Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

The following is further evidence regarding the "covert" involvement of American agencies within Pakistan based Islamic "terror" organizations, including that of the Al-Qaeda:

ABC News Exclusive: The Secret War Against Iran



A Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005, U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources tell ABC News.

The group, called Jundullah, is made up of members of the Baluchi tribe and operates out of the Baluchistan province in Pakistan, just across the border from Iran. It has taken responsibility for the deaths and kidnappings of more than a dozen Iranian soldiers and officials. U.S. officials say the U.S. relationship with Jundullah is arranged so that the U.S. provides no funding to the group, which would require an official presidential order or "finding" as well as congressional oversight.

Tribal sources tell ABC News that money for Jundullah is funneled to its youthful leader, Abd el Malik Regi, through Iranian exiles who have connections with European and Gulf states. Jundullah has produced its own videos showing Iranian soldiers and border guards it says it has captured and brought back to Pakistan. The leader, Regi, claims to have personally executed some of the Iranians.

"He used to fight with the Taliban. He's part drug smuggler, part Taliban, part Sunni activist," said Alexis Debat, a senior fellow on counterterrorism at the Nixon Center and an ABC News consultant who recently met with Pakistani officials and tribal members.

"Regi is essentially commanding a force of several hundred guerrilla fighters that stage attacks across the border into Iran on Iranian military officers, Iranian intelligence officers, kidnapping them, executing them on camera," Debat said.

Most recently, Jundullah took credit for an attack in February that killed at least 11 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard riding on a bus in the Iranian city of Zahedan. Last month, Iranian state television broadcast what it said were confessions by those responsible for the bus attack. They reportedly admitted to being members of Jundullah and said they had been trained for the mission at a secret location in Pakistan.

The Iranian TV broadcast is interspersed with the logo of the CIA, which the broadcast blamed for the plot. A CIA spokesperson said "the account of alleged CIA action is false" and reiterated that the U.S. provides no funding of the Jundullah group. Pakistani government sources say the secret campaign against Iran by Jundullah was on the agenda when Vice President xxxx Cheney met with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in February.

A senior U.S. government official said groups such as Jundullah have been helpful in tracking al Qaeda figures and that it was appropriate for the U.S. to deal with such groups in that context. Some former CIA officers say the arrangement is reminiscent of how the U.S. government used proxy armies, funded by other countries including Saudi Arabia, to destabilize the government of Nicaragua in the 1980s.

News source: http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/...own_in_th.html

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Iran, Armenia sign media cooperation pact



Iran and Armenia have signed an agreement to expand media cooperation. The agreement was signed by Ezzatollah Zarghami, head of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) and Alexan Harutyunyan, the president of the Council of Public TV and Radio Company of Armenia. IRIB and Armenia's Public Television will each open an office in Yerevan and Tehran, respectively.

Armenia will help pave the way for IRIB's stronger presence among broadcasters covering Europe, Harutyunyan said. Zarghami, for his part, said the media should make every effort in introducing both countries' capabilities and capacities, particularly in economic fields. He further emphasized that introducing the culture and civilization of Iran and Armenia “must be on top of our agenda”.

Zarghami was on a three-day visit to Armenia which started on Wednesday. He met several high-ranking Armenian officials including President Robert Kocharian and Prime Minister Serge Sarkisyan.

News source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020102

In related news:

ARMENIA AND IRAN CONSIDER THEIR RELATIONS AS STRATEGIC

Armenia and Iran consider their relations as strategic, said President of Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) Ezzatollah Zarghami during the conference in Yerevan.

He said that the approaches and prospects of both countries' presidents are identical and estimated as strategic. "Armenian-Iranian relations have good prospects, and the efforts of the high-ranking officials are directed to the deepening and development of bilateral relations," Zarghami said.
He pointed out that in the economic sphere serious cooperation programs are implemented, and some of these projects are on the implementation stage. He said that within his visit to Armenia he discussed with the country's officials the level of cooperation and prospects of interaction in the media sphere. Zarghami said that Iran has about 100 TV and Radio stations, many of which are satellite broadcast. He pointed out that in this way they can develop and deepen relations with neighboring countries, especially with Armenia.

"New cooperation program will allow to prepare documentaries about each country's possibilities, particularly, in the sphere of economy, as well as to create programs and films about historical-cultural traditions and heritage of Armenia and Iran. It is the best way to demonstrate one's originality and unite the societies of both countries," Zarghami said. He visited Armenia on April 16 by the invitation of Alexan Haroutiunian, Board Chairman of Armenia's Public TV Channel, with the aim of discussing the issues connected with the deepening of Armenian-Iranian cooperation in TV sphere.

News source: http://www.arka.am/en/archive/n04/n1904/190406.html[/quote]

Armenian minister: Iran entitled to produce nuclear energy

Armenian Minister of Energy Armen Movssisyan in a meeting with the head of Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), Ezatollah Zarghami in Yerevan on Wednesday, said that access to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is the inalienable right of Iran. According to a report released by IRIB Public Relations Department, Zarghami is currently visiting Yerevan. At the meeting, the Armenian minister said that expansion of multifaceted relations with Iran is of high importance to his country.

For his part, Zarghami pointed to Iran's numerous capacities to bolster its cooperation with Armenia, adding that introduction of the products of private sector through documentary television programs will greatly contribute to development of mutual ties. Turning to cultural and historical commonalties of the two countries as a proper ground for broadening of cooperation, he said that media play a decisive role in strengthening friendly relations among nations.

In another meeting with Armenian Culture Minister Hasmik Poghosian, the IRIB chief said that based on their history, the two nations are interested in bolstering bilateral ties. Zarghami pointed to Iran's potential in cultural and art fields and declared Iran's readiness for cooperation with Armenia in the domain of culture, adding that the Armenian citizens of Iran have an effective role in this regard. Poghosian said that the Armenian nation highly respects Iranian culture, urging the need for further attempts for production of cultural products.

News source: http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/men...8360172254.htm

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Next time we Armenians feel the "urge" to attack our "corrupt" politicians in Yerevan, I suggest we stop and first look at what the "civilized" world is engaged in - for a better perspective:

BLACKWATER - The Praetorian Guard of Neoconservatism

Part One: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8mfG...elated&search=
Part Two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3zPt...elated&search=

Iraq For Sale - The War Profiteers (Halliburton)

Part One: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht6LK...elated&search=
Part Two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWbiu...elated&search=
Part Three: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWzwZ...elated&search=
Part Four: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlVF7...elated&search=
Part Five: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw3sU...elated&search=
Part Six: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqnS_...elated&search=



Nearly 800 contractors killed in Iraq

In a largely invisible cost of the war in Iraq, nearly 800 civilians working under contract to the Pentagon have been killed and more than 3,300 hurt doing jobs normally handled by the U.S. military, according to figures gathered by The Associated Press. Exactly how many of these employees doing the Pentagon's work are Americans is uncertain. But the casualty figures make it clear that the Defense Department's count of more than 3,100 U.S. military dead does not tell the whole story.

"It's another unseen expense of the war," said Thomas Houle, a retired Air Force reservist whose brother-in-law died while driving a truck in Iraq. "It's almost disrespectful that it doesn't get the kind of publicity or respect that a soldier would."

Employees of defense contractors such as Halliburton, Blackwater and Wackenhut cook meals, do laundry, repair infrastruture, translate documents, analyze intelligence, guard prisoners, protect military convoys, deliver water in the heavily fortified Green Zone and stand sentry at buildings — often highly dangerous duties almost identical to those performed by many U.S. troops. The U.S. has outsourced so many war and reconstruction duties that there are almost as many contractors (120,000) as U.S. troops (135,000) in the war zone.

The insurgents in Iraq make little if any distinction between the contractors and U.S. troops. In January, four contractors for Blackwater were killed when their helicopter was downed by gunfire in Baghdad. In 2004, two Americans and a British engineer were kidnapped and decapitated. That same year, a mob of insurgents ambushed a supply convoy escorted by contractors, burning and mutilating the guards' bodies and stringing up two of them from a bridge.

But when contractors are killed or wounded, the casualties are off the books, in a sense. While the Defense Department issues a press release whenever a soldier or Marine dies, the AP had to file a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain figures on pre-2006 civilian deaths and injuries from the Labor Department, which tracks workers' compensation claims. By the end of 2006, the Labor Department had quietly recorded 769 deaths and 3,367 injuries serious enough to require four or more days off the job.

"It used to be, womb to tomb, the military took care of everything. We had cooks. We had people who ran recreation facilities. But those are not core competencies you need to run a war," said Brig. Gen. Neil Dial, deputy director of intelligence for U.S. Central Command. With the all-volunteer force, the military began more stringent recruiting of troops and made greater use of nonmilitary professionals. "It puts professionals in harm's way," he conceded. Although contractors were widely used in Vietnam for support and reconstruction tasks, they have never before represented such a large portion of the U.S. presence in a war zone or accounted for so many security and military-like jobs, experts say.

Some of the workers are former U.S. military personnel. Some are foreigners. The companies and the U.S. government say they do not keep track of how many are Americans. The contractors are paid handsomely for the risks they take, with some making $100,000 or more per year, mostly tax-free — at least six times more than a new Army private, a rank likely to be driving a truck or doing some other unskilled work. The difference in pay can create ill will between the contractors and U.S. troops.

"When they are side by side doing the same job, there is some resentment," said Rick Saccone, who worked as an intelligence contractor in Baghdad for a year. If the contractor deaths were added to the Pentagon's count of U.S. military casualties, the number of war dead would climb about 25 percent, from about 3,000 as of the end of 2006 to nearly 3,800.

If the contractors injured badly enough to be off the job for at least four days were added to the nearly 14,000 U.S. troops requiring medical air transport because of injuries, the injury total would rise by about the same percentage. Early in the war, most of the casualties on the coalition side were military. But with the fall of Saddam Hussein, contractors flowed in behind the troops, and the number of deaths among the contract workers has been increasing each year. Contractor deaths are less costly politically, said Deborah Avant, a political science professor at George Washington University.

"Every time there's a new thing that the U.S. government wants the military to do and there's not enough military to do it, contractors are hired," she said. "When we see the 3,000 service member deaths, there's probably an additional 1,000 deaths we don't see."

[...]

News Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070223/...GR0d8LpH2ocA

[simonig]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Great articles. Good to have you back posting here.

[Lucin]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Ներկայիս իրավիճակը մասամբ վերադառնում է ամերիկեան (սիոնիստական) expansionist քաղաքականութեանը :
Արդէն տարիներ է որ տարածաշրջանը զերծ է մնացել որոշ չափով նրանց ազդարարութիւններից, (նաեւ շնորհիվ Իրան-Հայաստան-Ռուսաստան ‘միւթեան’ )

իրանը ցանկանում է ունենալ միջուկային “էնէրգիա” դառնալ տարածաշրջանային գերուժ եւ դա բոլորովին չի համընկնում ամերիկացիների (սիոնիստների) շահերին, Իսրայէլի անվտանգութիւնն էլ խիստ ‘վտանգւում’ է, միւս կողմից
ամերիկացիները( իսրայելը) տարիներ է որ միայն երազում են միջին Արեւելքի Ադամանդին:
Ամփոփելու համար այս մասը; մի խոսքով Էս երազանքները իրագործելու եւ Իրանի վերելքը որպէս տարածաշրջանային գերուժ կասեցնելու համար “Իրանի միջուկային ծրագիրը” լիովին ծառա յում է որպէս յարձակման պատրվակ: ( իմ հասկացողութեամբ)

Միւս կողմից Թեհրանի դիրքորոշումը որոշ խնդիրների շուրջ ինչպէս; Ի սրայելի բնաջնջումը, Հրեաների հրկիզումը հարցականի տակ տանել այն էլ
Նախագահի միջոցով ՄԱԿ-ում մի քիչ բարդացրեց իրավիճակը եւ բոլորովին
չնպաստեց Իրանի պատկերի բարելավման այլ կրկին Թեհրանը անցաւ որպէս մի ծայրահեղական իսլամիստ պետութիւն ( հանրային հասարակութեան չափանիշներով):

Իսկ ինչ վերաբերում է Իրանի ռազմուժի մարտունակութեանը շ ատ գաղափար չունեմ բայց մի բան պարզ է որ ընդհանրապէս Պարսիկները հոգեբանական տեսակէտից հակառակ Արաբներին կռվավար( warlike) են:
Հետաքրքիր է իմանալ որ, ներկայումս հասարակութիւնը (երկրի մէջ) անկախ նրանից թէ սատարում են Ահմադինէժադի կառավարութեան ներքին/ արտաքին
քաղաքականութիւնը թէ ոչ միջուկային ծրագրի կապակցութեամբ գրեթէ համաձայն են:

[Iranianazeri]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

I know the relations between Iran and Armenia are quite good, but how come it's like that? How does Iran help Armenia?

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

I know the relations between Iran and Armenia are quite good, but how come it's like that? How does Iran help Armenia?

Iran and Armenia have always had cordial relations, it's not new.

For many hundreds of years during the classical period, Armenia and Persia were united in a very strong socio-political union. We Armenians still have a strong cultural legacy from that period. However, once Armenia adopted Christianity in the early fourth century and Iran adopted Islam in the mid seventh century the two nations parted ways. Nonetheless, last time Armenia and Iran had political problems was back in 451 AD. Generally speaking, Iranians, regardless of faith, have had great respect towards their Christian Armenian neighbors - as well as other western peoples. What's more, as far as Armenians are concerned, Iranians have been fighting Turkish and Arabic expansion for centuries.

More recently, when Armenia was fighting Azerbaijan over the control of the Armenian enclave of Nagorno Karabagh during the early 90's, Iran and Russia were the only nations that helped Armenia militarily, politically and economically. As usual, the western world, especially ZOG controlled America, not only abandoned us, they were openly helping Turks against us. I'm glad to say that Armeno-Iranian relations today continue to grow. In the face of growing Turkish, American, Sunni and Zionist power in the region, a political front made up of Russia, Armenia and Iran is gradually developing. Without this geostrategic front, the entire civilized world would eventually fall victim to the hands of Zionists, American Imperialists, Sunni Wahabists and pan-Turanists.

Thus, I believe that preserving Iran, as is, is crucial for the long term stability of the region in question. Iran has been a persistent counter balance in the region. Therefore, the territorial integrity and political stability of the Islamic Republic of Iran is extremely crucial to the long-term peace and prosperity of the general region in question.

Note: Please realize that there are some ignorant Armenians who disregard the above outlined geopolitical picture and instead choose to complain about "sociological" matters concerning the current Islamic regime in Tehran.

[Iranianazeri]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Iran and Armenia have always had cordial relations, it's not new.

For many hundreds of years during the classical period, Armenia and Persia were united in a very strong socio-political union. We Armenians still have a strong cultural legacy from that period. However, once Armenia adopted Christianity in the early fourth century and Iran adopted Islam in the mid seventh century the two nations parted ways. Nonetheless, last time Armenia and Iran had political problems was back in 451 AD. Generally speaking, Iranians, regardless of faith, have had great respect towards their Christian Armenian neighbors - as well as other western peoples. What's more, as far as Armenians are concerned, Iranians have been fighting Turkish and Arabic expansion for centuries.

That part, I'm aware of

But the azeri Shahs of Iran have been friendly too.

More recently, when Armenia was fighting Azerbaijan over the control of the Armenian enclave of Nagorno Karabagh during the early 90's, Iran and Russia were the only nations that helped Armenia militarily, politically and economically. As usual, the western world, especially ZOG controlled America, not only abandoned us, they were openly helping Turks against us. I'm glad to say that Armeno-Iranian relations today continue to grow. In the face of growing Turkish, American, Sunni and Zionist power in the region, a political front made up of Russia, Armenia and Iran is gradually developing. Without this geostrategic front, the entire civilized world would eventually fall victim to the hands of Zionists, American Imperialists, Sunni Wahabists and pan-Turanists.

I don't believe in the ZOG "theory". I Think it has alot to do with turkey being a member of NATO, Republic of Azerbaijan oil and their pipeline ...

Thus, I believe that preserving Iran, as is, is crucial for the long term stability of the region in question. Iran has been a persistent counter balance in the region. Therefore, the territorial integrity and political stability of the Islamic Republic of Iran is extremely crucial to the long-term peace and prosperity of the general region in question.

I don't want Iran to be islamist so I can't agree with you. I think the armenians of Iran agree with me. The good relations between Armenia and Iran can be kept after the fall of the islamofascist regime.

What I also want to know was how come iran helps armenia, if we forget the historical relations? What's in it for iran? Turkey and azerbaijan are muslim countries at least. It must also have strategic importance, the help ...

Never trust mullahs

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Նախ սրդանց ուզումեմ ասել շնորհակալութիւն քո վերլուծման համար:

մասամբ վերադառնում է ամերիկեան (սիոնիստական) expansionist քաղաքականութեանը: Արդէն տարիներ է որ տարածաշրջանը զերծ է մնացել որոշ չափով նրանց ազդարարութիւններից, (նաեւ շնորհիվ Իրան-Հայաստան-Ռուսաստան ‘միւթեան’) իրանը ցանկանում է ունենալ միջուկային “էնէրգիա” դառնալ տարածաշրջանային գերուժ եւ դա բոլորովին չի համընկնում ամերիկացիների (սիոնիստների) շահերին, Իսրայէլի նվտանգութիւնն էլ խիստ ‘վտանգւում’ է, միւս կողմից ամերիկացիները(իսրայելը) տարիներ է որ միայն երազում են միջին Արեւելքի Ադամանդին:

Ապրես ըկերուհի, համամիտ եմ քո հետ: Իրանի վերելքը դեպի «միջուկային գերուժ» լուրջ մտահոքութիւն է դարձել Ւաշինգթոնի, Լոնդոնի, Թէլ Ավիվի, Անքարաի և Րիյադի համար: Հետեւաբար, ներկայիս իրավիճակը այդ շրջանում հիմնական օրեն այս հարցի հետ է կապվաձ:

Միւս կողմից Թեհրանի դիրքորոշումը որոշ խնդիրների շուրջ ինչպէս; Իսրայելի բնաջնջումը, Հրեաների հրկիզումը հարցականի տակ տանել այն էլ Նախագահի միջոցով ՄԱԿ-ում մի քիչ բարդացրեց իրավիճակը եւ բոլորովին չնպաստեց Իրանի պատկերի բարելավման այլ կրկին Թեհրանը անցաւ որպէս մի ծայրահեղական իսլամիստ պետութիւն ( հանրային հասարակութեան չափանիշներով):

Իմ հասկացողութեամբ, Թեհրանի հակա-Զիոնիսթական դիրքորոշումը կամ քաղաքական ծրագիրները տեղին է և լաւ կազմակերպեված: Թեհրանի հակա-Իսրաելական սպառնալիք խոսքերը ուղված են հատկապես դեպի Իրանի և այլ երկիրների Մուսլիման հասարակությանը: Եւ այդ խոսքերի պատջարավ Իրանը այսօր մեծ տեր է խաղում Իսլամական աշխարհում մանավադ Իրաքում: Այդ խոսքերը արձակելով Թեհրանը բան չունի գորցնելու այսօր: Թեհրանը լաւ գիտէ որ իր դեմ կանգնաձ են այսօր արյունախում գազաններ որոնք մտադրված են նրան կործանել:

Իսկ ինչ վերաբերում է Իրանի ռազմուժի մարտունակութեանը շատ գաղափար չունեմ բայց մի բան պարզ է որ ընդհանրապէս Պարսիկները հոգեբանական տեսակէտից հակառակ Արաբներին կռվավար( warlike) են:

Լիովին համամիդ եմ: Նաեւ «Արյացի» Իրանցիք միշդ լաւ դիվանագետներ եղած են:

Համենայնդեպկում, ուրախ եմ որ մոտեցումդ հավասարագշրված էր: Ընդհանրապես երբ որ Պարսկահայերի հետ այս նյութը կքննարկեմ խոսք միշդ կերդայ դեպի «սոսիալական/Իսլամական» հարցերի շուրջ, և ոչ ռազմա-քաղակական կամ պատմագան հաշիվների: Հետեւբար, այս նյութի նկատմամբ քո ունեցած լայնատեսութիւնը, հեռատեսությունը, և հավասարագշրութիւը իմ վրա մեծ տապավորութիւն թողեց - Ապրես: Իմիչայլոց, իմացականութիւնը կամ իմաստութիւնը կապ չունի կին կամ մարդ արմատ լինելու հետ:

Կեցցե Հայաստան-Ռուսաստան-Իրան միւթիւնը:

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

That part, I'm aware of But the azeri Shahs of Iran have been friendly too.

I never said they were not. However, the last Shah was a liability for the Iranian nation, for he was a murderer and a pathetic stooge for Western powers.

I don't believe in the ZOG "theory".

Then you simply have allot to learn.

I Think it has alot to do with turkey being a member of NATO, Republic of Azerbaijan oil and their pipeline ...

The geopolitical calculations in the region have also to do with protecting the Zionist State. It also has to do with exploiting the last vast oil reserves on earth. It also has to do with isolating Russian influence in the region. It also has to do with securing the Chinese oil dependency. It also has to do with protecting pro-American Sunni Arab dictators in the region.

I don't want Iran to be islamist so I can't agree with you. I think the armenians of Iran agree with me. The good relations between Armenia and Iran can be kept after the fall of the islamofascist regime.

The mere fact that you foolishly blurted out "islamofascist" is quite revealing of your true intentions. The only characters that say such stupid terms are deranged Evangelicals in America, bloodthirsty Zionist J-e-w-s - or idiots who are brainwashed by them. The bottom line is, the Iranian people have to decide themselves what they want to be 'without' outside pressure. Nonetheless, had western powers not exploited Iran during the twentieth century, had the ZOG controlled US administrations not been aggressive towards Tehran - there would not have been an Islamic problem in Iran today.

Change in Iran cannot come from the outside, it simply has to be a natural gradual evolution from within. Change in Iran cannot come especially via the Mossad/CIA sponsored "Iranian" community of southern California. The ones waiting to jump into the thrones of government in Tehran once the mullahs are overthrown are those who are diametrically - politically, economically and militarily - opposed to Armenians and Russians. There are grand plans for the region in question. As a result, we can't risk a regime change in Iran for the foreseeable future.

What I also want to know was how come iran helps armenia, if we forget the historical relations? What's in it for iran? Turkey and azerbaijan are muslim countries at least. It must also have strategic importance, the help ...

Read what I wrote again and realize that religion does 'not' play a role in real politics. Religion only plays a role in controlling the ignorant masses. Religion only lives in sociological formulations. Geostrategic formulations has a life of its own. Without Armenia in the Caucasus, the region can potentially fall into Turkish/American control thereby severing Iran from an important route to Russia and beyond. Russia is an important factor in all this and that is why Russia is doing its best to thwart an aggression against Iran. It is in the interest of Russian and Iran to see that Turks and or Americans do not gain an upper hand in the Caucasus. Thus, Iran would rather see a strong Armenia as a neighbor to its north, instead of its historic opponent, Turks. And the same applies to the Russian Federation.

Never trust mullahs

And never trust Iranians living in southern California, never trust western politicians, never trust Turks, never trust J-e-w-s. As for me. I'll trust an Iranian mullah much before I can trust a career diplomat in the US State Department.

Long live the Islamic Republic of Iran.