It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tehran - Mega Capital of Iran - Photo Album (Bush doesn't want you to see this side of Iran!)

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Siroos must either work for the propaganda department in Iran or must be the most brainwashed person on Earth.


On the contrary, I have worked against the current regime for most of the past 26 years. It is only recently that I and many other Iranians have understood what is really going on in the world. We have understood what the U.S. is really up to and just which axis is the real evil one here. The brainwashed are really those who believe the U.S. propaganda. Just watch TV about the elections in Iraq - the "joy" and dancing in the streets..... it's disgusting! Not a word about the more than 120,000 Iraqis who got killed by U.S. and British bombardments, not a word about the torture of Iraqis, not a word about the museums that were plundered of invaluable archeological treasures while U.S. soldiers just stood and watched! THAT my friend is brainwashing! I want the U.S. and U.K. out of our region! They're invadors, agressors and occupiers. They have absolutely no business there or anywhere else than in their own countries. They have no business telling others that they cannot pursue a nuclear programme for peaceful or military purposes - especially when they themselves have nukes! I'm against a theocracy. I'm a secularist at heart. I'm against all kinds of fundamentalism. I'm against stonings and amputations as penalties - I'm also against the forceful veiling of women. But we have no better alternative today. If we want an INDEPENDENT, SELF-RELIANT and PROGRESSIVE INDUSTRIAL and DEVELOPED IRAN, then what we have right now is the only alternative.

I have worked in the Iranian opposition for some 20 years. It stinks! From the left to the very right - it stinks! The Iranian people don't want to be servants or slaves of anyone. The so called moderate and "democratic" opposition forces such as the Shah's son or the republican National Front are a bunch servants. They're out of touch with the Iranian masses. The MKO and the communists are the most hated by the Iranian masses.

Iran has been reformed tremendously over the years. Look at how women are dressed in those pictures. They're showing both hair and legs and their figures - they're pierced. Even 10-15 years ago there were underground hard metal clubs in Tehran and punks. I listen to Iranian exile radio stations and watch exile TV stations who broadcasts into Iran around the clock. They talk with dissidents in Iran who everyone knows, and who openly defy the regime, and nothing happens to them. In the streets of Tehran many people will even give the finger to mullahs when driving by or may spit at them when they walk by. Sure, newspapers are closed down and journalists are jailed. But there is a judicial system which deals with it to some degree and many times if not most, they win their case in the court and are released and can publish their newspapers again. Within the Iranian establishment there are those who are backwarded and fanatic or just business-minded opportunists, and then there are those who care for Iran and the people. The best is to let Iran find its own way, GRADUALLY and NATURALLY at its own pace. Obviously a lot of good things are happening in Iran as well. The opposition has proven that it's unworthy of ruling Iran, and so there is no better choice YET. And until that better choice pops up, we are better off going along with what we have, with all its problems and negatives, and do our best to help reform the system from within.




posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by lchoro
It'd be a shame to see a conflict result because of their stupid leadership. If you google on the phrase "destruction of israel", you'll find many extracts of speeches made by their government in just the last four years.


Anyone who truly knows the thocracy in Iran and how it works will also know that their anti-Israel rethorics are nothing more than slogans. The Iranian leadership would never lift a finger at Israel even if it had the opportunity. Israel knows this and this is why they have also dealt with the Iranian leadership under the table. The Israelis sold Iran plane loads of military spare parts and weapons during the Iran-Iraq war. Israel is not afraid that Iran would use its nukes against Israel. Israel just does not want a rival in the region . It wants to be the dominant power. Which is a ridiculous expectation by a 50 year old tiny country.



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Siroos,

Since you seem so familiar with the Iranian government, can you please explain why Iran needs a nuclear reactor when the entire country is practically floating on a sea of oil?



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   
What does it matter? Is there some new world legislation that disallows countries from obtaining nuclear power outside of need?



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
What does it matter? Is there some new world legislation that disallows countries from obtaining nuclear power outside of need?


The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty allows the development of peaceful uses of nuclear power but only under strict International Atomic Energy Agency supervision. Iran is currently in violation of the IAEA supervisory safeguards.



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 12:36 PM
link   









posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Perhaps they are, but invading Iran would not be the solution to the problem. Iran and Iraq are not the same, and any attempt to lump them in as same old same old would be poorly advised.

Not saying you are doing that. Never-the-less, I think that the victories in Iraq might be overshadowed by invading or even bombing Iran.



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 12:59 PM
link   
View of downtown Tehran in 2036 looking north:



[edit on 1/31/2005 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
If Iran fires so much as a firecracker at Israel, Israel will respond with a nuclear attack.


Oh yes? Like they did against Iraq when they sent missiles heading for Israel. Israel has no chance with Iran. Israel capability is far over rated just because of the mission in Entebe and their wars with the incompetent Arab armies. Iran is a different story. I hope that there will be no military confrontation, but if there will be I can promise you that Israel will be very, very sorry!



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
View of downtown Tehran in 2036 looking north:

[edit on 1/31/2005 by centurion1211]

Why don’t you finish the mess you guys are right now and then talk about invading a bigger much stronger country.



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by persian

Originally posted by centurion1211
View of downtown Tehran in 2036 looking north:

[edit on 1/31/2005 by centurion1211]

Why don’t you finish the mess you guys are right now and then talk about invading a bigger much stronger country.


From the picture, it looks like we just need to be a little patient.



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
If Iran fires so much as a firecracker at Israel, Israel will respond with a nuclear attack.


how much does a nuclear bomb shelter cost?
since if israel went nuclear it will be armergeddin for everyone


if israel does launch a air raid
the chances are high it will have Irans new missiles lobbed at it ( no doubt in that )



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 01:43 PM
link   
The only reason Israel didn't launch a counterattack against Iraq in Gulf War I is because the U.S. twisted their arm off not to and wouldn't provide them with any codes so their planes wouldn't be mistaken as enemy planes. I doubt we'd do that again if Iran attacked Israel unless we just decided to send some of our own Minuteman and Trident missiles its way...



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Siroos. How about answering the questions that were put to you instead of just posting more photographs?

My question. Why were 649 under-14 girls arrested in this utopian capital city?

www.iranfocus.com...



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Siroos,

Since you seem so familiar with the Iranian government, can you please explain why Iran needs a nuclear reactor when the entire country is practically floating on a sea of oil?


Yes, actually I will do better than so - I will post a few links which will explain in detail why it is so justifiable for Iran to have nuclear powers. You see the nuclear programme is nothing new. It started during the reign of the Shah. And the U.S. insisted on selling him everything he needed at an extremely high cost. The Shah turned to Europe instead, and in particular the French, which did not pleas the Americans.

Even if Iran sits on a sea of oil, it's not unreasonable to want a cheaper and much more environmentially friendly energy source, and besides it would enable Iran to use its oil for industry and export instead. Besides, the oil will not last forever, and every country needs to find alternative energy sources for the future.

But in any case, to me, whether Iran pursues a nuclear programme for civilian or military purposes makes no difference. I like 99% of Iranians support Iran's right to possess nuclear weapons. I wish that we could have a world entirely free of nuclear weapons. But as long as the U.S., Israel, Pakistan, India, Egland, etc, have nuclear weapons, then I think Iran reserves the right to have them too. What is the rationale behind the reasoning that the U.S., England, France should be allowed to have them? What is it that gives them this privelege? Is it their skin-color, religion.....what justifies that these countries should be allowed to have them but no others? If they really want to prevent other countries to have nuclear weapons, then they should get rid of theirs first.

Iran has much more reason to have nuclear weapons and to use them as a detente than do for instance England and France. Iran has always been surrounded by hostile neighbors because of its ethnic and cultural background. These hostilities exist more than ever today. Iran is also threatened by the imperialist U.S. which relentlessly has interfered in our internal affairs in the past and continues to try to interfere with clandenstine activities aimed at serving its greedy intentions and expansionism. Iran is squeezed inbetween a multitude of hostile nations who would take the first best chance to attack Iran if they could. Pakistan is one of them, and it has nuclear weapons. The Pakistani regime is the most sneaky, hypocritical and unreliable of all regimes in the region. Pakistan is also a country with a much more chaotic and unstable domestic political scene then Iran. Coup after coup and one assassination attempt after the other. Such a country, which is also very undeveloped, has nuclear weapons, and yet no threats of bombardments were made against them and very few objections were expressed. The possibility of a conflict between Pakistan and Iran is a tragic reality. Pakistan has a hidden agenda, and it involves expansionist ambitions. Pakistan was also involved in the ethnic cleansing which took place in Afghanistan by the Taleban against the Persian ethnicities of Afghanistan and also the Persian-speaking groups in that country. Women, men and children were slaughtered by the Taleban in city after city because they were ethnically Persian or Persian-speaking, and this happened with the full support and help of Pakistan.

Pakistan and Iran also have a common ground which could erupt into a full-blown conflict. Both Iran and Pakistan have an ethnic minority called the Baluchis, and both countries have their own Baluchistan Provinces. All of Baluchistan used to be part of Iran like many other territories in the region prior to the British schemes with their "Big Game" in which they and the Russians decided to split the entire region into "interest spheres" as if it was a cake. Recently Baluchi guerillas in Pakistan have started a campaign against Karachi. And ofcourse the U.S. propaganda machine was quick to suggest that Iran was responsible, although this is absolutely not true. The last thing Iran would want is more trouble at its hands with everything else going on. Furthermore, why would Iran want to see such developments in Pakistan's Baluchistan Province when Iran has its own much larger Baluchistan Province where there are dissidents with separatist sentiments, although they are insignificantly few since most Baluchis are fiercely patriotic towards the Iranian motherland.

So you see, Iran really has a reason to feel threatened on many fronts, and a nuclear arsenal could be the only chance we would have to save ourselves from a possible nuclear threat from an unpredictable Pakistan with an unpredictable future. I will post the links of some very interesting articles which explains Iran's justifiable need for a nuclear programme.



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos
TEHRAN PICTURES: www.worldisround.com...

IRAN PICTURES: www.worldisround.com...

Greater Tehran has become a giant metropolis of some 15 million in population. The city boasts some 800+ Parks. Construction of advanced highways, highrises, monuments, museums, is booming like never before.

[edit on 30-1-2005 by Siroos]

[edit on 31-1-2005 by John bull 1]


Let's keep these pictures around in order to compare them when the city is destroyed by the forces of freedom...



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
What does it matter? Is there some new world legislation that disallows countries from obtaining nuclear power outside of need?


The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty allows the development of peaceful uses of nuclear power but only under strict International Atomic Energy Agency supervision. Iran is currently in violation of the IAEA supervisory safeguards.


Actually the IAEA has not deemed Iran being in violation. On the contrary, the IAEA made statements as late as yesterday, stating that there is no proof or evidence pointing at that Iran is indeed pursuing a military nuclear programme, and that there also is no imminent need to worry about Iran achieiving such a programme in the near future.



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos

Actually the IAEA has not deemed Iran being in violation. On the contrary, the IAEA made statements as late as yesterday, stating that there is no proof or evidence pointing at that Iran is indeed pursuing a military nuclear programme, and that there also is no imminent need to worry about Iran achieiving such a programme in the near future.


Siroos = another very hopeful citizen of a super-power wannabe.

Democracies don't make war on other democracies. Now take that very important piece of information back to your mullahs, or whatever, and tell them to let their people go (and be free). They won't need nuclear weapons then.

BTW, you're claiming that nuclear power is "environmentally friendly". Shhhh. Our environmentally friendly liberal greens seem to be on your side right now, but will abandon you faster than you can say 'salaam a lakem' if they hear you talk like that.




posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
The only reason Israel didn't launch a counterattack against Iraq in Gulf War I is because the U.S. twisted their arm off not to and wouldn't provide them with any codes so their planes wouldn't be mistaken as enemy planes. I doubt we'd do that again if Iran attacked Israel unless we just decided to send some of our own Minuteman and Trident missiles its way...


The Persians were as ignorant and arrogant when they got invaded by the Arab armies in the 7th century and Iran thus became Muslim. It's this attitude of invincibility combined with the sense that you have the God-given right to bomb country after country as you please just because you think you have the right to do so . The Persian king of the Sassanid Dynasty, Yazdegerd III was approached by an alarmed messenger who terrified reported to the King that huge armies of united Arab tribes have gathered on the Iran's Western border (At that time there was no Iraq, as Iraq is a recent British creation and most of today's Iraq was part of Iran) The King arrogantly replied " Are you referring to those same barefooted, lizard and rat-eating Arabs? You expect the mighty Persian armies to fear them?" Shortly after this Iran was ran over with the primitive Arab bedouine tribes and the Sassanian Empire was gone forever. So, just some advise - don't count on it!



posted on Jan, 31 2005 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos
So, just some advise - don't count on it!


Hey, Siroos. Have you also ever read in the history books what happens when somebody attacks the U.S.? Ask Japan, Germany, and Afghanistan.

They're nice, mostly peaceful little countries now.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join