 |
Faith Freedom International
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ali Sina
Joined: 14 Feb 2002
Posts: 2174
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 10:23 am Post subject: Help this daughter of Iran |
 |
|
Dear Friends.
Parvaneh Nassiri Zanjani, is an Iranian freedom fighter and human rights activist. She is now stranded in Russia with no money and in immanent danger of being deported to Iran where she will be imprisoned and tortured again. This is her story
Please write to your Senator and demand that this brave woman be given asylum in America. Which side is America anyway? On the side of the terrorists? Talks are cheap. America has yet to prove that she cares for human rights more than she cares for profit. European governments have demonstrated that they do not give a damn to human rights and all they care is money. Are Americans going to stoop that low? Americans are falling dead in American soil. Terror has stricken the nation. The Islamic regime of Iran is one of the major contributors and financiers of Islamic terrorism. When the American government is going to learn that going to bed with terrorist regimes is not a good idea? Why no one protects the victims of these terrorist regimes. It was America that derailed the democracy in Iran in 1953 and paved the way for the Islamic revolution of 1979. Today America owes morally to Iranian people to protect them and help them rebuilt their democracy.
If you are not an American please contact your own government officials and tell them about this daughter of Iran. If you are a British, forget it because your petition will be thrown to the dustbin. Do not let profit come before human life. Your voice counts. Please speak out. Here is the list of USA Senators
Parvane Nasiri has no money. It is cold there. Please contact MPG p_azarmehr@angelfire.com They will tell you how you can send her some money. That would be a tremendous help. Thank you for caring. Yes we are all related.
_________________
Doubt everything, find your own light!
Last edited by Ali Sina on Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:28 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Karin
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Connecticut
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 1:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you go to NYTimes.com, and go to the politics section, you can put your zip code in a box and write all your representatives at once.
I wrote my guys, and hope others do the same.
Why would the British throw the letter into the dustbin, Ali?
End of October is fast approaching. Any chance she can get an extension, I wonder?
_________________
"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of those who would deny us happiness" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Susan
Joined: 06 Apr 2002
Posts: 2727
Location: none
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Why would the British throw the letter into the dustbin, Ali? |
Most Iranians have a low opinion of the British because they instituted the overthrow of Mossadegh ("the father of the Iranian democracy") in the 1950s. The US helped, but has since recognized that this was not a good thing to do. I'm not sure the British ever repented :)) The entire EU, including of course Britain, continues to do brisk business with the mullah-ocracy and the Iranian nationlists despise the EU for this.
Look how Spain is currently sucking up to Khatami. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ali Sina
Joined: 14 Feb 2002
Posts: 2174
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:04 pm Post subject: The Brits and Iran |
|
|
| Quote: | | Why would the British throw the letter into the dustbin, Ali? |
Actually we Iranians never had an enemy more formidable than the Britain. I am not going too far in the history. I start with the WWII. Prior to the late Shah, Iran had an able king that despite his dictatorial style was a patriot and cared about his country. Mind you, we Iranians never had democracy so a dictator king is not a big deal. Reza Pahlavi tried to modernize Iran and fought against the religious fundamentalists. He was an admirer of Ata Turk and strived hard to pull Iran out of the darkness of ignorance and usher it into the 20th century. When the war broke, like USA he declared neutrality. But the Britons wanted to transport their armaments to Russia and help defeat Hitler. Suddenly Iran became strategically important and Iran’s neutrality was disregarded. BBC filled the air with unbounded vituperations against the Shah and accused him of supporting Hitler. At that time there were 1000 Germans living in Iran. The British claimed that they are all spies. About 300 of them were men and the rest were their families. They were working in Iranian’s nascent industries. More British and French were working in Iran than Germans. Despite this unfounded accusation, Reza Shah accepted to expel the Germans to mitigate the hostilities. Nevertheless the intention of the London was to take over the country and use it for their own needs without having to negotiate with anyone. The English troops invaded the southern ports with Indian soldiers with no provocation a la Muhammad and started shooting and killing Iranian officials who were neither ready nor warned of an attack. This very country, UK, that present itself as the forerunner of human rights stopped the jeeps of Iranian officials and, dragged them down from their vehicles and shoot them right in the side roads. They sank two of our sea vessels. Babr and Palang (tiger and Leopard) Now Iran was a poor country at that time and this was all we had in the seas. They also sank the German and Italian commercial vessels that had sought refuge in Iranian waters because they could not carry on with their trip, as they did not find the International waters safe enough.
Shah complained to USA and begged Roosevelt to intercede. He was given the assurance unknowing that the USA had already given the green light to the British to invade Iran.
The Brits and the Soviets started to fly over Iran throwing flyers poisoning the minds of the people against their king whom actually they liked. They instigated the Mullahs whose liberties were taken away by the Shah. To create panic the British started the rumor that Iran is at the brink of total starvation. Later William Miller, the Christian missionary in Iran wrote that it was all lies and at that time Iran’s silos were filled with food. On the other hand the Bolsheviks were promising their socialist paradise to Iranians. Iran was invaded from the South by the British (Indian soldiers) and from the North by the Russians. The military high-ranking officials were bribed to not fight. Iranian 5th column has always been the cause of downfall of that country. I do not know of any other nation that has harbored so many traitors. Salman Parsi in the time of Muhammad is just an example. This weakness of Iranians has been exploited to the full extent by foreign powers throughout the history. Iran surrendered with no fight but still many patriotic military officials were murdered. Eventually Shah felt that the country would be split in two if he stayed in power. He decided to resign.
Even then the Britons were arguing who should replace him and deciding the destiny of the Iranians. A Qajar prince who was living in England serving the British Navy, who did not know a word of Parsi was suggested to become the King. Qajars destroyed Iran for 150 years and there is not a single Iranian who would like them. The ambassador of England in Iran knew that and he opposed this decision. Eventually the aged Ali Forughi, the Prime Minister of the Shah, suggested that Mohammad Reza, the son of Reza Pahlavi should succeed his father. This man was completely inept, not at all worthy of his father. This was just one evil deed of the British in Iran, which hampered the progress of Iran.
The young Shah was shy and inexperienced. Able Prime Ministers were in control until Mossadeq became the Prime Minister. Up until then all the oil of Iran was being exploited by a British owned company. Oil was being extracted and taken out and Iranians received nothing for it. The British did not even hire the Iranians to work in the industry. All the employees came from India and England. The deposition of Reza Shah created a vacuum of leadership in Iran and gave the Brits the freedom they needed to pillage the country. This was theft and there is no better term for that. There is not much difference between what the British did in Iran and what Muhammad did in Kheibar.
Mossadeq decided to put an end to this pillage of the Iranian wealth and declared the nationalization of the oil. He offered the Brits to sign a contract with Iran and pay royalty for the oil that they take out. The Brits did not like the idea and pulled out their employees. They boycotted Iran’s oil, moved their warships in the Persian Gulf blocking the entry to the waters to any ship attempting to buy Iran’s oil. That meant total paralysis of Iranian Industry. The English knew that from beginning that it is better not to hire Iranians least they learn the trade and dispose of them some day.
At the same time the BBC started again to fill the air with its campaign of defamation and misinformation against Mossadeq. They sought the help of USA to overthrow the Mossadeq who was enjoying unprecedented popularity despite the hardship caused by the paralysis of oil fields. USA under the Truman would not go along with the Britons but when Eisenhower was elected he was convinced that with Mossadeq Iran is going to slip into the hands of the Soviets and he should be removed from the power. This was a lie concocted by the Brits. But just like the holy Prophet these unholy self apointed maters of the universe believed that war means deceit and they used misinformation and lies with no scruples.
Tudeh, the Communist party of Iran was the only organized party at that time. It was very vocal but it did not enjoy the popular support. Mossadeq was a true democrat. He allowed the communist party to be represented in the Parliament. Communists were in Italian, French and many other NATO countries for years. That was not a big deal. But when this happened in Iran, it was an excuse to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran and instate a puppet ruler with no bones so the greedy imperialists could continue with pillaging the country.
Muhammad Reza Shah who was being pushed to accept the constitutional terms and relinquish the power to the government was encouraged to stage a coupe against the aging Mossadeq. In the first attempt the coupe failed and Shad escaped to Italy. The British made a second attempt. This time they allied themselves with the CIA. The CIA poured millions of dollars into Iran to stage another coupe. The Iranian 5th column, this time impersonated by General Zahedi, was ready to stab the motherland in the heart. The radio was taken and a bunch of hooligans and prostitutes were hired to come to the streets and shout “death to Mossadeq” and “Long Live Shah”. The mob was instructed to pillage the house of Mossadeq and the Iranian traitor military faction funded by the CIA took Mossadeq and imprisoned him. The incompetent Muhammad Reza came back home from his self-imposed exile that lasted just a few days and resumed the oppressive rule that eventually led to the 1979 Islamic revolution.
Muhammad Reza had the same policies of his father but not his guts, nor his sagacity. He continued with the modernization but honestly believed that Iran is his personal hacienda. At the same time he would look up to his masters in Washington and wanted to be told what to do. He was ruthless towards his subjects but meek in front of his masters.
Amazingly even when the revolution started, he was waiting the orders of Washington to tell him what to do. He expressed his frustration because the Americans would not tell him whether he should start killing the protestors and subdue the uprising by force or he should resign.
But the Islamic revolution was not entirely the work of the Iranians. Actually the Iranians did not even think of revolution. All they wanted was freedom of speech. They had money, the country was progressing and despite the big gap between the wealthy and the poor everybody was doing fine. There was work for anyone who wanted to work. If you could shut up your mouth you could live happily. That is what the Shah had envisioned for Iran, a nice and modern farm with lots of foods and comfort for everyone and people living happily like animals with rights to eat as much as they wanted but not to complain. However if you complained you could be taken to unknown places, tortured and even executed.
This shy boy grew up to become a narcissist and a despot. As he matured and the oil created a surplus in the budget, he decided to celebrate the 2500 years of Iranian kingship. Prepared a sumptuous feast, invited the kings and the leaders of all the countries and with barbwires and armed soldiers barred the Iranians from getting close. He visited the tomb of the great Cyrus and thus declared: “O great King Cyrus: sleep in peace for we are awake”. ..Oh yeah!
This was in 1967. From there the Shah’s downfall began. He became increasingly self-reliant. He disregarded the British and even gave them some humiliating lectures. He would not even listen to the Americans. Now he wanted to be a man of his own, set to conquer the world and leave his majestic imprint in the history. Surely he had become a nuisance to the Brits and the Americans. It was time that somebody taught him a lesson.
The British started to foment Islamism to regain control over Islamic countries. America welcomed the move because they thought Islam is a good resistance against communism. The British argued that Muslims have different values and democracy that is so treasured in the West is not compatible with Islamic values. The West had the Club of Rome the Islamic World needed a club of its own to preserve that Islamic values. Ikhvan al Muslemin (The Islamic Fraternity) was formed. The members were Islamists selected from different Islamic countries. Some prominent British were members of this club. Montgomery Watt was one of them and Khomeini was another member. This club was completely directed and orchestrated by the British.
As it happens the whole Islamic Revolution was nothing but anther coup d'état. Khomeini started his attack at the government from the exile/ First from Iraq and then from Paris. BBC started its relentless campaign of instigating the people for uprising. The weak shah waited for instruction from Washington. But Carter who just a couple of years earlier had gone to Iran and had called Iran “an Island of stability in an ocean of troubled world” turned cold shoulder. Shah was pro Republican. The Democrats were not so fond of him. But to add salt to the injury Carter was also a Christian who wanted to respect the Human Rights. Perhaps with good intentions but bad timing! The road to hell is paved by good intentions of incompetent people. Shah started to retreat step by step, the BBC vented the uprising and the Islamists started to gain ground as Shah backed away.
The timing was ripe, people were angry and the British coup d'état grew into an Islamic Revolution.
What was in it for the British? A lot! The British were resentful of MR Pahlavi who would give most of the business to the Americans. They wanted to have better share of Iran and with a disobedient Shah that was not possible. He had to go and Islamization of Iran was the answer. The Mullahs are easy to bribe but it is hard to deal with an arrogant king who thinks of himself as the savor of the country, the king of the kings and the sun of Aria.
This was the third time the British intervened in the affairs of Iran, stopped its progress and literally brought misery to that country in just 37 years.
But there is no end to greed. The British have not left Iran and are not planning to leave her alone yet. They keep signing lucrative and long-term contracts with the Mullahs that are detrimental to Iran. The Mullahs are more than happy to sign off the future of Iran as long as they get cash for it in advance. These kickbacks stay in English and European Banks, never affecting the economy of Iran. They will only stay in private accounts of the Mullahs. But the British as well as other greedy European countries will have contracts on the future of Iran’s oil. The Islamic regime is short lived but after the fall of this criminal government the Iranians will be in debt for decades to come. Thus the Brits, these Human Rights advocates managed to became the real beneficiary of the Iranian oid from the last century to the next century.
Shah was a despot, he probably killed few hundred of people and there was a rumor that he had up to 3000 political prisoners. But this was the number of people Khomeini ordered to kill in one night. Today there are hundreds of thousands of political prisoners, and Iranians are being murdered on daily basis. Where is the voice of BBC now? Why are they silent? The British never cared about Iranians and their human rights (or any other country for that matter). All they care is about their own pockets. These are the children of the same people who flooded China with opium, devastated that country. Ruined millions of lives just because the Chinese would not buy their wool. And when the Chinese confiscated one of their ships loaded with opium and sank it, they invaded China, murdered millions of them and imposed a “peace treaty” that somehow reminds me again of peace treaties imposed by the Prophet of Allah. Who knows, may be the Brits are also messengers of Allah; the god of deception and the god of tyranny.
Today America has declared the Islamic Republic of Iran the axis of evil. There are over 600,000 Iranians rutting in jails. They are being tortured savagely by sadistic thugs who actually enjoy their job. Mercenaries have been hired from Palestine, and other Islamic countries to control the uprising. A bunch of goons are ruling the country. Each one of them has amassed hundreds of millions and billions of dollars in kickbacks, have purchased high rises, malls, luxury hotels and highways in Europe, Canada and America while Iranians make $1200 on average per year. That is for those who work. Some are forced to sell their kidneys to bring food to their children. Some sell their daughters as sex slaved to filthy Arab sheikhs. An alarming number of young girls have to sell their bodies just for the price of a lunch or a loaf of bread.
Oil has been a great curse to Iran. Because of it, the Iranian democracy was crushed and many noble sons and daughters of that ancient land were sacrificed. Iran means the land of Arians. Aria means noble; free. Iran means the land of the free! Huh, what a sad irony!
_________________
Doubt everything, find your own light!
Last edited by Ali Sina on Tue Oct 22, 2002 7:38 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Susan
Joined: 06 Apr 2002
Posts: 2727
Location: none
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[Thanks for the history lesson, Ali.
Last edited by Susan on Mon Nov 11, 2002 8:13 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karin
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Connecticut
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you for the history lesson, Ali, it's alot to absorb and I will need to read it again.
Another thought I had, concerning the first post in this thread....I believe it would also be beneficial to write the State Dept. and the Ambassador to Russia concerning this matter, as it falls under their jurisdiction. Unfortunately, when one writes their elected rep, it doesn't really move the earth, hence, the expression "it would take an act of congress..."
I haven't yet done research on this, can anyone else weigh in?
_________________
"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of those who would deny us happiness" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anahita
Joined: 29 Sep 2002
Posts: 1008
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Oil has been a great curse to Iran. |
Right on the money there!
I wish we didn't have oil. I read somewhere that Iran only has enough oil for 72 more years. That's 72 more years of misery! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Susan
Joined: 06 Apr 2002
Posts: 2727
Location: none
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2002 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Anahita & Ali, oil is not a curse. Islam is a curse. If Iran did not have Islam it would be one of the richest countries in the world. In my state there are many Iranian immigrants who have become quite well-heeled through their intelligence, resourcefulness and talent. They succeed by using all of the qualities that Islam crushed when they were in Iran. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MarkT
Joined: 14 Feb 2002
Posts: 1152
Location: On the globe that gave me birth-the cool green hills of Earth
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 26, 2002 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Iran means the land of the free! Huh, what a sad irony! |
I always feel curiosity (and deep concern of course) when I read something like this. Just yesterday I heard an excellent hour-long interview with Dr. Manouchehr Ganji who expressed similar views to Ali's post.
I find present-day historians to be a strange lot. They tend to be so academically oriented as to dismiss as non-historians those who actually participated in making history such as Ms. Zanjani and/or have written it down, either as a personal memoir or as a dispassionate narrative of what took place because they were there when it happened. Thus, many books by people such as Willy Ley and others who were involved, actively or as bystanders, in the development of space flight are not considered to be "valid historical documents." Yet J.C. Caesar's Gallic Wars is considered to be a history book. Go figure while I climb off my soapbox here....
Yet I think a growing number of historians are starting to express an interesting series of new thoughts. These appear to be based on the view that history is a branch of the biological sciences. Therefore, its ultimate expression may become mathematical.
Where have science fiction readers (such as I) heard this before?
Pick up Dr. Isaac Asimov's Foundation novels. I have all three of them collected between one cover (saves shelf space, which is always at a premium at my house).
There you will learn about "psychohistory" a fictional branch of science invented by Asimov's mathematician character, Hari Seldon, on the planet Trantor in about the 12,050th Year of the Galactic Era. At the start of Chapter 4 of Asimov's novel, Foundation, is the following excerpted definition of psychohistory:
"That branch of mathematics which deals with the reactions of human conglomerates to fixed social and economic stimuli. . . Implicit in these definitions is the assumption that the human conglomerate
being dealt with is sufficiently large for valid statistical treatment... A further necessary assumption is that the human conglomerate be itself unaware of psychohistory analysis in order that its reactions be truly random......
This novel appeared during World War II. It was fiction then. It may become fact like many other SF forecasts of the period. As usual, herein lies one or more problems....
Are historians are starting to realize that they have been groping their way through narrative history? This narrative is told a series of national heroes, national actions, and crises internal and external to nation states. It is an often "colorful" recounting of wars and other conflicts, mostly involving death and destruction.
Very little attention has been paid to economics, trade, and business.
In fact, nowhere in the 11 books of The Story of Civilization by Will and Ariel Durant will you find any discussion whatsoever of the corporation. This was a business organization evolved by the Dutch and the British in the era of exploration and colonial expansion as a way to protect the individual participants against the corporation's creditors.
In fact, the history books usually treat economics and trade incompletely if not badly. These human activities are viewed as secondary activities when, in fact, they provided the motivation for the existence of many empires and for most of the great engineering and technological feats of antiquity. The reason? Probably because economics and trade are nowhere near as arresting and fascinating as conquest and death. Mystery and detective novels still outsell romance novels while history books don't even run a distant third. Criminal murder trials preempt other television fare.
History teachers try to make their subject interesting to students, but they have to work pretty hard at it because of the competition from the media and television. They have enough trouble trying to overcome the student MEGO (My Eyes Glaze Over) phenomenon because their narrative history approach just tells stories of kings and princesses and knights and wars and death and destruction. This is the same sort of material that any student can find in much more exciting "historical-fantasy" form on the shelves at the local book mongers.
It isn't going to get any better for history students because history is now becoming more interested in sociological and economic factors. Historians are beginning to take notice of steel production rates, agricultural prices, demographics, gross domestic product, monetary exchange rates, and other factors whose magnitude and trends have been tracked and analyzed with our improved technologies of communication and data processing.
The magnitude of this change of focus by historians can be sensed by trying to apply the new terminology and approach to the classical world in a comprehensible way. When modern economic questions are asked about the Roman Empire, the answers come back as a "don't know" or an educated guess.
From time to time, I try to get some handle on historical trends by using some of the new history approaches. Trying to determine the modern value of the florin, for example, leads to a wide spread of value guesses. We ask the simple question, "How could they afford to fight that war?" The answer is usually "don't know" or "doesn't make any difference." Today, we ask: "Can we win, what will it cost, and is it worth it?"
What were the economic motivators that drove the Phoenicians and Carthaginians? We don't know.
What about the Hanseatic League? We don't know.
What caused the collapse of the great Chinese trading empire under the Ming dynasty? We don't know.
Why did the Fuggers and the Medici gain control of the trade of Renaissance Italy? And what caused the fall of the trading city of Venice? Why did the Swiss win in the long haul when it came to international banking, and why did the Brits lose? Did the United States really go into southeast Asia to save the gold debasement center of Saigon?
Historians speculate and try to answer these questions, but mostly using the old techniques of narrative history. They're probably frustrated about not getting answers because (a) they have little if any education, training, or experience in economics and business, or (b) the data aren't there.
The study of ancient history is probably going to remain unchanged while history itself passes into this new stage that begins to show a very strong resemblance to Asimov/Seldon psychohistory.
However, the historians have a difficult road ahead of them.
If history is considered to be a branch of the biological sciences whose ultimate expression must be mathematical, the historians need to be aware that the biological sciences are only just beginning to gain the sort of rigor that math has given to the physical sciences.
And the historians need to be careful about their increasing interest in and use of sociology. That field of science is still what might be termed "emerging." It's full of platitudes expressed in jargon. It lacks the ability to test its hypotheses without using very large human systems over a long period of time, and said system is exposed to dire consequences if the "experiment" should fail.
We have a golden opportunity now to study the failure of a social/economic system. However, since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, I haven't seen any activity in that regard. And the sociologists and historians are faced with a massive campaign of excuses: "It should have worked! We didn't try hard enough! We didn't have enough money (or whatever) to make it work right! It's the Capitalist's fault! And we couldn't get everybody to cooperate!" ... The Game of Blame. We see that sort of thing right here in the USA with the breakdown of government social programs etc., and it can also be seen in other countries such as our own ReincarNation as an example where it seems to have progressed further.
The encouraging fact is that we have a growing data base that is accessible to nearly anyone who is interested. Two points do not necessarily determine a curve or a trend. Chaos theory can be helpful in sorting out the statistical nonsense and revealing the ultimate consequences of the initial assumptions--something that is true of the application of mathematics in any of the sciences.
There is another major consequence of the wide and general availability of data. It prevents the creation of a priest/brahmin class. This presupposes that many people use the data base access available to them and have the education, training, and intelligence to use that data.
Hari Seldon's psychohistory may become a real science much earlier than Asimov had forecast. However, I may have rendered psychohistory invalid or inconsequential because I devoted this post to it.  Asimov understood science very well, and he incorporated the Heisenberg Principle into his definition of psychohistory. The observer always affects the result of the experiment, no matter how carefully the experiment is designed. Psychohistory would be no different from economics or nuclear physics in this regard.
A major problem exists in doing this because there is a delay between the time something happens and the time someone figures out what caused it and can recommend corrective action. This can cause the system to go unstable. However, once the system is truly understood--and it probably won't be because history shows that the system changes even while it's being studied--then negative feedback can help keep it stable.
But do we want a Stable System? Does this mean that technical, economic, and social progress is stalled? Does this mean that we regress into a world where every day is just like the day before ... and the day before that?
I'd like to see the continuation of the dynamic system we now have. But I don't know how to use all the information and data to improve it. I don't have the answer(s). I don't believe there are any quick or easy answers. There never have been. But unless people start to think about problems, answers are never found.
OK, I didn't intend for such a lengthy post but its a subject I'm interested in and now that I've got that off my chest, time to write to my Senator regarding Ms. Zanjani. Would the Russians even let her be deported to Iran? Why? Would it disrupt the "peaceful" nuclear program and contracts etc?
That would be more than a shame.
_________________
"—to find one's happiness in truth, to oppose illusion, to value integrity above God, and character above salvation." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karin
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 727
Location: Connecticut
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 14, 2002 5:27 am Post subject: Update |
|
|
Hi all who took the time to help. I recieved this email today: 
Dear Friends,
This is to get all of you good people updated about Parvaneh Nassiri Zanjani.
She is safe and well and arrived in US last week. This amazing turnaround of
fortune is due to all the organizations which helped us in many ways, the
generous donations paid by people such as yourselves and those who spread the
news of her situation.
We will soon have a press release which will also give more information about
the Islamic Republic agents who were involved in attempting to deport Parvaneh
back to the Islamic Republic of Iran. This will include their pictures too.
Parvaneh had a difficult time when she arrived in Moscow from St. Petersburg.
One hotel refused to put her up because she only had 3 days visa left for
Russia. She was also kicked out of the train station by the Russian police, but
luckily some of our good friends reached her in time and provided her with
shelter until the rest of the complicated process was completed.
Parvaneh's ordeal was terrible to say the least, but the help of you good
people made the best outcome possible.
UNITED IN ACTION AND NOT JUST IN WORDS AND SLOGANS WE CAN OVERCOME THE HORRORS
OF ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM.
The world is a better place because of people like you.
kind regards,
Potkin Azarmehr
www.marzeporgohar.org
"Evil Only Prevails when the Good Stay Silent"
_________________
"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of those who would deny us happiness" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aelius Valerius
Joined: 12 Nov 2002
Posts: 33
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2002 7:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
All's well that ends well, as the bard would have said. Good to see that one case at least did not end in tragedy.
As to Mr. Sina's brief expose of recent Anglo-Iranian relations I'm afraid I have to agree, and I am British. Considering how the British government has treated its own people in the interests of profit it won't come as a surprise that they treat others badly. And with Tony Blair happily helping Islamists gain ground in the UK one can't expect him to stand up to them in Iran.
Aelius
_________________
DUM SPIRO SPERO |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
