6/19/9 Iran: Hard & Soft Power Destabilization aka 'liberation'; U.S.:"Have We Already Lost Iran?"

digest introduction
The regional propaganda, destabilization and provocation against Iran, now part of the US global terror war, to salvage its post WW2 global word order - the bipartisan U.S. National Security agenda.
Iran is central to control of the 'mideast' for US global hegemony, aided by its zionist proxy 'israel', After overthrowing Iran's democratically elected president Mossadegh in 1953 to install the fascist Shah, Iran has been subjected to non-stop U.S.soft and hard power- now merged as 'smart' power war for its new fascist world order..

Below hear different voices opposing U.S. imperialism's fascist terror and destruction against Iran and support of its steadfast defense of its national sovereignty and resistance. Be part of the struggle against world enemy #1

Finally some 'smoking guns' revealing major U.S. soft power agents and operations. To counter the massive 'news' propaganda offensive, which should raise serious suspicions to spread as widely as possible.
(All emphases by the digest.)

Gamila Zahran, “el-foukhar yekasar badoh”Arabian Sights, powerful internationalist call
My voice is to stress first and foremost: we cannot be neutral or silent

- As people who declare ourselves on the side of the masses of the poor and oppressed overwhelmingly in the ‘third world’, against ruling elites, spearheaded by America… our voice must be loud and UNIFYING.. with all oppressed peoples and nations against all capitalist - imperialist genocidal aggression....

- There are HIDDEN HANDS working relentlessly 24/7 with immense resources and ‘techniques’ behind the divisiveness in Iraq and between Iraq and Iran behind all the carnage (to mention one such tactic– death squads with local faces be them Arabic, Kurdish, Iranian, etc. for the purpose of divide and conquer as well as actual slaughter of opponents)…
We cannot be silently ‘neutral’ and let “el-foukhar yekasar badoh”= “pottery breaking each other” for we are not talking about “foukhar”= “pottery”, we are talking about human beings, human lives and entire populations targeted for devastation and ‘creative chaos”.
We cannot be ‘neutral’ regarding another genocidal war against another (Muslim) nation and people... when we know white phosphorous, napalm, and depleted uranium will be falling on the people and not on ‘Safawis’ and ‘Magoosis’...when we know Iranian women will be raped a la Abu Ghraib... when we know CIA is slaughtering Iranians with Arabic face/collaborators and death squads as they slaughter Iraqis withIranface/collaborators and death squads..
The Arabic people and their cause is against our common enemy –the masters of divide and conquer striving for each to stand alone bitter and betrayed...apathetic or indifferent...
we cannot turn our heads in an opposite direction claiming “it is not our fight”, ignoring our knowledge of what has happened by the same enemy…It is one fight, our humanity against the common enemies of humanity…


US funds terror groups to sow chaos in Iran
America is secretly funding militant ethnic separatist groups in Iran... In a move that reflects Washington's growing concern with the failure of diplomatic initiatives, CIA officials are understood to be helping opposition militias among the numerous ethnic minority groups clustered in Iran's border regions. The operations are controversial because they involve dealing with movements that resort to terrorist methods in pursuit of their grievances against the Iranian regime.... In the past year there has been a wave of unrest in ethnic minority border areas of Iran, with bombing and assassination campaigns against soldiers and government officials. Such incidents have been carried out by the Kurds in the west, the Azeris in the north-west, the Ahwazi Arabs in the south-west, and the Baluchis in the south-east. Non-Persians make up nearly 40 per cent of Iran's 69 million population, with around 16 million Azeris, seven million Kurds, five million Ahwazis and one million Baluchis. Most Baluchis live over the border in Pakistan.

Funding for their separatist causes comes directly from the CIA's classified budget but is now "no great secret", according to one former high-ranking CIA official in Washington who spoke anonymously to The Sunday Telegraph. His claims were backed by Fred Burton, a former US state department counter-terrorism agent, who said: "The latest attacks inside Iran fall in line with US efforts to supply and train Iran's ethnic minorities to destabilise the Iranian regime."...
John Pike, the head of the influential Global Security think tank in Washington, said: "The activities of the ethnic groups have hotted up over the last two years and it would be a scandal if that was not at least in part the result of CIA activity." ... http://www.legitgov.org/

digest note: most liberal US analysts/strategist voices
Op-Ed Contributors Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
President Obama's Iran policy has, in all likelihood, already failed. On its present course, the White House’s approach will not stop Tehran’s development of a nuclear fuel program — or, as Iran’s successful test of a medium-range, solid-fuel missile last week underscored, military capacities of other sorts. It will also not provide an alternative to continued antagonism between the United States and Iran — a posture that for 30 years has proved increasingly damaging to the interests of the United States and its allies in the Middle East.

This judgment may seem both premature and overly severe. We do not make it happily. We voted for Barack Obama in 2008, and we still want him to succeed in reversing the deterioration in America’s strategic position. But we also believe that successful diplomacy with Iran is essential to that end. Unless President Obama and his national security team take a fundamentally different approach to Tehran, they will not achieve a breakthrough. This is a genuine shame, for President Obama had the potential to do so much better for America’s position in the Middle East. In his greeting to “the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” on the Persian New Year in March, Mr. Obama included language meant to assuage Iranian skepticism about America’s willingness to end efforts to topple the regime and pursue comprehensive diplomacy.

Iranian diplomats have told us that the president’s professed willingness to deal with Iran on the “basis of mutual interest” in an atmosphere of “mutual respect” was particularly well received in Tehran. They say that the quick response of the nation’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — which included the unprecedented statement that “should you change, our behavior will change, too” — was a sincere signal of Iran’s openness to substantive diplomatic proposals from the new American administration.

Unfortunately, Mr. Obama is backing away from the bold steps required to achieve strategic, Nixon-to-China-type rapprochement with Tehran. Administration officials have professed disappointment that Iranian leaders have not responded more warmly to Mr. Obama’s rhetoric. Many say that the detention of the Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi (who was released this month) and Ayatollah Khamenei’s claim last week that America is “fomenting terrorism” inside Iran show that trying to engage Tehran is a fool’s errand.

But this ignores the real reason Iranian leaders have not responded to the new president more enthusiastically: the Obama administration has done nothing to cancel or repudiate an ostensibly covert but well-publicized program, begun in President George W. Bush’s second term, to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to destabilize the Islamic Republic. Under these circumstances, the Iranian government — regardless of who wins the presidential elections on June 12 — will continue to suspect that American intentions toward the Islamic Republic remain, ultimately, hostile.

In this context, the Saberi case should be interpreted not as the work of unspecified “hard-liners” in Tehran out to destroy prospects for improved relations with Washington, but rather as part of the Iranian leadership’s misguided but fundamentally defensive reaction to an American government campaign to bring about regime change. Ayatollah Khamenei’s charge that “money, arms and organizations are being used by the Americans directly across our western border to fight the Islamic Republic’s system” reflects legitimate concern about American intentions. Mr. Obama has reinforced this concern by refusing to pursue an American-Iranian “grand bargain” — a comprehensive framework for resolving major bilateral differences and fundamentally realigning relations.

More broadly, President Obama has made several policy and personnel decisions that have undermined the promise of his encouraging rhetoric about Iran. On the personnel front, the problem begins at the top, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. As a presidential candidate, then-Senator Clinton ran well to the right of Mr. Obama on Iran, even saying she would “totally obliterate” Iran if it attacked Israel. Since becoming secretary of state, Clinton has told a number of allies in Europe and the Persian Gulf that she is skeptical that diplomacy with Iran will prove fruitful and testified to Congress that negotiations are primarily useful to garner support for “crippling” multilateral sanctions against Iran. First of all, this posture is feckless, as Secretary Clinton does not have broad international support for sanctions that would come anywhere close to being crippling. More significantly, this posture is cynically counterproductive, for it eviscerates the credibility of any American diplomatic overtures in the eyes of Iranian leaders across the Islamic Republic’s political spectrum.

Even more disturbing is President Obama’s willingness to have Dennis Ross become the point person for Iran policy at the State Department. Mr. Ross has long been an advocate of what he describes as an “engagement with pressure” strategy toward Tehran, meaning that the United States should project a willingness to negotiate with Iran largely to elicit broader regional and international support for intensifying economic pressure on the Islamic Republic. In conversations with Mr. Ross before Mr. Obama’s election, we asked him if he really believed that engage-with-pressure would bring concessions from Iran. He forthrightly acknowledged that this was unlikely. Why, then, was he advocating a diplomatic course that, in his judgment, would probably fail? Because, he told us, if Iran continued to expand its nuclear fuel program, at some point in the next couple of years President Bush’s successor would need to order military strikes against Iranian nuclear targets. Citing past “diplomacy” would be necessary for that president to claim any military action was legitimate. Iranian officials are fully aware of Mr. Ross’s views — and are increasingly suspicious that he is determined that the Obama administration make, as one senior Iranian diplomat said to us, “an offer we can’t accept,” simply to gain international support for coercive action....

Beyond the nuclear issue, the administration’s approach to Iran degenerates into an only slightly prettified version of George W. Bush’s approach — that is, an effort to contain a perceived Iranian threat without actually trying to resolve underlying political conflicts. Obama administration officials are buying into a Bush-era delusion: that concern about a rising Iranian threat could unite Israel and moderate Arab states in a grand alliance under Washington’s leadership....

It was not easy for President Richard Nixon to discard a quarter-century of failed policy toward the People’s Republic of China and to reorient America’s posture toward Beijing in ways that have served America’s interests extremely well for more than 30 years. That took strategic vision, political ruthlessness and personal determination. We hope that President Obama — contrary to his record so far — will soon begin to demonstrate those same qualities in forging a new approach toward Iran.
Flynt Leverett directs the New America Foundation’s geopolitics of energedy initiative and teaches at Penn State’s School of International Affairs. Hillary Mann Leverett is the president of a political risk consultancy. Both are former National Security Council staff members.

Dennis Ross promoted...
In a Staff Shuffle, Signs of Obama’s Direction on Mideast
WASHINGTON — So now Dennis B. Ross, the Obama administration’s senior Iran policy maker, less than three months into his State Department job, is moving to the White House, administration officials say. Mr. Ross will be taking on an expanded role covering Iran and other Middle East issues at the National Security Council....
Senior administration officials said that Mr. Obama values Mr. Ross, who backed Mr. Obama early on during the election campaign, and wanted the benefit of his strategic thinking nearby.
One official suggested that the combination of Mr. Ross, a veteran Arab-Israeli negotiator and longtime foreign policy hand, and National Security Adviser General James L.-- "i Take my orders daily from Kenry Kissinger" -- Jones would help the administration to come up with a better, more cohesive long-term strategy for America’s relations with the world....
Mr. Obama’s administration, from Mrs. Clinton to Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to Mr. Ross, is filled with politicians and foreign policy experts who have high standing among the pro-Israel lobby in the United States, but moving Mr. Ross from the State Department to right next door at the White House could help to protect Mr. Obama’s flank even further when it comes to Israel.
For Mr. Ross, there’s an added benefit as well: Unlike the two other high-profile special envoys at the State Department — Richard C. Holbrooke, the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan and George Mitchell, the special envoy to the Middle East, who are both presidential envoys — Mr. Ross has reported exclusively to Mrs. Clinton. Transfering to the White House with an expanded portfolio moves Mr. Ross from the periphery to the center of the Obama administration’s foreign policy operation, one administration official suggested.

Time for a U.S.-Iranian Grand Bargain
By Flynt Leverett, New America Foundation with Hillary Mann Leverett, STRATEGA
October 7, 2008
The next U.S. president, whether it is John McCain or Barack Obama, should reorient American policy toward the Islamic Republic of Iran as fundamentally as President Nixon reoriented American policy toward the People's Republic of China in the early 1970s.... Iran is not just a threat to be managed. Rather, Iran's strategic location (in the heart of the Persian Gulf and at the crossroads of the Middle East, Central Asia, and South Asia), its growing influence and standing in key regional arenas, and its enormous hydrocarbon resources make it a country critical for the United States. Prior to the current Bush administration, a diplomatic opening with Tehran was at least intermittently viewed by the first Bush administration and the Clinton administration as falling in the "nice to have" category -- a desirable prospect, but not essential for America's strategic position in the Persian Gulf, the Middle East more broadly, and the Eurasian heartland. For the U.S. administration that takes office in January 2009, strategic rapprochement with Tehran will fall into the "must have" category -- something truly imperative for American interests in these critical regions....

Middle East Elections 2009: Lebanon, Iran, Afghanistan, and Iraq
Congressional Research Service 7-5700
www.crs.gov R40586
May 18, 2009

The strategic influence of Iran in the Middle East, the stability of Iraq, and the ongoing war in Afghanistan are at the forefront of U.S. policy and Congressional interest in the region. The Obama Administration and many Members of the 111th Congress are making decisions about the U.S. approach to the Middle East at a time when the consequences of recent decisions and events may constrain U.S. options. In 2009, key elections in Lebanon, Iran, Afghanistan, and Iraq could reshape regional dynamics and either complicate or advance U.S. policy goals in the Middle East.
This report provides an overview of the election contests in Lebanon, Iran, Afghanistan, and Iraq, including possible outcomes and implications for U.S. policy. It will be updated periodically to reflect major developments. For more information, see CRS Report R40054, Lebanon: Background and U.S. Relations, by Casey L. Addis, CRS Report RL32048, Iran: U.S. Concerns and Policy Responses, by Kenneth Katzman, CRS Report RL30588, Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy, by Kenneth Katzman, and CRS Report RS21968, Iraq: Politics, Elections, and Benchmarks, by Kenneth Katzman.

Mir-Hossein Mousavi's Iran/Contra Connection?
Reza Fiyouzat, Revolutionary Flowerpot Society
June 8, 2009
What do Michael Ledeen (American 'neo-conservative'), Mir-Hossein Mousavi (the Iranian presidential candidate of 'change') and Adnan Khashoggi (the opulent Saudi Arabian jet-setter) have in common? They are all good friends and associates of Manuchehr Ghorbanifar (an Iranian arms merchant, an alleged MOSSAD double agent, and a key figure in the Iran/Contra Affair, the arms-for-hostages deals between Iran and the Reagan administration)....

You can find all kinds of trivia about Ghorbanifar in the Walsh Report on the Iran/Contra affair. In Chapter 8, for example, we learn:"Ghorbanifar, an Iranian exile and former CIA informant who had been discredited by the agency as a fabricator, was a driving force behind these proposals [for arms-for-hostages deal];" or, "Ghorbanifar, as broker for Iran, borrowed funds for the weapons payments from Khashoggi, who loaned millions of dollars to Ghorbanifar in "bridge financing'" for the deals. Ghorbanifar repaid Khashoggi with a 20 percent commission after being paid by the Iranians," (see: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_08.htm).

Here is a bit from an article by Time magazine that shows Ghorbanifar's circle of associates; it is from a January 1987 cover story (The Murky World of Weapons Dealers; January 19, 1987):
"By [Ghorbanifar's] own account he was a refugee from the revolutionary government of Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini, which confiscated his businesses in Iran, yet he later became a trusted friend and kitchen adviser to Mir Hussein Mousavi, Prime Minister in the Khomeini government. Some U.S. officials who have dealt with Ghorbanifar praise him highly. Says Michael Ledeen, adviser to the Pentagon on counterterrorism: "[Ghorbanifar] is one of the most honest, educated, honorable men I have ever known."...

This second bit is from Chapter 1 of Walsh Iran/Contra Report: (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_01.htm)
"On or about November 25, 1985, Ledeen received a frantic phone call from Ghorbanifar, asking him to relay a message from [Mir-Hossein Mousavi] the prime minister of Iran to President Reagan regarding the shipment of the wrong type of HAWKs. Ledeen said the message essentially was "we've been holding up our part of the bargain, and here you people are now cheating us and tricking us and deceiving us and you had better correct this situation right away.'' [...]
"In early May, North and CIA annuitant George Cave met in London with Ghorbanifar and Nir, where the groundwork finally was laid for a meeting between McFarlane and high-level Iranian officials, as well as financial arrangements for the arms deal. Among the officials Ghorbanifar said would meet with an American delegation were the president and prime minister [Mousavi] of Iran and the speaker of the Iranian parliament," (emphasis added).

And to remind how Michael Ledeen became involved in the Iran/Contra affair in 1985, here from Chapter 15 of Walsh Report (http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_15.htm):
"[McFarlane] authorized Michael A. Ledeen, a part-time NSC consultant on anti-terrorism, to ask Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres to check on a report that the Israelis had access to good sources on Iran. By early August 1985, Ledeen's talks had led to a direct approach by Israeli officials to McFarlane, to obtain President Reagan's approval to ship U.S.-supplied TOW missiles to Iran in exchange for the release of American hostages in Beirut. McFarlane said he briefed the President, Regan, Shultz, Weinberger, Casey and perhaps the Vice President about the proposal in July and August 1985.40 McFarlane said that Casey recommended that Congress not be informed of the arms sales."...
Seeing how we cannot ignore his 'neo-con' credentials and that Michael Ledeen maintained his very good relations with Ghorbanifar, (who at least used to be) a good friend of Mir-Hossein Mousavi (the 'candidate of change' in the Iranian presidential elections); and given the support that Mousavi's candidacy has been receiving from the American 'moderates', maybe this kind of 'change' is the 'regime change' the Americans have had in mind for Iran?

major u.s. imperialist political intelligence
Iranian Elections, Israel and the United States

Western Misconceptions Meet Iranian Reality
Geopolitical Intelligence Report
By George Friedman
...Misreading Sentiment in Iran
Limited to information on Iran from English-speaking opponents of the regime, both groups of Iran experts got a very misleading vision of where the revolution was heading — because the Iranian revolution was not brought about by the people who spoke English. It was made by merchants in city bazaars, by rural peasants, by the clergy — people Americans didn’t speak to because they couldn’t. This demographic was unsure of the virtues of modernization and not at all clear on the virtues of liberalism. From the time they were born, its members knew the virtue of Islam, and that the Iranian state must be an Islamic state.
Americans and Europeans have been misreading Iran for 30 years. Even after the shah fell, the myth has survived that a mass movement of people exists demanding liberalization — a movement that if encouraged by the West eventually would form a majority and rule the country. We call this outlook “iPod liberalism,” the idea that anyone who listens to rock ‘n’ roll on an iPod, writes blogs and knows what it means to Twitter must be an enthusiastic supporter of Western liberalism. Even more significantly, this outlook fails to recognize that iPod owners represent a small minority in Iran — a country that is poor, pious and content on the whole with the revolution forged 30 years ago.
There are undoubtedly people who want to liberalize the Iranian regime. They are to be found among the professional classes in Tehran, as well as among students. Many speak English, making them accessible to the touring journalists, diplomats and intelligence people who pass through. They are the ones who can speak to Westerners, and they are the ones willing to speak to Westerners. And these people give Westerners a wildly distorted view of Iran. They can create the impression that a fantastic liberalization is at hand — but not when you realize that iPod-owning Anglophones are not exactly the majority in Iran...
Some still charge that Ahmadinejad cheated. That is certainly a possibility, but it is difficult to see how he could have stolen the election by such a large margin. Doing so would have required the involvement of an incredible number of people, and would have risked creating numbers that quite plainly did not jibe with sentiment in each precinct. Widespread fraud would mean that Ahmadinejad manufactured numbers in Tehran without any regard for the vote. But he has many powerful enemies who would quickly have spotted this and would have called him on it. Mousavi still insists he was robbed, and we must remain open to the possibility that he was, although it is hard to see the mechanics of this.
Ahmadinejad’s Popularity
It also misses a crucial point: Ahmadinejad enjoys widespread popularity. He doesn’t speak to the issues that matter to the urban professionals, namely, the economy and liberalization...

This election has made Ahmadinejad a powerful president, perhaps the most powerful in Iran since the revolution. Ahmadinejad does not want to challenge Khamenei, and we suspect that Khamenei will not want to challenge Ahmadinejad. A forced marriage is emerging, one which may place many other religious leaders in a difficult position.
Certainly, hopes that a new political leadership would cut back on Iran’s nuclear program have been dashed. The champion of that program has won, in part because he championed the program. We still see Iran as far from developing a deliverable nuclear weapon, but certainly the Obama administration’s hopes that Ahmadinejad would either be replaced — or at least weakened and forced to be more conciliatory — have been crushed. Interestingly, Ahmadinejad sent congratulations to U.S. President Barack Obama on his inauguration. We would expect Obama to reciprocate under his opening policy, which U.S. Vice President Joe Biden appears to have affirmed, assuming he was speaking for Obama. Once the vote fraud issue settles, we will have a better idea of whether Obama’s policies will continue. (We expect they will.)
What we have now are two presidents in a politically secure position, something that normally forms a basis for negotiations...For the moment, the election appears to have frozen the status quo in place. Neither the United States nor Iran seem prepared to move significantly, and there are no third parties that want to get involved in the issue beyond the occasional European diplomatic mission or Russian threat to sell something to Iran. In the end, this shows what we have long known: This game is locked in place, and goes on. STRATFOR

Will Iran Become the Route Out for Caspian Oil – And How Will That Transform the Geopolitics of the Region?
Paul Goble
The disruption of oil flows via Georgia during the recent violence has made that route significantly less attractive for Caspian oil exporting countries, with some concluding they have no choice but to go via Russia given Iran’s international isolation but at least a few thinking about using Iran to gain greater freedom of maneuver relative to Moscow.
If the governments of the region do decide to ship some or all of their oil via Iran, that would have three serious geopolitical consequences that may rival some of the already enormous geopolitical fallout from Russia’s decision to invade Georgia and to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia ( www.nr2.ru/economy/193763.html )...
Ilham Shaban, the president of the Baku Center of Oil Research, told the paper that "all Western oil companies would like to work in Iran" but can’t easily because of American opposition. But now "invoking the situation in Georgia, they are beginning to advise official Washington to review its relations with Iranian so as to allow them to begin work there." ...

The Coming Iranian Class Wars
Rosa Faiz
June 13, 2005
First Published in Covert Action Quarterly
The particular shape of the ruling classes in Iran has, for the past one thousand and one years at least, consisted of two major components. In Iran they are referred to as the ‘Shah’ and the 'Shaykh'; the King and the Cleric...

We must repeat that with or without the imperialist invasion by the US-British-Israeli axis, the liberation of the Iranian peoples of all nationalities remains in our own hands.   As such, those of us the people of Iran who will yield neither to the Shah nor to the Shaykh, will have to make an unambiguous stance:   Anybody who, for the purpose of taking the state power, is collaborating with the imperialists including U.S., U.K. or Israeli colonialists, you are a traitor to the country, and as such, a pimp selling the future of generations of your fellow country men and women, for the price of a temporary taste of political power ...

In the fog of the current ‘war on terror’ it is easy to forget that Khomeini, the cunning master politician that he was, knowing the imperialists’ liking for abundance of possibilities, benefited from the favors rendered him by imperialists, who, in turn, saw in Khomeini a great anti-communist like they would not see too frequently, whom Zbigniew Brzezinski called a ‘strategic ally’. 3     This should not come as a surprise in view of the historical landscape of the Iranian ruling classes’ particular components as shown above. The mullahs, in their latest occupancy of what they consider their rightful place in the seat of power have been extremely helpful to the imperialists, by wiping out at least two
generations’ worth of leftist achievements in Iran, sending an entire social movement into exile, into jails, or executed in thousands.   In spite of all the belligerent talk by the Bush and his Gang against the Iranian Islamic regime, pursuing all alternatives is a must-follow element of the proven protocols of the U.S. ruling classes.   And so it is that in following
protocol, the imperialists’ choice among the mullahs for Iranian President, Rafsanjani, is getting a lot of positive media attention in the Western capitals, especially in Washington, DC. Item: as reported in Al-Sharq al-Awsat of Feb 24, 2005, Rafsanjani had communicated with the White House, as well as with European and Arab leaders, to seek out their views on the possibility of his running for president.

And consider, if you will, International Crisis Group, a Soros/CIA front, which, before Rafsanjani even announced his candidacy, was calling for him to run for president, and has been advertising for him ever since. ...

As Samir Amin has characterized it, Islamic Fundamentalism is the ‘Dream of the Past’, something highly appreciated by the CIA as a ready-to-use weapon against the progressive forces of the Muslim countries. 4   We demand that imperialists stay out of our country, and allow us to settle our accounts with the barbaric regime that is choking us and keeping us all down, to the ultimate delight of the imperialists. An imperialist power that has some thousand of nuclear warheads at the ready, and who daily uses uranium-enriched munitions in Iraq and Afghanistan, thereby exposing all the biological life of the region to radioactive poisoning for the next four billion years (half life of uranium), has no moral authority espousing concern over the offensive capabilities of a nation whose military budget is a mere drop in the ocean that represents the U.S. military expenditure, and is completely surrounded by the U.S. military....

U.S. imperialist thinktank Poll Predicted Landslide Victory for Ahmadinejad
The Iranian People Speak
By Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty
June 15, 2009
...While Western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad's principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead. Independent and uncensored nationwide surveys of Iran are rare. Typically, preelection polls there are either conducted or monitored by the government and are notoriously untrustworthy. By contrast, the poll undertaken by our nonprofit organizations from May 11 to May 20 was the third in a series over the past two years. Conducted by telephone from a neighboring country, field work was carried out in Farsi by a polling company whose work in the region for ABC News and the BBC has received an Emmy award. Our polling was funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
The breadth of Ahmadinejad's support was apparent in our preelection survey. During the campaign, for instance, Mousavi emphasized his identity as an Azeri, the second-largest ethnic group in Iran after Persians, to woo Azeri voters. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favored Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over Mousavi
Much commentary has portrayed Iranian youth and the Internet as harbingers of change in this election. But our poll found that only a third of Iranians even have access to the Internet, while 18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups.
The only demographic groups in which our survey found Mousavi leading or competitive with Ahmadinejad were university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians...

Allegations of fraud and electoral manipulation will serve to further isolate Iran and are likely to increase its belligerence and intransigence against the outside world. Before other countries, including the United States, jump to the conclusion that the Iranian presidential elections were fraudulent, with the grave consequences such charges could bring, they should consider all independent information. The fact may simply be that the reelection of President Ahmadinejad is what the Iranian people wanted. [...]
Ken Ballen is president of Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion, a nonprofit institute that researches attitudes toward extremism. Patrick Doherty is deputy director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation. The groups' May 11-20 polling consisted of 1,001 interviews across Iran and had a 3.1 percentage point margin of error.

violence fueled by u.s. is 'democracy', state intervention in nations u.s. aims to dominate is 'violence'
Iran Leader’s Speech Adds to Pressure on Obama
Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Mr. Khamenei framed his position as commitment to law and the orderly functioning of government. He instructed dissenters to pursue their complaints about the June 12 ballot through legal channels, insisting that the turnout, which election officials put at 85 percent, proved that it was a reflection of the national will. The margin of victory, at 11 million votes, was so big that could not have been falsified, he said....“Flexing muscles on the streets after the election is not right. It means challenging the elections and democracy. If they don’t stop, the consequences of the chaos would be their responsibility.”... http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/20/world/middleeast/20iran.html?pagewante...

Obama: it's up to Iran to determine own leaders
President Obama says it's up to Iran to determine its own leaders. But he also says he's troubled by the situation in Iran and that it would be wrong to stay silent. Obama says any investigation into Iranian election results must not result in bloodshed. It was the U.S. president's first comments following the disputed outcome of Iran's presidential election ...

Obama speaks on Iran, again
...Now, it's not productive, given the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, to be seen as meddling -- the U.S. President meddling in Iranian elections. What I will repeat and what I said yesterday is that when I see violence directed at peaceful protestors, when I see peaceful dissent being suppressed, wherever that takes place, it is of concern to me and it's of concern to the American people. That is not how governments should interact with their people. And my hope is, is that the Iranian people will make the right steps in order for them to be able to express their voices, to express their aspirations.... I stand strongly with the universal principle that people's voices should be heard and not suppressed.

'No Comment' Is Not an Option
By Paul Wolfowitz
June 19. 2009 " Washington Post" -- President Obama's first response to the protests in Iran was silence, followed by a cautious, almost neutral stance designed to avoid "meddling" in Iranian affairs.... In such a situation, the United States does not have a "no comment" option. Coming from America, silence is itself a comment -- a comment in support of those holding power and against those protesting the status quo. Iranians are protesting not just election fraud but also the growing abuses of the Iranian people by a dictatorial regime. Now is not the time for the president to dig in to a neutral posture. It is time to change course.... http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22864.htm
Paul Wolfowitz, a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, was deputy secretary of defense from 2001 to 2005.

reflecting the class base of the 'opposition' out of Iran's 80 millions
Social Networks Spread Defiance Online
Social media sites are challenging levers of state media control and allowing Iranians to find novel ways around restrictions

loving amerikan values
A Different Iranian Revolution
by Shane M., a student in Iran who, for reasons of safety, did not want to be identified by his full name.
There is strong evidence that Iranians across the board want a better relationship with the United States. But if Mr. Moussavi were to become president and carry out his campaign promise of seeking improved relations with America, we would probably see a good 30 percent of the Iranian population protesting that he is “selling out” to the enemy. By contrast, support for Mr. Ahmadinejad’s campaign was rooted in part in his supposed defense of the homeland and national honor in the face of United States aggression....
The truth is, it wasn’t supposed to happen this way. The open-air parties that, for one week, turned Tehran at night into a large-scale civic disco, were an accident. People gathered by the tens of thousands in public squares, circling around one another on foot, on motorcycle, in their cars. They showed up around 4 or 5 in the afternoon and stayed together well into the next day, at least 3 or 4 in the morning, laughing, cheering, breaking off to debate, then returning to the fray. A girl hung off the edge of a car window “Dukes of Hazzard” style. Four boys parked their cars in a circle, the headlights illuminating an impromptu dance floor for them to show off their moves. Everyone watched everyone else and we wondered how all of this could be happening. Who were all of these people? Where did they come from? These were the same people we pass by unknowingly every day. We saw one another, it feels, for the first time. Now in the second week, we continue to look at one another as we walk together, in marches and in silent gatherings, toward our common goal of having our vote respected.

not to mention the whole hideous amerikan history of state terror, genocide, eugenics, unjust wars, violent suppression of political groups and protest, relentless psyops here and worldwide....
Obama Pot Calls Iranian Kettle Black: Criminalizing Dissent
By Dave Lindorff, June 17, 2009
...Just days ago, the ACLU of Northern California issued a press release announcing that it had filed a complaint over a Pentagon anti-terrorism training manual. That training manual, aimed at Pentagon personnel, describes domestic protests as "low-level terrorist activity."... "For the DoD to instruct its employees that lawful protest activities should be treated as 'low-level terrorism’ is deeply disturbing in and of itself. It is an even more egregious insult to constitutional values, however, when viewed in the context of a long-term pattern of domestic security initiatives that have attempted to equate lawful dissent with terrorism." The ACLU has documented that the government has been and continues a policy of spying on legitimate peaceful protest organizations—particularly those that have been opposing America’s wars and its military policies, and the new president has said nothing and done nothing about terminating this.. nothing... to undo the USA PATRIOT Act, which codifies much activity that traditionally would have been called dissent as a crime, or to publicly reverse the policy of the last eight years during which non-violent protest organizations have been spied on and infiltrated by agents of the military and by the FBI, and during which actual protesters have been harassed, penned into fenced-off "free speech zones," assaulted by armed police and arrested, his pontificating to Iran about the sanctity of dissent rings particularly hollow.... http://www.uruknet.de/?s1=1&p=55243&s2=18

the u.s. world-dominator always prepares for and uses war for its hegemonic ends, but military war against Iran is not likely unless diplomatic, psywar and other soft power methods fail to 'convince' Iran to 'cooperate'
Why the US Wants to Delegitimize the Iranian Elections
Are You Ready for War with a Demonized Iran?
By Paul Craig Roberts
How much attention do elections in Japan, India, Argentina, or any other country, get from the U.S. media? How many Americans and American journalists even know who is in political office in other countries besides England, France, and Germany? Who can name the political leaders of Switzerland, Holland, Brazil, Japan, or even China? Yet, many know of Iran’s President Ahmadinejad. The reason is obvious. He is daily demonized in the U.S. media... demonization of Ahmadinejad itself demonstrates American ignorance. The President of Iran is not the ruler. He is not the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. He cannot set policies outside the boundaries set by Iran’s rulers, the ayatollahs who are not willing for the Iranian Revolution to be overturned by American money in some color-coded “revolution.” Iranians have a bitter experience with the United States government. Their first democratic election, after emerging from occupied and colonized status in the 1950s, was overturned by the U.S. government. The U.S. government installed in place of the elected candidate a dictator who tortured and murdered dissidents who thought Iran should be an independent country and not ruled by an American puppet...
The government-controlled U.S. corporate media, a Ministry of Propaganda, has responded to the re-election of Ahmadinejad with non-stop reports of violent Iranians protests to a stolen election. A stolen election is presented as a fact, even thought there is no evidence for it whatsoever. The U.S. media’s response to the documented stolen elections during the George W. Bush/Karl Rove era was to ignore the evidence of real stolen elections....

There have been numerous news reports that the U.S. government has implemented a program to destabilize Iran. There have been reports that the U.S. government has financed bombings and assassinations within Iran. The U.S. media treats these reports in a braggadocio manner as illustrations of the American Superpower’s ability to bring dissenting countries to heel, while some foreign media see these reports as evidence of the U.S. government’s inherent immorality. Pakistan’s former military chief, General Mirza Aslam Beig, said on Pashto Radio on Monday, June 15, that undisputed intelligence proves the U.S. interfered in the Iranian election. “The documents prove that the CIA spent 400 million dollars inside Iran to prop up a colorful but hollow revolution following the election.”

The success of the U.S. government in financing color revolutions in former Soviet Georgia and Ukraine and in other parts of the former Soviet empire [editor: for more on U.S./NGO fueled 'color revolutions' worldwide see http://www.burbankdigest.com/] widely reported and discussed, with the U.S. media treating it as an indication of U.S. omnipotence and natural right and some foreign media as a sign of U.S. interference in the internal affairs of other countries.... We know for a fact that the U.S. government has psychological warfare operations that target both Americans and foreigners through the U.S. and foreign media. Many articles have been published on this subject.

Iran is an ancient and sophisticated society. Much of the intellectual class is secularized. A significant, but small, percentage of the youth has fallen in thrall to Western devotion to personal pleasure, and to self-absorption. These people are easily organized with American money to give their government and Islamic constraints on personal behavior the bird....
Think about the Iranian election from a common sense standpoint... if your country was under constant threat of attack, even nuclear attack, from two countries with much more powerful military establishments, as is Iran from the U.S. and Israel, would you desert your country’s best defender and elect the preferred candidate of the U.S. and Israel? ... as in everything else having to do with American hegemony over other peoples, facts and truth play no part. Lies and propaganda rule....

As a person who has seen it all from inside the U.S. government, I believe that the purpose of the U.S. government’s manipulation of the American and puppet government media is to discredit the Iranian government by portraying the Iranian government as an oppressor of the Iranian people and a frustrater of the Iranian people’s will. This is how the U.S. government is setting up Iran for military attack. With the help of Moussavi, the U.S. government is creating another “oppressed people,” like Iraqis under Saddam Hussein, who require American lives and money to liberate. Has Moussavi, the American candidate in the Iranian election who was roundly trounced, been chosen by Washington to become the American puppet ruler of Iran?
You can find the Ballen-Doherty election report here. http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts06162009.html
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

"The CIA has a wretched history of interfering with the internal affairs of countries in the Middle East and Latin America in order to assure that puppet regimes subservient to imperialist interests are empowered"
June 15, 2009

Malcom Lagauche
The Iranian election results are in. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won. Those two sentences are about all the publicity that the election warranted. Until about a month ago, his re-election seemed assured. Then, outside forces intervened and used creative fantasies to portray this as a great historical event. The Western press began to push his closest rival, Mir Hossein Mousavi, as a reformist capable of changing Iran into a fair and just nation that would make friends with the world. Mousavi, a distant second in the polls at the time, was himself surprised at his designation as Iran’s possible savior. His views were similar to those of Ahmadinejad, and, with the subject of Iran’s nuclear program, were identical. The only difference appeared to be Mousavi’s declaration of toning down rhetoric and attempting to gain better relations with the West. Then, the propaganda machines went into full gear. According to many media pundits, Mousavi’s victory would reverse all the negative aspects of Iran. They began affixing names and colors to the revolution. These were identical to the Western depictions of elections in Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, and other former Soviet republics that the U.S. was courting. Even the bogus Iraqi "elections" of 2005 were designated the "purple" revolution. With Iran, the same script writers emerged. They tried to affix a name to the occurrences in Iraq, such as the "velvet" revolution.... that name had already been used....

Iran has a strong hold on Iraq and the U.S. has gained much information from Iran about Afghanistan and Iraq. Since Bush’s announcement of the "war on terror," Iran has been a willing partner. The talk of the U.S. going to war with Iran is absurd. Both have, and continue to, help each other immensely. We can see from Obama’s actions that the public denigration, yet private collaboration with Iran has not changed since the Bush administration and shows no sign of being altered in the near future...

The actions of the young people in Iran and those of the anti-war, progressive left [SIC] in the U.S. are identical. The U.S. left took a mediocre mainstream U.S. senator and created a mystique about him. Obama became the greatest thing since Jesus roamed the Earth (if he ever existed). After his inauguration, Obama has proven millions of his supporters to be wrong. Some have openly criticized his right-of-center actions, while others, even though they know they were wrong in building up Obama, fail to admit their errors. In both cases, press hoopla began an illogical program of creating images that did not exist for Obama and Mousavi.

In all the media frenzy, a report from Al-Jazeera News last week seems to have gone un-noticed. It spoke of the reality of a "revolution" in Iran and who really holds the power in Iran. The piece was called "Iran Guard Warns Reformist Groups:"The political chief of Iran's Revolutionary Guard has warned reformists in the country against seeking what he called a "velvet revolution", vowing that it would be "nipped in the bud". Yadollah Javani's comments appeared aimed at Mir Hossein Mousavi, a reformist candidate in the country's presidential elections and followed another day of bitter exchanges between Mousavi and his rival and current president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad....Javani drew parallels between Mousavi's campaign and the "velvet revolution'' that led to the 1989 overthrow of the communist government in then Czechoslovakia."There are many indications that some extremist [reformist] groups, have designed a colourful revolution ... using a specific colour for the first time in an election," the statement said. Calling that a "sign of kicking off a velvet revolution project in the presidential elections", Javani vowed that any "attempt for velvet revolution will be nipped in the bud". Javani also accused the reformists of planning to claim vote rigging and provoke street violence if Mousavi loses

and has evidence to back up its claims including info. the digest reveals below
Iran accuses US of meddling after disputed vote
June 17, 2009 Iran AP
Iran accused the United States on Wednesday of "intolerable" meddling in its internal affairs, alleging for the first time that Washington has fueled a bitter postelection dispute. Opposition supporters marched in Tehran's streets for a third straight day to protest the outcome of the balloting. The Iranian government summoned the Swiss ambassador, who represents U.S. interests in Iran, to complain about American interference, state-run Press TV reported. The statement alleged that dissident Web sites were backed by Canadian, U.S. and British interests, a frequent charge levied by hard-liners against the opposition....
[NB: as if to prove the allegations....see below for more on u.s. imperialist soft power 'human rights' destabilization intervention...]
The U.S.-based International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran said several dozen noted figures associated with the reform movement have been arrested, among them politicians, intellectuals, activists and journalists. Analyst Saeed Leilaz, who is often quoted by Western media, was arrested Wednesday by plainclothes security officers at his home, said his wife, Sepehrnaz Panahi. At least 10 Iranian journalists have been arrested since the election, Reporters Without Borders said... http://www.uruknet.de/?s1=1&p=55228&s2=18

'unsubstantiated twitter rumors'
US asks Twitter to stay online because of Iran vote
AFP/Yahoo! Tech
17 June 2009
The Obama administration took the unusual step of asking Twitter to delay a planned maintenance outage because of the social blogging site's use as a communications tool by Iranians following their disputed election, a senior official said Tuesday. The request highlighted the administration's Web-savvy ways and the power of social networks such as Twitter and Facebook in organizing protests over the election results in the face of a ban by Iranian authorities on other media.

... beware, there seem to be even more wild rumours flying round Twitter than usual. Writing on his personal blog, Richard Sambrook, the BBC's director of the BBC's Global News, lists the unsubstantiated rumours that have been circulating: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2009/jun/15/iranian-elections

A list of rumours - unsubstantiated as far as I can make out - circling wildly on Twitter includes:
Tanks on the streets
Arabic speakers with Anti Riot police - possibly hezbollah (update: The LA times asserted as fact, then rewrote it seems)
Various Oppostion members "arrested"
Iran's electoral commission had declared the election void (it was a dissident sub set of staff)
The Army announcing it will be "neutral" (unsurprising - they are meant to be on side of "the people")
"Massive use of teargas"
Protestors captured weapons from a military base
"Staggering" numbers of injured flooding into hospitals
That the "real" voting figures are emerging giving Mousavi some 19m votes
Rafsanjani and Qom Masters "are going after Khamenei"
Protestors shot in the streets
Injured protestors turned away from hospitals
students killed and buried without families being notified
Ballot boxes were taken away and burned

(If you have others - or have proof of any of the above let me know) There are and will be more. Some may be true. Some may be confusion. Many are planted in the hope of inciting more protests and support.... I wouldn't trust any such reports without hard evidence. http://sambrook.typepad.com/sacredfacts/2009/06/iran-rumours-everywhere....

NOTE: Excerpt below from original documents in Farsi was translated by the U.S./SOROS International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran:

On 10 January 2009, Branch 15 of the Islamic Revolutionary Court in Tehran, which I preside over according to the ruling number 1/82/17126 dated 27 January 2004, issued by the respected head of the Judiciary, held its hearing for file case numbers D/T/10099/87, D/T/10096/87, D/T/10097/87, and D/T/10278/87. The purpose of this session was to consider charges against Arash Alaei, son of Sha’ban; Kamiar Alaei, son of Sha’ban; Silva Harotonian, daughter of Khachatoor; and Mohammad Ehsani, son of Majid. Thus, in accordance with the content of their files and having heard the last defense of the defendants and their lawyers, I declare the end of these proceedings and issue the court’s decision as follows.

....The Process (Gardeshkar)
The effort to confront and oppose the Islamic Republic of Iran has been consistently a priority of United States national security doctrine during recent decades. Accordingly, various proposals have been made, including military confrontation by imposing a war, confiscation of property and assets (economic sanctions), destructive political propaganda and cultural invasion, supporting political opposition movements, fomenting terrorist and anti-regime groups, attempts to isolate [Iran] on regional and global stages, supporting ethnic movements to cause disintegration, assisting the distribution of harmful narcotics within Iran through eastern borders, attempts to divert the path of social movements with the goal of aligning them with movements to overthrow the state, and challenges of the nuclear program. All of the above are actions that despite much financial and human capital investments as well as propaganda attempts, have widely failed.

In recent years, United States military and intelligence organs, having failed both to confront Iran militarily as well as to achieve a change in the direction of the Iranian government and people through carrot and stick policies and military threats, have initiated a new policy. They have changed the direction of their hardline approach by implementing a policy of soft and gradual regime change. Two key points of this new policy are regime change and changing the behavior of the regime. [The U.S. government] attempts to attract and employ elements from non-governmental organizations (NGOs), journalists, bloggers, members of the intellectual and educated class, scientific leaders, social movements, and students by creating organic linkages. Such linkages aim to transfer and inject the necessary values to the body of the above mentioned groups and create a divergence between the values of the ruling class and those of the people. This divergence in values [between the society vs. the state] will eventually cause a rift between the state and the people and transfer sovereignty to the minority [who has captured] the majority [of public opinion] and causes the majority of the masses to believe in the values of a system to the liking of the United States, thus resulting in a surrender of sovereignty. At this stage , the political leadership will either surrender to the social pressure of the masses and their civil resistance or it will allow changes to its policies that will be to the liking of the American government. With the addition of tough economic sanctions, street riots, and if necessary with tactical and limited military strikes, the fall [of the state] will result.

After the failure of plans implemented by the Soros Foundation and the Open Society [Institute], the arrest of their representative inside the country (Kian Tajbakhsh) ,and [their failure] to reach their goal to bring about desired changes and overthrow the ruling system by using the popular potential to overcome limitations, American intelligence services planned an alternative project based on the concept of exchanges. As such, American elements coordinated with scientific and research centers in that country and invited certain well-known personalities to induce the impression of the necessity of exchanges between the United States and Iran.

According to the confessions of the defendants as well as judicial and intelligence investigations, the four stages of advancing covert American actions in the country [Iran] are:

1 – Implementation of the plan for a regional initiative by the Soros Foundation (OSI)
2 – Implementing exchange programs
3 – Public health diplomacy
4 – Bilateral interactions (travels and visits by Iranian and American citizens to each country)

It is necessary to note that preventative actions, confessions of the defendants, as well as an analysis of American intelligence policies reveal that the management, policy-making, planning, and organizing of these projects are carried out by American intelligence agencies. Other centers such as the State Department and [American] non-governmental organizations have the responsibility to provide cover and superficially coordinate [these projects] and make arrangements to persuade targeted persons to participate in such gatherings.

Aiming at these objectives, [American] intelligence stations in Turkey, Azerbaijan, Germany, England, and the UAE started their activities. The responsibility for the regional command was given to the Dubai office under the cover of the Special Office for Iranian Affairs. The Dubai office worked with institutions such as the Aspen Institute, Asia Society, OSI, IHRD, CDC, NIC, ILB, and universities such as Harvard, John Hopkins, Maryland, Yale, New York, Stanford, San Francisco. Using the multi-million dollar budget allocated by the Congress for this purpose and under the cover of the State Department and the Institute of International Education (IIE), [these projects] were implemented, with the covert planning of American intelligence services, and thus the exchange program was put into action. Ramin Agsari and Allen Eyre are among the American intelligence agents who played an important role in implementing these actions through the Dubai office. From another side, in the country of Armenia, the American organization IREX, as a cover, and with the management of Ms. Azita Zohrabian and its representative Silva Harotonian, the fourth defendant in this case, under the cover of scientific, public health, and cultural cooperation entered into action and took on another part of the project. These cover institutions planned and implemented their activities according to the following framework: [....]

tracking the great humanitarian liberators: search on http://www.iranhumanrights.org/links/ for Open Society Institute:

International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran – Alaei Brothers ...After the failure of plans implemented by the Soros Foundation and the Open Society [Institute], the arrest of their representative inside ... www.iranhumanrights.org/2009/05/courtrulingenglish/ - Cached - Similar

International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran... with a view towards helping the organisation re‐open its premises and resume in conducting its activities in promoting ... Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy (ELSAM), Indonesia. ... Law and Society Trust (LST) – Sri Lanka ... www.iranhumanrights.org/2009/01/anni-ihrc/ - Cached - Similar

International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran Link
Human Rights Watch
Amnesty International
Reporters Without Borders
International Federation for Human Rights


Other links
Human Rights Information and Documentation Systems (HURIDOCS)
The Human Rights Search Engine
Search over 4500 human rights websites
60451 Results found in 0.443 s. 1-20 Next

Open Society Institute - Assistance Foundation
Open Society Institute - Assistance Foundation Open Society Institute - Assistance Foundation ...Partnership of the World Bank, Open Society Institute-Assistance Foundation (OSI-AF...
http://www.osi-az.org/indexaz.asp (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Open Society Institute / Soros Foundation - Azerbaijan
Published in : Azerbaijan

Open Society Institute Invites Innovative Thinkers to Confront Global Challenges - Open Society
... Programs Open Society Fellows « back to Articles Open Society Institute Invites Innovative Thinkers...Global Challenges The Open Society Institute today launched a fellowship...
http://www.osf.ro/en/program_articol.php?articol=94 (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Fundaţia Soros România = Soros Foundation Romania
Published in : Romania

Open Society Justice Initiative
The Open Society Justice Initiative pursues law reform grounded in the protection of human rights and the development of legal capacity in our thematic areas. The Justice Initiative website includes a database of legal resources.
http://www.justiceinitiative.org/email (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Justice Initiatives, Open Society Institute
Published in : United States

Public Interest Law Institute - Enabling Civil Society
...Guardian of Commitments to Civil Society, by Public Interest Law Initiative...Support Civil Societies and NGOs? by Open Society Institute and International Center for Not-for-Profit...Structure and Governance of NGOs, by Open Society Institute and International...
http://www.pili.org/en/content/view/52/53/ (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Public Interest Law Initiative
Published in : Hungary

Open Society Policy Center | About
...Policy Center President, Open Society Institute Aryeh Neier is the Chair...Center. He is also the President of the Open Society Institute. Before joining the Open Society Institute (OSI) and the Soros foundations network...
http://www.opensocietypolicycenter.org/about/staff.php?staff... (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Open Society Policy Center (OSPC)
Published in : United States

OSF: Open Society Fund Prague
... The Funding of the Open Society Fund Prague The...used his American foundation, Open Society Institute, to provide us with more than...financial support received from the Open Society Institute. The reduction is part of the...
http://osf.cz/en/o-nadaci/ (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Nadace OSF Praha = Open Society Fund Prague
Published in : Czech Republic

Open Society Institute Invites Innovative Thinkers to Confront Global Challenges
...Announcements Open Society Institute Invites Innovative Thinkers...2008 NEW YORK—The Open Society Institute has launched a fellowship... ### The Open Society Institute, a private operating and...
http://www.soros.org/initiatives/fellowship/news/launch_2008... (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Open Society Institute
Published in : United States

BORDC: Open Society Institute Awards $50,000 to The Bill of Rights Defense Committee
...December 9, 2004 Open Society Institute Awards $50,000 to The Bill...a $50,000 grant from the Open Society Institute (OSI). BORDC’s mission is...Constitutional Legal Policy for the Open Society Institute’s US Justice Fund. ...
http://www.bordc.org/press/pr12-09-04.php (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Bill of Rights Defense Committee
Published in : United States

Open Society Institute Women's Program - Partnership Grants
WUNRN http://www.wunrn.com Open Society Institute - A Soros Foundations Network OSI International...Organizations that forge partnerships with other civil society groups; and Organizations that have a 5...
http://www.wunrn.com/news/2008/03_08/03_24_07/032407_open.ht... (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Women's UN Report Program & Network (WUNRN)
Published in : United States

Campaign for a UN Democracy Caucus
...for Social Justice in Africa op-ed by Open Society Institute Senior Policy Analyst for Africa, Akwe Amosu. In her...Amosu called for a mobilization of African civil society to help shift the position of individual countries...
http://www.democracycaucus.net/html/media03_opeds.html (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Campaign for a UN Democracy Caucus
Published in : United States

Democracy Coalition Project
...important role for Nigerian civil society at the Council given the current...African human rights and civil society organizations....Zimbabwe Campaign The Open Society Institute has launched Eyes on Zimbabwe...
http://www.demcoalition.org/2005_html/undem_appea.html (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Democracy Coalition Project
Published in : United States

Justice Initiative Fellows Newsletter, October 2004
...Rita Bakradze at rbakradze@osi.hu The Open Society Justice Initiative, an operational program of the Open Society Institute (OSI), pursues law reform activities grounded in...
http://www.sutyajnik.ru/eng/news/2004/Fellows_Newsletter_Oct... (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Cутяжник = Sutyajnik
Published in : Russian Federation

Freedom of Information Program
... More cases Subscribe: The Open Society Justice Initiative promotes freedom of information as integral to an open society, participatory democracy and the promotion and protection...
http://www.ecln.org/link.asp?linkid=448 (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Justice Initiatives, Open Society Institute
Published in : United States

http://soros.org.mk/dokumenti/konkursi_arhiva/konkurs%202%20... (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Open Society Institute / Soros Foundation - Macedonia
Published in : Macedonia

Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights -
... Nicoleta Bitu, senior consultant of the Open Society Institute - Joint Roma Women's Initiative, moderating a side... Nicoleta Bitu, senior consultant of the Open Society Institute - Joint Roma Women's Initiative, moderating a side...
http://www.osce.org/odihr/item_5_21080.html (new window)
Collections : igo
Published by : Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
Published in : Poland

Tajik Society Divided on Magic Ban
...Commonwealth Office US Department of State Open Society Institute (OSI) © Institute for War & Peace Reporting 48 Grays Inn Road, London WC1X...
http://www.iwpr.net/?p=rca&s=f&o=342053&apc_state=henh (new window)
Collections : ngo
Published by : Institute for War & Peace Reporting
Published in : United Kingdom

The Role of Media in Democracy: A Strategic Approach
...the civil society arena..that is more open ...A media sector supportive of democracy...National Press Institute (NPI) includes the following activities...PIMS of the Institute for Democracy...promotes an open and accountable...activities to civil society and other...
http://www.jdhr.org/publications/media-and-development/pnace... (new window)
Collections : ngo


About ONI
The OpenNet Initiative is a collaborative partnership of four leading academic institutions: the Citizen Lab at the Munk Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto; Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University; the Advanced Network Research Group at the Cambridge Security Programme, University of Cambridge; and the Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford University.

Dear friends,
We are pleased to share our latest report on Internet filtering in Iran....
Today the OpenNet Initiative (ONI) released a new survey of Internet filtering and surveillance in Iran. The new profile provides context for the recent crackdown on the Internet in Iran, describing the legal, institutional and technical details of Iran's filtering regime. It is available here: http://opennet.net/research/profiles/iran.
Rob Faris, 6/16/09

OSI Search results http://opennet.net/search/node/open+society+institute

Funding Institutions ... than $3 million to the Berkman Center for Internet & Society and its partners to advance their collaborative study of ... has been funded by a generous series of grants from the Open Society Institute (OSI). The OpenNet Initiative's " Internet Censorship Map " ...

China... assert control over this global event while presenting an open and welcoming environment for athletes, media, foreign dignitaries and ... “harmful” information and is sponsored by the Internet Society of China, formally registered as a civil society organization. 130 ...

Curbing corporate complicity in Internet filtering and surveillance: Tech firms pursue code of conduct ... we called the OpenNet Consensus. Friendly funders from the Open Society Institute (Vera Franz) and the MacArthur Foundation (John Bracken) have ...

'Internet filtering is growing by the minute around the World': conversation with Robert Faris of ONI Initiative ... a chance to visit the ‘Berkman Centre for Internet and Society’ at Harvard University ( http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/ ) where I met Robert Faris, Research Fellow of Open Net Initiative (ONI). ONI tries to identify and document the Internet ..


P.S. if you believe u.s. Iran elections campaign you probably buy this too:

N. Korea: U.S. Nuke Umbrella a Declaration of War
June 10, 2009
North Korean media said Wednesday that a U.S. pledge to extend its nuclear umbrella to South Korea and Japan over military threats from Pyongyang would consist of a declaration of nuclear war. The commentary in the official newspaper of the ruling Workers' Party of Korea is the latest in what is becoming increasingly frequent criticism against the U.S. nuclear umbrella covering its allies in Asia. The report, carried by the official Korean Central News Agency, also criticized President Obama's vision for a world without nuclear weapons laid out in April, calling it "falsehood. "If the United States seriously wants nuclear disarmament, it should set an example" by carrying it out itself, the commentary said.The U.S. special envoy on North Korea, Stephen Bosworth, said Tuesday evening that the United States will do what is necessary for the security of its allies but has no plans to invade the North or overthrow its government by force [....]

NYT editorial condemned NK's 'Cruel Verdict' for sentencing two journalists caught trespassing on NK soil to twelve years of hard labor for spying and fabricating conflicting stories.

Two Paths, Same Fate for Reporters Facing Prison
SAN FRANCISCO — The roads that led two Current TV employees, Laura Ling and Euna Lee, to be sentenced this week to a North Korean labor camp were in some regards as different as their lives here in California. Ms. Ling... was earning a reputation at the San Francisco-based news channel as a fearless globe-trotting journalist. She reported stories in hotspots like Sri Lanka and Myanmar and witnessed the type of bloodshed such gritty work often entails. Ms. Lee, on the other hand, moved as an adult to the United States from South Korea and usually worked in Los Angeles behind the scenes as an editor. She was taking her first trip on an overseas assignment for the company when she was arrested, according to a Current TV employee who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the company’s policy of not commenting on the situation. Current TV, a politics and youth-oriented news channel founded by former Vice President Al Gore, has had no comment on the two journalists. Kalee Kreider, a spokeswoman for Mr. Gore, also declined to comment on the specifics of the situation, but said Mr. Gore had been in regular contact with the families of Ms. Ling and Ms. Lee. The two women were working on a story on the China-North Korea border when they were detained in mid-March.