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 set to lose status as Iran capital

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Tehran set to lose status as Iran capital


www.guardian.co.uk

Now Tehran's days as the Iranian capital appear numbered after a powerful state body approved a plan for a new principal city. The idea was proposed by the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and rubber-stamped by the expediency council.

Seismologists have warned that Tehran is liable to be struck by a catastrophic earthquake in the foreseeable future. It is not clear whether a new capital will be built from scratch or sited in an existing city.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 12:14 AM
link   
I did a search and wasn't able to find this story already posted , if it has been already posted please forgive me .


Wow can you believe this ? They are prepared to move there Capital based on there belief that Tehran is set for a " catastrophic earthquake in the foreseeable future " .

It would seem that they have talked about this before but it seems this time around they fully intend on moving the capital .



www.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 2-11-2009 by Max_TO]



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Max_TO
 


Creating a new Capital may be a nice idea. But that wont help the 12 Million still living in and around Tehran. I wonder how much of this is really politically/religiously motivated? I mean building a new Capital closer to their supportive religious base and away from the more modern moderates.


He said a new capital should be built between Qom – home to the country's clerical establishment – and Delijan, in Markazi province, an area that has not seen an earthquake in 2,000 years.


[edit on 2-11-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 01:01 AM
link   
There new capital will need a few things.

One will be some very deep hardened bomb shelters.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   
Earthquake, 500 Israeli fighter jets..

What's the differernce? They better move their nuke sites as well....
Maybe to Russia? or the bottom of the Tonkin?



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   
The earthquake thing sounds kind of plausible, but I wonder whether there's more to it. Moving the capital to the more religious areas of Iran might be a way of "sending a message", both to other countries and to the people of Iran. That message may be, "We are a theocracy, not Westernized".

I'm thinkiing that just because an area hasn't had a quake in 2000 years, doesn't mean it's not going to have one eventually - maybe even soon. It would be ironic if they hauled everything over there, only to get hit by a once in 2000 years earthquake. Bummer.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   
Haven't the regime got more pressing matters - like trying to keep hold of power, or stopping the next phase of the green revolution on 4th November!



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 01:12 AM
link   
This has nothing to do with Earthquakes, but it is the best possible thing that could happen to the citizens of Tehran.

Right now Tehran is a target militarily, because it houses the central government.

If the central government was to leave it then it will be purely a residential and commercial center.

This is great because Tehran unlike much of the rest of the country is fairly modernized and has a lot of very strong pro western elements in it, which would be victims of an Israeli strike.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Desolate Cancer
 



This is great because Tehran unlike much of the rest of the country is fairly modernized and has a lot of very strong pro western elements in it, which would be victims of an Israeli strike.


That's precisely why they wouldn't move govt. & military buildings away from civilian areas.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by john124
 


No i understand that, but what I am saying is the Tehran is actually a very nice city and pro western in a lot of ways. So by it being taken off as a target and replaced with another city that say is the religious stronghold of the tyrannical theocracy then that is beneficial to the Persian people, if there ever was to be a war or military strike.

The farther the Theocracy is from Tehran the better off the country and its future is.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   
They want to wipe the "religious" sector of Iran via "earthquake" (Bomb or Advanced Weaponry) because once the "religious" sectors are gone, then Tehran will be easier to persuade to join NWO.

Remember Ahmadinejad is a NWO puppet.



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 04:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Emerald The Paradigm
 


Ahmadi is a puppet of the coup d'etat branch of the revolutionary guards. He's irrelevant to all decision making.

[edit on 2-11-2009 by john124]



posted on Nov, 2 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


The ATS'er in me tends to think you are right about this .
I to think that there is more to this story then there government is reporting .



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 03:51 AM
link   
Iran is not the only country to have ever done this. Most significantly, Pakistan did the same:


On 4 February 1976 the Federal Military Government of Nigeria promulgated Decree No. 6, initiating the removal of the national capital from Lagos to Abuja. Thus Nigeria followed Brazil, Botswana, Malawi, Pakistan, and Tanzania to become the most recent developing country to arrange for a transfer of its centre of government. The proliferation of new capitals constructed in the twentieth century has captured the world-wide attention of geographers, architects, planners, and demographers, but the literature on the subject examines these projects almost exclusively with a focus on planning for national development. This viewpoint too often neglects politics as the paramount force in the relocation of a nation's capital city.

Link

Islamabad, new capital of Pakistan was built in the shape of a TRIANGLE:

When Pakistan came into being in 1947, Karachi was its first capital. However, in 1960, Islamabad was constructed as a forward capital due to certain reasons. Traditionally, the development was focused on the colonial centre of Karachi and President Ayub Khan wanted it to be equally distributed. Moreover, Karachi was located at one end of the country making it vulnerable to attacks from the sea and a capital which was easily accessible from all parts of the country was needed. The new selected location of Islamabad was closer to GHQ in Rawalpindi and the disputed territory of Kashmir in the North.[10]

Islamabad


[edit on 3/11/2009 by deltaalphanovember]



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join