The big issues of the coming campaign are not in question. The economy, America’s growing debt, unemployment, and the role of entitlements (read: government) in Americans lives are crux of the 2012 battle for the White House. Highlighting the negative results in these areas is Mitt Romney, best hand for winning the election.

Nonetheless, foreign policy issues and threats are looming above America’s head in a big way, and will need to be addressed. The conventional wisdom is that Romney has little foreign policy and relations experience. President Obama’s own lack of experience in this area notwithstanding, his campaign zeroed in on this one reason that Romney is not the right man for job.

Governor and Romney advisor Tim Pawlenty addressed this viewpoint and other foreign policy concerns today in a symposium held by the Foreign Policy Initiative. Moderated by board member and Fox news analyst Bill Kristal, the event gave Pawlenty a forum to address how a Romney Presidency would look like in the area of foreign relations. The big take away from the event was Pawlenty’s view that Romney is on the right track.

“Romney has the right foundational and directional philosophy to make the correct decisions.” Pawlenty followed this up by reminding everyone in attendance that Reagan did not have extensive foreign policy experience. His worldview is what allowed him to be an effective foreign policy President.

Channeling Reagan is something that most, if not all, republicans attempt to do. It does not matter whether it is taxes, the economy, or dealing with America’s challenges abroad. Still, there is a large grain of truth to his statement. Governors of either party seldom have extensive foreign policy and relations experience. Their duties at times lightly touch the area, but their primary function is running their states. The lack of experience has to be made up with study and experienced, sound advisors.

Underlying it all, however, is the philosophy of the person in charge. The President can have a mindset like Carter or Winston Churchill. How he views Americas role and his mindset sets the agenda for who he has as advisers, what diplomacy targets he set, and what he will do and not do with America’s armed forces.

Pawlenty was critical of the philosophy President Obama has taken. “President Obama has decided to lead from behind. To have America take a less active role as leader in the world. That has not worked out well.” Examples given of this view were the “reset with Russia,” as the President calls it, and the missed opportunity in the Iranian uprising.

The financial challenges the country faces are grave, but the potential threats of Iran, Russia, and China are like a Damocles sword above the neck of Uncle Sam. Romney cannot afford to let the view of the President set America’s view of him in this area. The knowledge and philosophy that Pawlenty speaks of must be in full view to the American public. Foreign policy may not be issue one this election cycle, but it still cannot be allowed to be ignored.

The article What Happened to Foreign Policy? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

New York, U.S.A. — U.S. designation of Hezbollah as a primary supporter of the Assad regime’s brutality “is another important step in efforts to confront the murderous Syrian regime,” said David Harris, executive director of AJC, the global advocacy organization. The U.S. government announced the new designation of Hezbollah in a conference call with reporters.

Ambassador Daniel Benjamin, the State Department’s Coordinator for Counterterrorism, one of the U.S. officials announcing the new designation, said “it serves the very, very important purpose of making clear to parties around the world – both domestically and internationally – the true nature of Hezbollah’s activities.”

The U.S designation states that Hezbollah has been training Syrian government personnel inside Syria, facilitating training of regime forces by Iranian Revolutionary Guards, and actively helping to expel Syrian opposition forces from some areas of Syria.”Hezbollah’s actions in Syria are particularly egregious, extending and prolonging this deadly conflict,” said Ambassador Benjamin.

“The Syrian people are suffering and dying at the hands of this unholy alliance of Hezbollah, Iran and the Assad regime,” said Harris. “State terrorism at its worst is playing out on the streets of Aleppo, Damascus and many other Syrian cities and towns.” The U.S. designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization in 1999. Canada, the United Kingdom and Israel have similarly labelled the group.

Several years ago, an attempt to secure European Union designation came close, but ultimately failed because a few European leaders maintained that Hezbollah, with representatives in the Lebanese Cabinet and Parliament, was a “legitimate” political organization.

“Serving at the highest levels of a government does not facto legitimize a terrorist organization,” said Harris. “Hezbollah should not be allowed to have it both ways — on the one hand, maintain its own militia and global terrorist apparatus, while, on the other hand, being recognized as a legitimate political force.”

Hezbollah, created with Iran’s aid nearly 30 years ago, is one of the world’s most dangerous terrorist organizations with a record of deadly attacks and foiled attempts in Latin America, Europe and the Middle East. Most recently, Hezbollah has been implicated in terrorist plots in two EU countries — Bulgaria andCyprus — as well as in other attempts from Kenya to Thailand.”

AJC last week sent letters to the foreign ministers of all 27 EU member states, the first step in a renewed campaign to encourage the EU to formally designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.”European nations should be among the very first to understand the true nature of Hezbollah and the regional and global threat it continues to pose,” said Harris. “It’s deadly involvement in Syria, as underscored by the new U.S. designation, only further underscores the point.”

Image Courtesy of   homeros / Shutterstock.com

The article New U.S. Steps Against Hezbollah; EU Urged to Act appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Washington D.C., U.S.A. — Survivors of Iran-backed bombings in Beirut in 1983, at the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996, and families who lost loved ones in these attacks praised the House and Senate for coming to agreement on an Iran sanctions bill, especially for including language that clarifies and strengthens current law governing collection of court awarded judgments against Iran for its role in the two terrorist events.

The survivors and families from across the United States said they are now closer to being able to hold Iran responsible for murdering 241 American service men in Beirut and 19 at the Khobar Towers and for maiming many others at both locations.

“This legislation is a major step in making sure that Iran understands that it will have to face responsibility for killing and injuring Americans. No legislation or legal judgment can repair the awful damage Iran did to all of our families, but at least we can all know that our country stands behind us in seeking justice forIran’s murderous rampages,” said Lynn Smith Derbyshire National Spokesperson for the Beirut Families and whose brother, Marine Captain Vincent Smith, was killed in the bombing.

The American victims of Iranian terrorism groups commended Congress for taking a strong stand in an array of sanctions areas. They said they were particularly grateful to the Senate Banking Committee, especially Senators Robert Menendez (D-NY) and Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL); the House Foreign Affairs Committee; especially the Chair, Representative Ileana Ross-Lehtinen (R-FL); the House Financial Services Committee and Chair, Spencer Bachus; the House Judiciary Committee and Chair, Lamar Smith(R-TX); and Representative Robert Turner (R-NY) as well as the tireless efforts of House and Senate staffers for their collective efforts in assuring that provisions that will make it easier to make Iran pay for its terrorism were included in the omnibus bill.

The groups urged expeditious passage of a final bill and expressed hopes that President Obama will sign it into law promptly.

Image Courtesy of    Official U.S. Air Force

The article Beirut and Khobar Bombing Victims Praise Iran Sanctions Bill appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

As of July 1, new sanctions against Iran are taking effect, effectively banning crude oil imports to the EU, which accounts for some 18% of Iranian crude oil exports. These new sanctions are coming into play as talks between the Iranian regime and the so called P5+1 nations (the U.S., U.K., China, Russia, and France plus Germany) are not making much headway.

Neither the May 23 meeting in Bagdad nor the June 23 meeting in Moscow resulted in anything substantial. Arguably, Iran is moving closer to the “point of no return” with threats being handed out on all sides and the rhetoric growing fiercer. Although a military solution seems to become more and more likely, there are compelling reasons why an air strike should be avoided at all costs.

An air strike on Iran is neither going be as easy as the Israeli strike on Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981, nor the strike on Syria’s reactor near al-Kibar in 2007. Iran, having learned a lesson or two from history, has gone to great lengths to protect their enrichment plants – spread out all over Iran – composing at least a dozen different sites. A top US air-force planner estimates that at least 400 targets would have to be hit, and that at least 75 would require the use of penetrating munitions (such as so called “bunker buster bombs”).

Furthermore, these sites are buried deep under ground, (such as the enrichment plant at Fordow which is located under a mountain), and are protected by sophisticated Russian-made air defence systems.

The air strike would have to be massive, continuous and surgical – and the problem is, it would do nothing but postpone the Iranian nuclear venture, (with some 2-5 years according to analysts). And detriment to the whole cause, a strike would naturally add enormous incentive for Iran to actually acquire the bomb, instead of keeping to peaceful uranium enrichment.

Following an Israeli strike, the Iranians would undoubtedly counterattack. Such a strike would be delivered both by means of conventional weapons such as ballistic missiles towards Israel (Iran has got the biggest stock of ballistic missiles in the Middle East), and also by the use of proxy forces such as Hezbollah who could target Israel with rocket strikes from the neighbouring Lebanon.

Other notable proxy strikes would come from the powerful warlord Moqtada al-Sadr, commander of the Shiite Mahdi Army, who’s openly promised to strike back at U.S. coalition forces in Iraq in the case of a U.S./Israeli strike against Iran.

If such a scenario unfolds, the U.S. would undoubtedly launch its own strike against Iran. The U.S., having built up a presence of some 125,000 troops in close proximity to Iran according to recent CENTCOM figures have the ability to hit some 10,000 targets inside Iran overnight.

However, the aftermath of a potential U.S. strike could prove to be very dangerous, as it would galvanize the other pro-Iranian powerhouses China and Russia, active in the region, and, in a worst case scenario, spark a new cold war.

Furthermore, a U.S. strike would have to be continuous and conducted over a long time span, in order to quell any resumed Iranian nuclear efforts, putting further strain on an already badly overstretched U.S. army, not to mention its economy. And all the while, soaring global oil prices would put the final nail in the coffin of an already badly beaten Western economy.

This is simply a scenario, but makes a rather convincing case why a military strike should be avoided at all costs. But amidst the threats and the gloomy outlooks, there are some positive notions.

Although the conflict has seen some escalations, such as cyber attacks on Iranian enrichment plants, as well as several mysterious and dramatic deaths of leading Iranian nuclear scientists, it has mostly been a war of words up to this point.

Historically, Israel has shown that when they are really intent on striking, such as in the cases of Iraq and Syria, it was done in the quiet, without any warning. The current amount of warnings and threats is thus a sign that Israel is content at keeping it “a war of words,” at least for now. But this rather precarious stalemate is not going to last forever.

Image Courtesy of  Mahmoud Ahmadinejar 

The article Iran, Why all Options Shouldn’t Be on the Table appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

United Nations Peace Envoy, Kofi Annan, has decided to hold an international conference regarding the ever-growing war in Syria, which has left several killed and severely injured. The meeting will take place in Geneva this coming Saturday, but cause for concern is arising, as the United States is having mixed emotions about being a part of the conference.

Secretary of State Hilary Clinton has confirmed that despite the United State’s lukewarm feelings about the conference, it will be in attendance, in addition to representatives from various countries including Russia, China, Britain, France, Turkey, and others from European Union, as well as the Arab League.

According to Annan, the purpose of the meeting, “is to forge a consensus on the terms for a political solution among international players with stakes and influence in the Syrian conflict over terms for a political solution. The U.N. envoy believes that the best hope of pressing the combatants on the ground to observe his peace plan to which they signed up in April but have not implemented, is for the foreign powers on whose support they variously depend to agree on terms.”

And the main problem that needs to be addressed this coming Saturday, is the conflict in different approaches and decisions that Russia and the United States both want to make. One of the countries that has yet to announce its appearance is Iran, which is a key factor in resolving conflict. “I have made it quite clear that I believe Iran should be part of the solution,” Annan said in Geneva last Friday. “If we continue the way we are going and competing with each other, it could lead to destructive competition and everyone will pay the price.”

The reason for both Iran and Saudia Arabia being excluded from the conference is based on the Obama Administration not wanting them there. According to Tony Karan, reporter for Time World, “The Obama Administration cited Iran’s role in backing up Syria’s bloody crackdown to declare Tehran’s involvement a “red line” for participating in the Geneva talks, and Annan presumably left out Saudi Arabia as a compensatory gesture to Russia which insists that those countries arming and funding Syria’s rebels share major responsibility for escalating the conflict.

A state department official told reporters last week that “If Kofi Annan can get the proposed participants to agree on such a plan for political transition then there will be a meeting, but that’s what we need to find out before we go to any meeting. There’s no point in going just for the sake of it.”

Image Courtesy of  United Nations

The article UN Conference to be Held Soon, Hoping to End War in Syria appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

For decades, Iran has been a subject of multilateral international sanctions which have failed to produce cumulative effects on influencing Iran’s policy on its nuclear program. The “toughest sanctions to date,” as quoted by President Obama, will come into full effect on 28th June 2012. Once again, sanctions fall under the umbrella of attempting to prevent Iran from pursuing its nuclear proliferation program.

According to an International Atomic Agency Report 2011, Iran is aiming towards obtaining nuclear weapons and the punitive methods used by the U.S. government will not just subvert the central bank of Iran but will also have an effect on its energy and transport sector. Pressure has also been exerted on other governments to join in with the implementation of a fourth round of UN sanctions on Iran.

Ranking fifth in the world in its oil reserves and second in gas reserves, Iran is clearly an important energy resource base and a major supplier of oil and natural gas to countries like India, China and Japan. In January 2012, the European Union froze assets of Iran’s central bank within its zone and will be extending oil shipment ban later in July. The severity of these sanctions has made it impossible for companies, banks and governments to do any business dealings with Iran.

The debate about whether or not Iran has a right to nuclear energy is as old as Queen Elizabeth’s ascent to the throne. For Iran, acquisition of nuclear energy has become a matter of national pride and in response to this fourth round of multilateral sanctions taken by the UN in 2010, Iran has responded by stating its right to peaceful nuclear energy.

Iran is a study of complexity and intrigue. It is difficult to understand a society that tethers between the modernism of Shah’s time and adherence to the early years of Islam. Iran’s image in the global world is tarnished, and according to a BBC poll in 2012, Iran tops their list as the country that offers “the most negative influence in the world.”

With the collapse of Saddam’s Baathist regime and the defeat of the Taliban in Afghanistan, an altered and delicate balance of power exists in Southwest Asia. Iran’s strategic importance has made itself a point of convergence of the interests of major players, particularly the US. One only needs to look at the map of the Middle East to know the strategic importance of Iran to the US.

In last 10 years, the strong and divisive fissure in U.S. foreign policy to coerce Tehran into adapting a new stance on the war on terrorism has also failed. Sanctions imposed by the Bush administration in 2006 barred Iran from dealing with US financial institutions, even indirectly. As a result, continuous rounds of sanctions have severed diplomatic ties between the two countries. The restart of the Iranian nuclear program and the US retaliation in terms of sanctions, further induces strong images of adversaries that are monolithically aggressive, diabolical, and untrustworthy. For adversaries who hold equally negative images of the other, the ability for each side to misperceive the enemy’s intent has become more pervasive. This means that it is highly possible that the mutual fear between the US and Iran may result in war.

In the present, the impending talks of attacks on Iran are chiefly driven by concern over the safety of US energy supplies, which is similar to the 2003 Iraq war. However, it is certain that the US will never mention oil as a reason for attacking Iran and furthermore, weapons of mass destruction will be cited as the principal justification for war. It is a concern that waging a war against Iran will worsen the cycle of war and violence in the Middle East since that has been continuing since time immemorial.

There is a pursuing debate among international community about the efficacy of these sanctions. With the impending global recession, and ongoing crisis in the Middle East and North African regions (MENA), boycotting Iranian oil will have an adverse effect on world supplies, especially for developing countries. Even though Iranian oil exports are down by 25%, the government has refused to compromise its stance on its nuclear program.

We shouldn’t forget that Iranian anger over centuries of foreign meddling in their sovereign affairs hasn’t yet disseminated. Iranians have yet to learn to forgive the US and its allies over the ousting of Mossadegh in 1953. If the international media can manipulate and present Iran as something out of the stone ages, then Iranian media has also been ambivalent in showing America and its allies as their version of the axis of evil.

Also, the Shiite faction across the world is fiercely loyal to Iran and has taken its impalpable oath of allegiance to the Ayatollah of Iran. Ali Khamenei’s term is coming to an end, but to think that the new government will be easy to manipulate like the puppet governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan could merely be more wishful thinking. Already, the sanctions have fueled bitter resentment against countries participating in them. Perhaps it’s a time for Euro-Anglo-American bodies to renew their policies and ascertain a modus vivendi that will build ties and, more importantly, will guarantee the stability of the Gulf region.

Economic sanctions throughout history have had corrosive effects on the population of a sanctioned country. Though the government of Iran is confident in its ability to ‘weather’ such sanctions, this is the biggest challenge the country will face since the end of the bloody Iran-Iraq war. With the evolving recession crisis worldwide, it will be interesting to see how Iran will overcome these further imposed sanctions.

Image Courtesy of  [john]

The article Isolated Iran vs. the Rest of the World appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Monarchy of Thailand is fed up over years of Thailand’s citizens criticizing the government and Thailand traditions. And, as more people are resorting to the Internet to speak out about their beliefs that collide with ancient Thailand traditions, the government has decided to finally take action.

According to Mobiledia, the government is “realizing the serious threats the technology, especially its social and mobile elements, can bring to governance and traditional beliefs. Countries around the globe are struggling to balance their population’s embrace of mobile communications with order, public safety and streamlining government affairs, and the challenges are beginning to show.”

Because governments in Kuwait, Turkey and Thailand revolve around what they believe, as each other’s survival, they believe that the citizens of these countries are damaging to each countries beliefs and values, while also damaging foreign relations with other countries. (Who is “they,” the government or the citizens?  What do you mean by “each other’s survival?” Can you rephrase this so it is more clear?)

The legal case that has grabbed international media attention revolves around Thailand resident Chiranuch Premchaiporn, a webmaster who manages a local news site, after she insulted Thailand’s king, 84-year-old Bhumibol Adulyadej. According to the ITTO (Who is the ITTO?), “Premchaiporn did not post the material, she is responsible for its message under Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act, a law which criminalizes hosting anti-monarchical content and puts content providers like Premchaiporn at risk for prison time if they fail to censor such comments quickly.” She had 11 days to remove the comments from her site but considering she failed to do so, Premchaiporn was sentenced to spend eight months in prison. Her sentencing was based on each comment that was derogatory toward the government, king, queen, or an heir.

Thailand has extremely strict consequences for those who go up against their government, with the standard penalty being a one year prison sentence for each insulting comment that is posted. However, Premachaiporn’s sentence was reduced based on her cooperation.

Thailand has extremely strict, what they call, “lese-majeste” laws which prohibits the public expression of criticism against the monarchy in any media form whether it be television, print, radio or the Internet.

According to Reporter Kendra Srivastava, “the sentence reflects Thailand’s long history of censorship, which is gaining attention and sparking controversy as technology advances in the digital age. Lese-majeste laws are also coming under fire with demands for reform due to the recent death of a 62-year-old man who was serving a 20-year jail sentence for insulting the king. A petition of almost 27,000 signatures calling for reform of the laws was delivered to the Thai parliament yesterday in response to the man’s death.”

Fortunately for other countries in Asia and the Middle East, governments are looking at ways to go about the penalties of violating censorship laws among its citizens. Rather than punishment, countries like Iran and Syria are exploring ways to limit the Internet’s reach to citizens by not allowing access to sites that can give them information to retaliate and denounce their governments as well as forbidding them to insult the religions and politics of their countries.

While Thailand is censoring the media to prevent the denouncement of their ancient beliefs that go centuries back, it might actually end up hurting the country’s future.

According to Srivastava, “Google called Premchaiporn’s sentence a threat to the potential of Thailand’s Internet economy.”

However, the real questions still remain. How far is censorship going to go? And, how far are these countries willing to risk the free speech of their citizens in order to save face for their governments? Is all this censorship worth the protests, deaths and detriment to these countries economies?

Image Courtesy of  AJP / Shutterstock.com

The article Internet Censorship Cracking Down in Thailand appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Because so many countries are starting to censor what their citizens can access on the internet, or ban websites from being seen entirely, citizens have found a way to access those sites through a program known as Green Simurgh.

According to ComputerWorld, “Green Simurgh is an anti-censorship application that routes a computer’s outbound connections to a server located in the U.S. This allows the software’s users to bypass network filters and access Internet resources that would normally be banned by their ISP. Green Simurgh doesn’t require any installation and can run directly from USB memory sticks, which makes it suitable for users who access the Internet from cafes and public computers.”

Unfortunately for users however, several copies of Green Simurgh that have been distributed have been found to have a Trojan horse and malware that reveals the internet user’s each and every keystroke they make. According to a University of Toronto laboratory, Citizen Lab (known for its specialization in researching digital media, human rights and global security), the software has been used in Iran since 2009 and Syrian users have also begun to rely on it.

“It has recently come to our attention that this software is being recommended and circulated among Syrian Internet users for bypassing censorship in their country,” said Citizen Lab technical adviser Morgan Marquis-Boire in a blog post on Friday. “This information led to the discovery and analysis of a back-doored version of this software.”

The malicious version of Green Simurgh comes in a package Simurgh-setup.zip from file sharing websites, one of which is 4shared.com.

Chester Wisniewski, a senior security adviser at antivirus vendor Sophos explains how users were convinced to use the malware version of Green Simurgh:

“When run on a Windows machine, the rogue installer drops a legitimate copy of the Green Simurgh software in the Program Files directory, but also installs a computer Trojan horse that runs in the background. [The Trojan horse] keeps a log of your username, machine name, every window clicked and keystroke entered,” he said.

 ”It attempts to submit these logs to some servers located in the United States, but registered to an entity that appears to be based in Saudi Arabia. Considering that thousands of users depend on the legitimate Simurgh software, it’s likely that a lot more people have been impacted by this malware than by Flame — a recently discovered cyber espionage threat that has received a lot of attention in the media.”

The creators of Green Simurgh have sent out a warning on their website to their users regarding the malware software, and for future users to only download the software directly from the Simurgh website itself. For those who have already been infected, the company recommends to run an anti-virus program and remove the program immediately.

The article Fake Version of Anti-Censorship Software Used in Syria and Iran appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

As technology advances at such a rapid pace, government regulations of censorship of the internet are cracking down just as fast. In recent weeks, an anonymous group has begun attacking the Indian government in retaliation of the government blocking citizens from using certain websites.

The websites that have been banned to the public thus far include, “YouTube, Vimeo (a video sharing website), Pastebin (a web application that allows users to write a large amount of text for public viewing), Daily Motion (another video sharing website) and The Pirate Bay (a Swedish website that allows users to download music, movies, games, software, etc), all in an effort to fight online piracy,” says Reporter DJ Pangburn.

Internet censorship has become a global issue. Is it perhaps that governments in various countries don’t want their citizens to see certain things on websites? Pangburn uses examples of the growth of censorship by mentioning that, “of course, it isn’t right to steal and distribute content, but it’s also not right to resort to draconian, Orwellian measures that empower governments to control the Internet.

Indeed, this architecture of control could be used for any variety of measures to stop what the government doesn’t want Internet users to see. This Internet censorship effort is truly global, with various treaties, executive agreements and UN proposals such as one currently being pushed by Russia, Iran and China that would have the UN implement an Internet code of conduct and create a superstructure to manage it all.”

The group ‘Anonymous’ keeps their identity concealed by wearing decorated masks or cloth to cover everything but their eyes. The group is communicating with the Indian government and the rest of the world through a program on the internet they created called ‘Anonymous Operations.’

On their website, the group recently announced they “had taken down the Indian Supreme Court and All India Congressional websites, as well as the Department of Telecommunications with the hacking collective accusing the Indian government of censorship and corruption in the form of bribery,” says Pangburn.

A member of India’s Upper House, Rajeev Chandrasekhar, wrote a letter to India’s Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, expressing his opposition over India’s recent attempt to control the Internet through a United Nations committee. He wrote that, “any attempt to expand government’s power over the Internet should be turned back,” according to his website, Death & Taxes.

‘Anonymous’ chose June 9 as the protest day for the censorship of the internet in India. Several protest sites have already been announced including Mumbai, New Delhi, Chandigarh, Indore, Kolkata, Hyderabad, Bangalore, Kochi, Kozhikode, Nagpur and Pune, according to the Times of India.

‘Anonymous’ has made a statement in regard to what they are hoping for as a result of the protests, but wants it to be known that they have no plans of this becoming a violent retaliation against the government. In the groups press release they stated, “this is to be a 100% Non-Violent Civil rights protest,” and encouraging “any one who feels they need this movement needs to be in their city can start a FB page for the Occupy City movement and let us know about it.”

The article An Anonymous Group in India Fights for Rights on the Internet appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Two months ago, journalists Adem Ozkose and Hamit Coskun were flown to Tehran to do some filming for a documentary. What they did not plan on documenting however, was the captivity they have endured for the past two months.

Ozkose, a reporter and Coskun, a cameraman, both with the magazine Gerçek Hayat and the daily Milat, were waiting for a plane to go home when they were captured on March 10.

“The journalists, as well as some Syrians who were accompanying them, were abducted by militia members known as shabiha at a checkpoint outside a Shiite town in the predominantly Sunni province,” Reporters Without Borders, a non-profit organization which defends the rights of journalists by advocating freedom of the press and the freedom of information, said.

According to the shabiha, they were abducted for illegally entering the country.

In the northwestern city of Idleb, a small Shiite town where the Turks were taken, rebel leaders attempted to negotiate with Syrian authorities for the journalists to be released, but were unsuccessful.

According to the IHH, a Turkish Islamist humanitarian non-governmental organization, it was announced on May 5 “that it had managed to visit the two detained journalists in Damascus. Turgut Alp Boyraz, the head of foreign news at Milat, said they were able to telephone their families on May 5 for the first time since their capture.”

Since the uprising of the Syrian people against President Bashar Assad started 14 months ago, relations between Turkey and Syria have worsened. According to Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Iran is said to have played a crucial role in the release of the prisoners, acting somewhat as a “mediator” between the two countries.

Additionally according to the LA Times, “since the Syrian uprising began last year in March, the country has been a dangerous place for foreign journalists to work. Most are not allowed to enter the nation and those who have received permission are often monitored. As a result, some journalists have sneaked into the country.”

And indeed it has become increasingly dangerous for journalists to report in foreign countries. Since the beginning of this year, six journalists have died as a result of working in a foreign country, including Remi Ochlik and Marie Colvin, who were killed while reporting on a monthlong bombardment of the Baba Amr neighborhood in Homs, according to Reporters Without Borders.

“Their release is a big relief,” the group said regarding the Turkish journalists. “But more than 37 journalists and citizen journalists are still detained in Syria. We must not forget them.”

Both Ozkose and Coskun were reported to be in good health and after being released on Saturday, will soon be reunited with their families.

Image Courtesy of   Kodak Agfa

The article Two Turkish Journalists Freed in Syria appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

As the United States has removed itself from one extended military conflict in the Middle East – in Iraq – another one possibly looms on the horizon, brought on by Iran’s suspected nuclear program and, among other things, Israel’s desire to abolish it. The U.S. has a tricky and nuanced road to navigate, made only more complicated by Israel’s role, the rising price of oil, and the presidential election in November. When Americans were asked about various items related to the potential conflict with Iran, the responses reflect the complicated nature of the issue.  Seven in ten Americans agree that Iran’s nuclear capabilities pose a threat to the United States (72%), yet what action the United States should take in response is less clear.

Over half of U.S. adults say that if Israel takes action against Iran’s nuclear program that the U.S. should support Israel (56%), yet fewer than half of Americans say Israel should take action to destroy Iran’s nuclear program (45%) and fewer believe that the U.S. should take this action themselves.

These are some of the results of The Harris Poll of 2,451 adults surveyed online between March 12 and 19, 2012 by Harris Interactive .

While a majority of all U.S. adults agree that Iran’s nuclear capabilities pose a threat to the United States this belief is stronger among older generations; 77%-79% of Baby Boomers (ages 48-66) and Matures (ages 67+) agree, compared to 63%-71% of Echo Boomers (ages 18-35) and Gen X (ages 36-47) who do.  The older generations are in similar agreement about the U.S. supporting Israel if Israel takes action against Iran’s nuclear program: over three in five Baby Boomers (63%) and Matures (68%) say the U.S. should support Israel, yet just 55% of Gen X and 45% of Echo Boomers respectively say the same.  There is a less strong opinion on whether Israel should take military action to destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities.  Approximately half (47%-51%) of Gen X, Baby Boomers and Matures say Israel should, although just 38% of Echo Boomers agree.  If Americans are uncertain about how Israel should act, they are even more uncertain about what the U.S. should do:

• Overall 45% of U.S. adults agree that the United States should NOT take military action to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, 39% disagree and 16% are not at all sure;
• Matures (aged 67+) are most likely to say that the U.S. should not take action against Iran and Gen X is least likely to say this (40%).

Political Differences
Military engagements and involvement with Israel are usually politically charged issues, but that sense is even more escalated in an election year. Republicans, Democrats and Independents show a different mind when considering Iran’s nuclear situation:

• While a majority of all political parties say that Iran’s nuclear capabilities pose a threat to the United States and that if Israel takes action against Iran the U.S. should support Israel, Republicans are the most likely to say these things (83% say Iran poses a threat and 70% want the U.S. to support Israel). Democrats and Independents agree that Iran poses a threat (70% and 73% say so respectively), yet these groups are less strongly in favor of supporting Israel taking action (51%-57% agree the U.S. should do so);
• When asked directly if Israel should take military action against Iran’s nuclear program Republicans agree they should (59%), yet significantly fewer Democrats and Independents say the same (40% and 45%);
• On the other hand, a majority of Democrats say that the U.S. should not take military action to destroy Iran’s nuclear program (52%), yet fewer than half of Independents (46%) and Republicans (37%) agree.

Taking a more philosophical look, interestingly a majority of Americans — in all political parties — disagree that Iran has the right to continue working on its nuclear program (65%-71% of Republicans, Democrats and Independents say this).

So What?
Although most reports indicate that neither Israel nor the U.S. is likely to take immediate military action against Iran – the results of which could be enormous and costly — the continued discussion and analysis on what each country should do might have consequences of its own, particularly if Iran sees the ongoing discussion as provocation unto itself.  It will be interesting to see how President Obama handles the discussions and decisions moving forward — it seems unlikely that he would want to enter into a new military engagement, yet the potential threat from Iran is felt by Americans, the pro-Israel lobby is strong, and the U.S. demand for oil continues to be pervasive.

Methodology
This Harris Poll was conducted online within the United States between March 12 and 19, 2012 among 2,451 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents’ propensity to be online.

All sample surveys and polls, whether or not they use probability sampling, are subject to multiple sources of error which are most often not possible to quantify or estimate, including sampling error, coverage error, error associated with nonresponse, error associated with question wording and response options, and post-survey weighting and adjustments. Therefore, Harris Interactive avoids the words “margin of error” as they are misleading. All that can be calculated are different possible sampling errors with different probabilities for pure, unweighted, random samples with 100% response rates. These are only theoretical because no published polls come close to this ideal.

Respondents for this survey were selected from among those who have agreed to participate in Harris Interactive surveys. The data have been weighted to reflect the composition of the adult population. Because the sample is based on those who agreed to participate in the Harris Interactive panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated.

These statements conform to the principles of disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.

The Harris Poll  #39, April 10, 2012
By Samantha Braverman, Sr. Project Researcher, Harris Interactive

Image Courtesey of  Steve Rhodes

The article What Do Americans Think About Iran’s Nuclear Threat? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

On the anniversary of the April 8, massacre of the residents of Camp Ashraf, International Solidarity for a Democratic Change in Iran (ISDCI) calls on UN, US and EU to take necessary steps to guarantee safety and basic human rights of the residents.

ISDCI also calls on US Secretary Clinton to, firstly, uphold her last year’s December 25 commitment for a “robust Monitoring” by the U.S. at Camp Liberty and secondly remove the terror tag on the Iran’s most important opposition movement, the MEK, which is an absolute necessity to facilitate resettlement to third countries.

The UN Security Council is expected to discuss Iraq, including the situation of Ashraf residents, next week. The Secretary General Special Representative for Iraq, Ambassador Martin Kobler is also expected to report to the Security Council.

ISDCI also calls on the United Nation Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to ensure that the conditions at Camp Liberty meet minimum humanitarian standards which it currently lacks.

ISDCI further expresses its dismay that after one year past the April 8 Massacre, the perpetrators of this heinous crime against humanity are yet to be brought to justice.

ISDCI participated in an international conference in Paris on March 24, 2012 as a display of solidarity for the call to protect residents of Camps Ashraf and Liberty in Iraq as the international consensus have called for it for the past year.

On the one-year anniversary of April 8 massacre of unarmed residents of Camp Ashraf at the hands of the Iraqi Army, and by the orders of the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the Iranian regime, ISDCI along with the families of the residents of Ashraf and supporters of the Iranian resistance remember the day of loss of their loved ones on April 8 of last year, knowing there is still much left to be accomplished as lives of the residents who still live in Ashraf or Liberty are in danger.

The Attack of April 8, 2011 on the unarmed residents of Camp Ashraf, who were declared “Protected Persons” under the “Fourth Geneva Conventions” by the American forces following the invasion of Iraq, left 36 residents dead, including 8 women, one as young as 19 years old.

The Attack was the second of its kind. The first attack, leaving 11 unarmed residents dead, took place in July 2009 shortly after the handover of the protection of the camp to Iraqis, despite persisting opposition on the part of residents, realizing the close ties between the governments of Iraq and Nouri al-Maliki and the theocratic regime ruling in Iran, foreseeing a human catastrophe.

Last February the residents accepted an international call supported by the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to move to Camp Liberty located in Baghdad under the condition that their safety and security as well as humanitarian and human rights standards would be guaranteed and honored in the new Camp.

About 1200 residents have moved to Liberty up until now despite the new camp’s lack of adequate and basic accommodation particularly for so many people. The inadequacies include drinking water, electricity, and proper sewage system, not mentioning the 24 hour presence of police guards armed with heavy machineguns.

At the March 24 Conference in Paris, speakers from the United States and Europe stressed on the need for protecting the rights of Ashraf and Liberty residents. Speakers included Maryam Rajavi, the President-elect of the Iranian resistance, Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York and US Presidential Candidate (2008), Michael Mukasey, US Attorney General (2007-2009), Secretary Tom Ridge, the first US Homeland Security Secretary (2003-2005) and former Governor of Pennsylvania;

John Bolton, former US Ambassador to the United Nations, Patrick Kennedy, member of the US Congress (1991-2011); Glenn Carle, former Deputy National Intelligence for Transnational Threats; Col. Wesley Martin, former Commander of the MNF-I anti-terrorism unit and commander of Forward Operation Base in Ashraf; Lt. Col Leo McCloskey, Commander of Forward Operation Base in Ashraf until 2008. Additionally, a number of European personalities also made remarks during the conference.

Speaking in front of a crowd of about one thousand cheering supporters, the speakers stressed on the necessity for the U.S. Government to remove the unjust terror tag on the Iranian resistance, as the Europeans and the British have done, paving the way for a smooth transit by the residents to other countries.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/perspective/

The article ISDCI Calls On for Protection of Iranian Opposition Members of Camp Ashraf appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

On March 25 , during the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, US President Barack Obama said that there is still time for a peaceful and diplomatic solution of the recent dispute that has risen between Israel and Iran, “I believe there is a window of time to solve this diplomatically, but that window is closing,” declared Obama. He also added that although world leaders are ready to give a helping hand to the rebellious nations, they may not wait for too long.

According to his words, the American government is trying to undo some of the political friction between the Middle Eastern countries. Earlier, it was said that the United States intended to provide Israel with military munitions and aerial refueling tankers, on the condition that the Canaan state will not start warlike actions against Iran.

As a whole, the leaders of G8 are putting all their efforts in keeping the present international situation, because a future nuclear conflict in the Middle East could have a destructive effect on the rest of the world.

The strife between Israel and Iran started at the beginning of the new century, when the world media was flooded with sharp remarks, exchanged between the heads of the two states (can you be more specific? what event led to sharp remarks between the heads of state?). Since then, problems in these parts of Asia at one moment subsided, at another intensified again. (this is very generic and has no information value – I’d rather see you focus on explaining the bad relations between the two nations, why they have it out for each other)

The conflict became increasingly volatile in the first months of 2012, when the Israeli embassies in India and Georgia were targeted by Iranian terrorism. Thankfully, due to the fast interference of the police, the car bomb in Georgia was not able to explode. However, in India four people were seriously wounded.

In addition, Iranian agents were arrested in Bangkok, Thailand, after trying to put a bomb on the car of an Israeli official. Even journalists are involved in the bitter war between the Middle Eastern countries. In March this year, Syed Mohammed Kazmi, an Indian journalist, was arrested in New Delhi in connection with the terrorist attacks there.

The old dispute between Israel and Iran is reaching its climax, and will soon burst out in violent and bloody actions, which poses a threat to the safety of the world community. Experts in international and military relationships stated that this future war between Tehran and Jerusalem could turn into a Third World War, which will be much more destructive this time, because it may involve nuclear weapons.

For the time being, the main mission is to find a peaceful solution in the crisis between the two countries. However, recent speculations say that Israel is preparing for military actions in the near months. Their training and preparations will take time, which risk speculators believe is used by the Iranian Air Forces on preparing for the attacks.

No one can be sure of what will be the future development of the Israel-Iran conflict, but one thing is obvious: it will have an annihilating effect at a global level, at least according to specialists in this field.

The article Israel and Iran: The Calm Before The Storm appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum flailed against each other through most of the Republican presidential primary in Mesa, Arizona on Wednesday night, but both assailed President Obama for not taking a more aggressive stance towards Iran.

Romney called Obama’s policy towards Iran, “his biggest failure,” and said the Iranian threat to stop the flow of oil to the west and drive up gas prices “pales in comparison” to the threat of the Iranian regime getting their hands on a nuclear weapon.

The United States should have intervened during the Green Revolution in 2009 when protesters rose up against the disputed re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Romney added. When the Iranian regime pressed ahead with efforts to produce nuclear fuel, the US should have put in place “crippling sanctions,” he said.

Santorum agreed that Obama hasn’t supported sanctions and is too timid to stand up to the Iranians. “We need a new president or we will have a cataclysmic situation,” said Santorum. He agreed that Obama should have come to the aid of the pro-democracy movement in Iran, but stumbled a bit during his tirade, calling Iran “the world’s most most prolific proliferator of terrorism.”

Both men agreed that the United States should do more to help the pro-democracy movement in Syria, although they stopped short of calling for direct military intervention. Santorum called Syria “a puppet for Iran” in the Middle East and Romney said the turmoil in Syria presented a critical time for the United States to change the balance of power in the Middle East. He said the US should consider turning to Turkey or other allies in the region to help overthrow the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Santorum stumbled again when he said that Obama had not demanded that Assad leave office. In a statement to the United Nations on February 4, Obama said Assad should step down, stop the killing of his own people, and allow the pro-democracy movement to run its course. It was the latest of many similar statements Obama has made since the protests in Syria began last year.

Newt Gingrich joined the chorus of tough talk, but added that if the United States got rid of the Environmental Protection Agency and eased restrictions on oil exploration, the country would produce so much gasoline that it could ignore Iran’s threats to stop oil shipments to the west.

Gingrich said he wouldn’t necessarily oppose a preemptive strike against Iran by the Israelis. “If you think a madman is about to get nuclear weapons and you think he is going to use those nuclear weapons, then you have an absolute moral obligation to defend the lives of your people by eliminating the capacity to get nuclear weapons,” said Gingrich. Ron Paul struck his usual contrarian pose on foreign policy, saying that the US has already overextended and nearly bankrupted itself with militarily intervention.

“There is no evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapon,” said Paul, to a chorus of cheers and jeers from the audience. And even if Iran did acquire a weapon, he continued, that’s not an excuse for immediate military action. Paul said the Soviet Union had over 30 thousand nuclear weapons, “but we still talked to them.” Eventually the Soviet Union collapsed, he continued. “It was because they bankrupted themselves.”

Paul said that al-Qaeda’s intention was to “bog down” the United States with military intervention in the Middle East, and so far, they’ve succeeded. “We’ve spent more than $4 trillion dollars over the last ten years in the Middle East,” said Paul, suggesting that if those who favor military intervention against Iran won’t listen to constitutional or moral arguments, perhaps they will listen to a financial one.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/

The article Republican Candidates Talk Tough on Iran appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

AJC expressed grave concern about India’s relations with Iran. In a letter to the Indian ambassador to the United States, AJC stressed that any effort by India to intensify its commercial activity with Iran could undermine the U.S. and EU sanctions that aim to stop Iran’s nuclear-weapons program.

“We are alarmed and dismayed by this apparent move to elevate commercial interests over vital security concerns,” wrote AJC President Robert Elman and Executive Director David Harris in a letter to Ambassador Nirupama Rao.

The full text of the letter to Ambassador Rao follows:

Her Excellency Nirupama Rao
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary
Embassy of India
2107 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20008

Dear Ambassador Rao:

As you are aware, AJC has been a long-time friend of India and an advocate of increasingly close cooperation between Washington and New Delhi.

In that spirit, we were deeply troubled by recent news reports of Indian efforts to intensify trade relations with Iran at the very moment that Washington and fellow democracies are applying new economic pressures in the banking and energy sectors to persuade Tehran to halt its pursuit of nuclear-weapons capability.

We were particularly struck by the announcement this week, by Commerce Secretary Rahul Khullar, that “a huge delegation” of Indian business representatives would soon travel to Iran to capitalize on opportunities created by European withdrawal from the Iranian market.

This suggests that New Delhi is attempting to take advantage of sanctions adopted by like-minded nations for the explicit purpose of preventing nuclear proliferation by a dangerously aggressive regime — and which could, in turn, trigger an escalating arms race — in a highly volatile region.

In light of India’s history of support for International Atomic Energy Agency resolutions on Iranian transgressions, and repeated expressions of Indian Government concern about Iran’s nuclear ambitions, we are alarmed and dismayed by this apparent move to elevate commercial interests over vital security concerns.

India has asserted that it will only abide by UN Security Council restrictions on trade with Iran, but not go beyond. Yet, as in the recent case of Syria, further measures are today impossible because of a threatened veto by one or two permanent members. We fear that India risks not only the erosion of the latest steps laudably adopted in Washington, Brussels and elsewhere, but also its standing as an admired partner in safeguarding regional and global security.

We thank you for conveying AJC’s concerns on this urgent matter to your Government, and look forward to the prospect of discussing it with you at your earliest convenience.

With the assurance of our profound esteem and best wishes, we remain,

Respectfully,
Robert Elman, President
David Harris, Executive Director

The article AJC Dismayed by India’s Expanding Ties to Iran appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

On Friday, British authorities revoked the license of Press TV, Iran’s English language news channel, for violating the Communications Act. The Wall Street Journal reported that the British communications regulator, Ofcom, made the decision. It was triggered by Maziar Bahari, a Newsweek journalist, who filed a complaint against Press TV after it aired a false confession of him in 2009.

“Press TV will cease to broadcast today; we have given them a number of opportunities to bring them into compliance. For whatever reason, they have not done so,” Rhys Hurd of Ofcom said.

Even though Ofcom did not revoke the channel’s broadcasting license in 2009, it declared the release of Mr. Bahari’s footage, while he was under duress during his imprisonment in an Iranian prison as “serious breach in broadcasting code.” Ofcom imposed a fine of 100,000 British pounds for invading his privacy.

According to the Guardian, Press TV has been offered two options by Ofcom in November. The first was to turn over editorial control to the UK for Press TV’s programming, and the second was to shift the broadcasting license to Iran.

“Broadcasting rules require that a license is held by the person who is in general control of the TV service: that is, the person that chooses the programmes to be shown in the service and organizes the programme schedule,” Ofcom said.

Despite Ofcom’s open-minded offer, Press TV has failed to meet both of the conditions and pay the fine which was due early this month. The regulator said, “Press TV has failed to make the necessary application, and Ofcom has therefore revoked Press TV’s license to broadcast in the UK.”

In a statement made late Friday, Press TV retaliated against Ofcom’s decision by calling it “the British government’s tool to control the media” and indicted the regulator for waging a campaign against the Iranian channel for being an “alternative news channel.”

Hamid Emadi, the Press TV newsroom director, said, “The British government and Ofcom will not be able to silence Press TV’s voice in the UK. We will exhaust all possibilities and will try to stay in the UK as an active media player and an alternative voice.” Currently, UK viewers can still continue to watch Press TV online through its website.

Lastly, the Wall Street Journal also reported that Press TV has yet to pay the fine and, until now, has refused to do so. “Ofcom is pursuing this as a separate matter,” the regulator said.

The article UK Revokes Iranian Press TV’s Licence appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

After a 7.2 magnitude earthquake rocked Turkey on Sunday, people are scrambling to rescue those who may still be buried underneath the rubble of destroyed buildings. The southeastern region of Turkey was badly hit by the earthquake, where the death toll has soared to over 400.

Over 1,300 people have been injured because of this natural disaster. As time speeds forward, the amount feared dead is expected to rise. Thousands of buildings have collapsed due to the destructive power of the earthquake, burying people within layers of concrete and debris. The town of Van is one of the hardest hit areas in Turkey, along with Ercis.

The southeastern region of Turkey is heavily mountainous and is considered to be one of the poorest areas of the country. Turkey is located on a geological fault line that makes it highly susceptible to destructive earthquakes. 90 countries from around the world have stretched out their funds towards Turkey in hopes of rescuing potential survivors and providing aid.

Turkey’s government has held by its strong stance of providing for its own country and has only accepted the help from neighboring countries Azerbaijan and Iran. Turkey is continuously being pressured to agree to international aid as the devastation from the earthquake continues to take a toll on its citizens.

The government is receiving much criticism for not accepting international aid when hundreds of people are still missing. Many of the hard to reach areas are remote villages. Rescue efforts have not been able to travel to these areas because roads are impassable.

Typical villages in this area have houses made out of clay and mud, which are materials that are not made to withstand the powers of a 7.2 magnitude earthquake. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish Prime Minister, believes that the majority of the buildings in these remote villages are completely destroyed.

Turkey’s Health Ministry has set up a crisis center in Ankara, while the hardest hit areas of Turkey have had help from international relief organizations. 2,300 emergency personnel have arrived to the hardest hit areas of the region by Monday and continue searching for people in collapsed buildings.

Upcoming weather forecasts will undeniably play a role in the rescue efforts as overnight freezing temperatures are predicted, as well as snow. Hundreds of aftershocks have played a detrimental role in rescuing people, often making it hard to make successful rescues. Positive rescue efforts have been seen throughout the hard hit areas.

On Tuesday, an infant girl at just two weeks old was rescued with her mother and grandmother within their destroyed home. Their family was taken to a hospital in Ercis, near the town of Van, where much of the earthquake’s impact was felt. There are many organizations that are helping with the earthquake crisis and a numerous amount of ways people can donate to this unfortunate disaster.

The Turkish Red Crescent has set up tents for those who have become homeless after the earthquake, along with providing food and water for thousands. Donations are being accepted by the Disaster Relief Emergency Fund. Donations can be made on the website of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Society.

From the United States, people can donate $10 by calling (941) 907-6036 or text “SHELTER” to 20222.

The article Rescue Efforts Continue After Turkish Earthquake appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Obama administration is working to provide dissidents with a new tool in their struggle against corrupt regimes: covert communications networks that cannot be shut down by official censors.

According to The New York Times, the government’s plans range from parallel cellphone networks to a futuristic “Internet in a suitcase.”  The innocent-looking piece of luggage could easily be smuggled across a border and provide a highly-portable wireless connection that would give dissident groups a link to the outside world.  In essence, each ‘suitcase’ would act like a miniature cellphone tower and provide the ability to transmit information without using official networks.

In Afghanistan, the State Department and the Pentagon have spent $50 million to create an independent cellphone network to circumvent the Taliban’s attacks on official telecommunications services.  The US is also working to enable mobile phone users to send files directly from phone to phone via Bluetooth.

The recent uprisings in the Arab world have underscored the Internet’s  ability to foment widespread opposition.  Consequently, despots from Cairo to Damascus have sought to block their citizens’ access to the Internet in order to stifle uprisings.  During uprisings in 2009, Iran launched an “Internet slowdown” which made it much more difficult for activists to use social media to mobilize support for their cause.

“No matter how much circumvention the protesters use, if the government slows the network down to a crawl, you can’t upload YouTube videos or Facebook postings,” said Collin Anderson, a liberation-technology researcher who spoke to the New York Times.  “They need alternative ways of sharing information or alternative ways of getting it out of the country,” he continued.

Not all strategies are high tech, however.  In North Korea, America has shown an interest in local dissents who bury Chinese cell phones near the border for use in making clandestine calls.  Among other things, these calls have helped coordinate efforts to smuggle North Korean defectors across the border into China.

The New York Times quoted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as saying that “There is a historic opportunity to effect positive change, change America supports.”

“So we’re focused on helping them do that, on helping them talk to each other, to their communities, to their governments and to the world,” she continued.

The United States has a long history of using technology to undermine hostile regimes.  In 1940, it began using shortwave radio broadcasts to counter Nazi propaganda in Latin America.  The Voice of America began broadcasting behind enemy lines after America entered World War II.  And during the Cold War, it worked to counter Soviet propaganda.

The article Obama Administration Funding “Shadow” Networks to Circumvent Censors appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Iran is claiming that that they have built the world’s first “flying saucer”, according to the official state-run Iranian news agency.  The news agency asserted that the craft was unveiled to Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamene in a special ceremony last month.  The unmanned craft is intended largely for aerial imaging.

The saucer, named ‘Zohal’, which translates to Saturn in Persian, is part of a “new generation of vertical flyers,” according to the Daily mail.  The original news release stated described the flying saucer in more detail.  The release read in part:

Zohal, designed and developed jointly by Farnas Aerospace Company and Iranian Aviation and Space Industries Association (IASIA), can be used for various missions, specially for aerial imaging.

The flying machine is equipped with an auto-pilot system, GPS (Global Positioning System) and two separate imaging systems with full HD 10 mega-pixel picture quality and is able to take and send images simultaneously.

Zohal uses a small, portable navigation and monitoring center for transmission of data and images and can fly in both outdoor and indoor spaces.

Not everyone is a believer, however.  A picture that accompanied the press release may not actually be a picture of the machine. Another press release by the Iranian Students’ News Agency may be a more accurate depiction of the craft.

“It is equipped with autopilot, image stabilizer and GPS and has a separate system for aerial recording with FULL HD quality as well as another system for aerial photography with 10 megapixel capability which can be sent and recorded simultaneously. The machine involves a small and portable land station with the monitoring capability and is able to fly indoors and outdoors,” according to the students’ press release.  “Easy transportation and launch and flying with less making noise are some of the advantages of the device. “

The article Iran Claims to Have Flying Saucer appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Mir Hossein Moussavi and Mehdi Karroubi are the opposition leaders in Iran.

Some sources say they were detained,along with their wives Zahra Rahnavard and Fatemeh Karroubi, under house arrest in their respective homes in Tehran with the charge to have called for demonstrations in the Iranian capital after the recent uprising in Tunisia and Egypt.

Their houses were under surveillance and they were kept in complete isolation, completely cut off from the outside world. Now their disappearance is a mystery. The sources give different versions of the story.

According to the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran (ICHR), Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi were moved from their homes and taken to an unknown location. Iranian government officials deny that the men had been taken. “The two are currently in their homes and there have only been restrictions on their contacts”, an unnamed government official said.

Debkafile‘s Iranian sources reveal that both have been secretly jailed at the ill-famed Parchin prison.

The night on February 24th, they were taken from their Tehran homes, beaten, hidden in large sacks and carried in armoured police vehicles to one of the most Iran’s infernal prisons. Also their wives have disappeared,no one knows where they have been moved.

They were seized so suddenly that their fellow activists couldn’t even think about it,they thought they were still at home under protracted house arrest. But then they discovered that the Moussavi and Karroubi residences were empty and dark, and their families nowhere around. Also the guards were gone.

The Parchin top security prison is reserved for either the most audacious regime’s political and ideological dissidents, the spies accused of threatening Iranian state security and foreign prisoners of the regime. Situated really close to Iran’s most secret nuclear laboratories, the prison’s vicinity is one of the most heavily guarded sections of Tehran. The prisoners of Parchin are rarely seen again.

Some sources report Moussavi and Karroubi must have been seriously weakened by enforced hunger while still under house arrest. They and their wives were obliged to eat only the food supplied by their guards, but it seems that they refused for fear of been poisoned. Their relatives sent various letters to the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to express concern about their state of health, they also complaint because they weren’t allowed to visit them and nobody could see them. They never got an answer.

The reformist Sayed Mohammad Khatami is asking for their release since they were held in their residences and he is also posting on his website calls for protests in the key squares and streets of Tehran and provincial cities against the violation of the human rights of the two opposition’s leaders.

The authorities oppose the protests. Officials have branded anyone who supports Mir Hossein Moussavi and Mehdi Karroubi as “anti-revolutionary”. During the demonstrations of February 14th there were thousands of supporters of the two opposition leaders to fill the streets of Tehran. At least two persons died in the clashes with security forces and around 1,500 people were detained according to what the opposition groups said. Official figures say that the right number is 150. The Iranian MPs calls for the execution of the opposition leaders.

The Iranian state ignores voluntarily the duty of informing the country and also the world. The destiny of the two opposition figures and of their wives remains obscure.

The article Opposition Leaders Disappeared In Iran appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.