Iranian people’s demand for freedom is heard all over the world

Robert G. Joseph, former undersecretary for arms control at the State Department

US Undersecretary for arms control, Robert Joseph addressed the grand gathering of the Iranian supporters of the NCRI and said: “The intensity that I feel from this massive gathering of freedom fighters is overwhelming, as is your demand for freedom. As Madame Rajavi has pointed out, and others have stated, it’s been a year since the nuclear accord was concluded and the regime of mullahs in Tehran is even more dangerous than before.
Have no doubt that the regime retains its option of having a nuclear weapon at the time of its choosing. It is using billions of dollars to support terrorism … to support the proxy wars in Yemen, in Lebanon, in Iraq and elsewhere. It’s also using that same funding to continue to brutalize the people of Iran and to deny them their freedom. The regime cannot reform, neither from within or from out; it must be overthrown by the people of Iran.
We must pressure the regime from all directions; retain and impose new sanctions for its ballistic missile activities and for its support of terrorism; stop all economic transactions with the IRGC related entities; counter Iran’s presence and its influence in the region economically, diplomatically, and when necessary, militarily; highlight Iran’s abysmal human rights practices. And most important, we must support those who seek to tear down this barbaric regime and in its place establish a democratic, secular and non-nuclear Iran. You, the Iranian Resistance, are the vehicle for this historic change. You are the future of Iran.”

Maryam Rajavi: Tehran backs Syria to hide failure

Maryam Rajavi, the leader of the National Council of Resistance of Iran

The head of the French-based Iranian opposition movement  said Saturday that Tehran is concealing its “failure” by supporting “massacres” committed by the Syrian regime during an indoor rally in Paris.
Maryam Rajavi , President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran ( NCRI ), an opposition group in exile, also said “those resisting Wilayat al-Faqih regime are increasing and spreading their influence.”

Iranian Resistance hold memorial at the Bataclan for Paris Attacks victims

Members of the National Council of Resistance of Iran ( NCRI ) on Wednesday gathered opposite the Bataclan concert call in Paris to remember the 129 people who were killed in a terrorist attack by Islamic fundamentalist terrorists in the French capital last week.
Senior officials of the Iranian Resistance, including Ms. Sarvnaz Chitsaz, chair of the NCRI’s Women’s Committee, Mr. Mehdi Abrishamchi, chair of the NCRI’s Peace Committee, and Ms. Dowlat Nowrouzi, the NCRI’s representative in the United Kingdom, laid flowers at the site in memory of the victims of the brutal attack.
The statement issued by NCRI President-elect Mrs. Maryam Rajavi on November 13 immediately after the massacre was read out at the ceremony.

Mrs. Rajavi reiterated that fundamentalism in the name of Islam - whether under the banner of Shia and velayat-e faqih or under the banner of Sunni and Daesh – and their inhuman crimes have nothing to do with Islam, and this evil phenomenon, wherever it may be, is the enemy of peace and humanity.
Renowned Iranian musician Hamidreza Taherzadeh, a member of the NCRI, performed a violin solo in remembrance of the victims of the tragedy.

Prominent French singer and writer Sapho joined the supporters of the NCRI by giving a live performance at the memorial. Also present was French writer Olivier Steiner who welcomed the international unity among peoples against the threat of Islamic fundamentalism.

Iran: cellmate of executed decorator saved from death

                                     Women in Iranian prisons

Important News

• Iran: court hearings for rights advocate postponed
• Girl college students clash with security agents in southwest Iran
• Protesting teachers rally in northern Iran

Related News

• Iran: court hearings for rights advocate postponed
• Girl college students clash with security agents in southwest Iran
• Iran: Baha’i prisoner deprived of leave

Mohammad Ali Jaddari Forughi, the lawyer of death row prisoner Sahar Mahabadi Monfared wrote:
“Sahar Mahabadi Monfared was saved from “Qisas” (punishment of retaliation) at 2:30 pm on Monday, October 5 after the family members of the victim agreed to spare her…”

Reyhaneh Jabbari

It must be noted that Reyhane Jabbari, a 26-year old decorator who was in the same ward with Sahar for about a year prior to her execution, had placed intensive effort with the help of her mother – Mrs. Sho’le Pakravan – to save Sahar’s life and have her spared from execution. This was done while she, herself was on the death row and was finally hanged on Oct. 25, 2014.

( NCRI Women’s Committee )

Mr. Obama, the third option could be your choice, if…

 Mr. Obama knows that the more the American people learn about the Iran deal, the less popular it will be. This explains his steamrolling Congress by supporting the U.N.’s vote for the deal before Congress has considered it. As Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.) -- chairman and ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee -- wrote to Obama. In addition the Iranian  main opposition group , PMOI  has already announced that   if Obama is really willing to solve the existing crisis in the middle East , he should put away his appeasement policy towards Iranian Mullahs  and  listen to the real Iranian natives and their third option as Mrs. Sonia  Sam Sami  wrote the following article:

Critics rightly point out that the Iran nuclear deal announced on July 14 is deeply flawed. The pact preserves Iran’s major nuclear infrastructure; it fails to convincingly block all pathways to a nuclear bomb; Tehran can secretly outsource its sensitive nuclear work; and the agreement recognizes Tehran as a nuclear-threshold state with time-bound restrictions exclusively on declared sites.
But the more disturbing - and less talked about – aspect of the deal is not its inherent defects. It stems from the fact that the accord was introduced in a strategic policy vacuum that leaves other threats unchecked.
The U.S. continues to lack a broad, coherent, and effective strategy on Iran; one that affords the nuclear issue the weight it deserves, but does so in conjunction with – not in isolation from - Iran’s other threatening facets as well as the percolating desire of millions of Iranians who earnestly seek regime change.
The nuclear agreement may have dire unintended consequences: an emboldened regime that will channel gains into other threat generators, such as the financing of Islamic extremism. As a result, the perceived mitigation of one threat actually bolsters another.
Just this week, after the deadliest bombing in months in Bahrain, state media said the explosives used in the attack were similar to those smuggled in from Iran and seized days earlier.
Indeed, despite all the fanfare by Tehran’s apologists inside the Beltway, the agreement does not provide much cause for celebration in a region already embroiled in sectarian strife, for the most part encouraged by the mullahs.
Myopic focus on the nuclear issue has resulted in underestimating or even ignoring the two pillars of the theocratic regime: suppression of dissent at home and exporting of terrorism abroad.
Proponents of the deal argue that there is no other viable alternative. “Without a deal, we risk even more war in the Middle East,” President Obama warned in response to Congressional skepticism.
But, is war the only alternative? NO! There is a third option, long advocated by the most organized democratic resistance movement, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI): respect the Iranian people’s right to topple the tyrannical regime.
This option offers a comprehensive and potent policy that targets the regime's Achilles Heel: popular resentment towards it. It will once again bring the Iranian people - not just a minority of fundamentalist rulers - and their vast economic resources into the international fold, facilitating lasting peace.
Make no mistake: Tehran came to the negotiating table because the pressure of economic sanctions threatened its ability to curb internal dissent.
The deal showed that Tehran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei reluctantly capitulated and took a strategic poison pill, fearing popular unrest. In the shadow of sanctions and catastrophic economic mismanagement, popular resentment toward the regime was already at the precipice. In 2009, similar conditions facilitated popular uprisings that shook the regime's foundations.
Today, Khamenei is in an even weaker position, facing vociferous and divided factions within his regime jockeying for power and influence in uncertain times. That provides a historic opening for the third option, because every step that the regime retreats opens the way for popular demands to advance.
With the real prospect of more infighting threatening Tehran's internal equilibrium, Khamenei has fallen back on core principles. A few days before the agreement was announced, he told regime rank-and-file to "get ready to continue your fight against the global arrogance,” referring to the U.S.
The regime’s ally in Syria, Bashar al-Assad, lauded the deal and said he was assured that Iran would continue “with greater momentum” to support “just issues” in the region. He was perhaps buoyed by the U.S. concession to lift an arms embargo against Iran as part of the nuclear deal.
The U.S. and the world have their own allies: the Iranian people and the organized opposition, which by the way blew the lid on Tehran’s clandestine nuclear weapons program in 2002. They are ready and more than capable to create a secular, democratic and non-nuclear Iran, if only the West refrains from empowering the regime.
At this critical juncture, the regime should not be allowed to regain its balance. After its nuclear retreat, and before benefiting from hundreds of billions of dollars in unfrozen assets, this is the perfect opening to empower the Iranian people and their organized opposition movement. They can make major advances toward a more promising future in which terrorism, human rights abuses and nuclear weapons are firmly and permanently abandoned.
Samsami is the representative in the United States for the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which seeks to establish a democratic, secular and non-nuclear republic in Iran

Iran Nuclear Deal Feeds the Roots of Regional Terrorism

By Maryam Rajavi

Against the backdrop of daily reports of atrocities at the hands of terror groups in Egypt, Syria, Yemen and Iraq, the world now has word of a nuclear agreement between the P5+1 and the Iranian regime, which–even in the most optimistic reading–not only fails to block Tehran’s pathways to a nuclear bomb, but will provide it with tens of billions of dollars to add to its war chest.

Some may view the concessions to Tehran as an attempt by the Obama administration to secure Iran’s cooperation to counter and defeat the insidious danger of Islamic fundamentalism. This would misread the regime’s history and stated intentions.  Tehran’s nuclear program is explicitly tied to its revolutionary, imperialist impulse. As former President and current head of the Expediency Council Ali-Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani once boasted, if the regime acquires nuclear weapons, who could prevent the export of the “revolution”?

The agreement comes as the increasingly fragile regime is reeling from a multitude of crises. Under such circumstances, the P5+1 could have easily compelled the regime to abandon its nuclear projects had it adopted a decisive policy. In reality, the international community has lost an exceptional opportunity to stop the regime from acquiring the bomb.

Regime in Tehran has acted as the driving force of the modern Islamic caliphate read more

Iranian regime president unwittingly admitted the country have previously pursued nuclear weapons

A very interesting and eye opening revelation recently came over the transom from Tehran: In an interview to the state-run news agency IRNA, president Rouhani threatened that “if the other side breaches the deal, wewill go back to the old path, stronger than what they can imagine.”

We can set aside the belligerent tone here: Bluster and bullying have long been the Tehran regime’s stock-in-trade. But it’s worth spending a few minutes parsing Rouhani’s words. The “other side” is the collection of world powers, known as the P5+1, that are currently negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program. (They’ve just extended the deadline by a week, to July 7.) The “deal” is a long-sought bargain that would allow the regime in Tehran to pursue peaceful nuclear technology while the world lifts economic sanctions on Iran.

But what, pray, is “the old path” along which the cleric-president is threatening to take his country? Since its secret nuclear plant in Natanz was revealed in 2002 by the dissident group NCRI, the Iranian regime has sworn, over and over again, that it has never pursued nuclear weapons.

The first interpretation for those naïve minded people is to believe the regime’s claim of peaceful nuclear work, then Rouhani’s threat makes no sense. The “old path” would simply be more “peaceful” nuclear research, allowing the sanctions to continue devastating the Iranian economy. That’s not so much a threat as a flagellant’s cry for help: “If you go back on your word, I’ll hurt myself.”

The second interpretation would be that Rouhani is merely bluffing: There’s no “old path,” and Tehran is simply trying to frighten the P5+1 into relenting on the remaining sticking points at the negotiating table in Vienna. (To his critics, President Barack Obama’s claim that the US will walk away from negotiations if it doesn’t get a good deal smacks of bluff, too.)

But the logical and rational mindset is that Rouhani has unwittingly revealed that Iran was indeed pursuing nukes. That would be a real threat, especially if he is also sincere in pursuing this path “stronger than what they can imagine.” Revealingly, even as it has suspended uranium enrichment activities while negotiating with the P5+1, Iran has refused to let the IAEA, the international nuclear watchdog, to investigate whether it has been pursuing nuclear-weapons development.

So, what’s Rouhani’s game—bluff or blackmail? The P5+1 negotiators will call that one off with their eyes wide open, hopefully by July 7.

Republicans: stop nuclear Negotiations with Iran

While the President of the Washington-based Strategic Policy Consulting Inc.and spokesperson for theNational Council of Resistance of Iran ( NCRI ), claims that the “Iranian regime did not answer to any of the IAEA’s questions regarding evidence nuclear bomb making activities.” Congressional Republicans are pressuring the Obama administration to take a firm line with Iran in the final stretch of the nuclear talks.
The Obama administration announced Tuesday that the negotiations would be extended for a week past the initial June 30 deadline.
Republicans say the extension is a sign the talks aren't going well and argue President Obama should consider walking away from the negotiating table before he gets forced into a "bad deal" that doesn't do enough to dismantle Iran's nuclear capabilities.
"The Administration’s deadlines and red lines with Iran are all moving in the wrong direction, and the backpedaling is a major threat to our security. Achieving a nuclear deal at all costs is not only short-sighted, it is dangerous," House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) said Wednesday.
Republicans say they fear the Obama administrationwill concede too much to Iran and are drawing their own red lines for what would be an acceptable agreement.
In particular, they are zeroing in on demands that Iran allow inspections "anytime, anywhere," including at military sites, and that the country come clean on any past nuclear weapons research. Republicans also say Iran should agree to phased-in sanctions relief.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called on the administration Tuesday in a Politicoop-ed to pause negotiations until international negotiators could agree on those and other "basic objectives."
Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) also called for dismantlement of Iran's "vast nuclear program" and "complete transparency and accountability on any future sanctions relief to Iran."
Kirk has authored a bill with Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) that would require the White House to tell Congress whether any money from sanctions relief would go toward terrorism, nuclear weapons or to the bank accounts of Iranian officials.
Kirk said the deal would give back as much as $150 billion in frozen assets to Iran.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a 2016 presidential candidate, blasted reports that a senior administration official told reporters that the U.S. wouldn't insist upon access to Iranian military sites, because the U.S. would not allow for others to do the same.
“There is no place in this negotiation for moral equivalence," they said in a statement. "Iran must be held to different, more rigorous standards."
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-Calif.) added, “It’s logical that any deal with a nuclear pariah and state sponsor of terrorism must require exceptional access for international inspectors.”
"Stop explaining Iran’s position, and certainly don’t do it by comparing Iran with the U.S. in any way, shape, or form. The standard needs to be ‘go anywhere, anytime’ — not go ‘some places, sometimes,’” he said.
If negotiators submit text of the deal to Congress before July 9, Congress will have 30 days to review the deal and vote on a resolution to disapprove it. If Congress rejects the deal, the White House would have 12 days to veto the resolution. Congress would then have 10 days to override the veto.
Two nuclear proliferation experts argued Tuesday that there was "just enough" overlap between international negotiators and Iran to meet core concerns and that press reports suggesting that Iran Supreme Leader Al Khamenei ruled out all military site inspections were wrong.
"It is unrealistic and unnecessary to have carte blanche access to Iran's military sites to verify Iran's compliance with this agreement. Iran, like any other country, has legitimate concerns about safeguarding sensitive military sites," argued Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy for the Arms Control Association, and ACA Executive Director Daryl G. Kimball.
President Obama on Tuesday said he would walk away from the Iran negotiations "if, in fact, it's a bad deal."
"If we can’t provide assurances that the pathways for Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon are closed, and if we can’t verify that, if the inspections regime — the verification regime is inadequate, then we’re not going to get a deal," he said at a press conference.
Some Republicans are calling for the administration to walk away from the talks.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a 2016 presidential candidate, blasted the pending deal and said the White House has "given into Iran's obfuscation and stalling tactics."
If the president were "serious about negotiating a deal that advances our security and protects our allies," he would walk away from the talks and impose new sanctions on Iran until "it comes to the table ready to negotiate seriously."
Rubio also said even if Congress could not override a presidential veto, a resolution of disapproval would set the stage for the next president to undo the deal — a suggestion that Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) made in a GOP letter to Iran earlier this year.
If the president "instead chooses to conclude a deal that ensure that Iran will be a nuclear threshold state, I am confident that a majority of both houses of Congress will join me in opposing it, which will lay the foundation for our next President to undo this disaster," Rubio said.
Iran isn’t the only threat facing us, but it’s a grave one. The White House needs to remember that this is one of the most serious issues of our time. It needs to remember that the consequences of a bad agreement may be to simply defer a decision on military action to the next President. And it needs to know that the Congress elected by the people is prepared to do anything it can to make Americans safer: whether that means working collaboratively with the President to advance the goal or whether it means working against a bad agreement that threatens our country and our allies.

Planting the seeds of hope

By   Iran reporter

June 1sth 2015

As Mullahs’ regime in utter 

weakness is driving the region towards unprecedented crisis.

As the oppression, torture, hanging, medieval dooms are implemented across the country, despite the claims of moderation by Rohani cabinet,

As the officials of this regime plunder all Iranian assets, and the situation of the people life has deteriorated,

A huge gathering of Iranians in resistance meeting in Paris gives a response and plants the seeds of hope in Iran and entire region. A response to all cries that seeks freedom and rescue,

• a great gathering in Paris, thousands of Iranians, while being supported by a number of prominent European and American dignitaries, reminded that a major development is on the way in Iran and a democratic change, as a solution to avoid an unprecedented regional and international crisis, is at hand.

the President of the Maryam Rajavi , President-elect of the Iranian Resistance will symbolize millions of oppressed Iranians who seek for liberty and democracy in Iran more than Four decades but the International community has ignored them unfortunately!.

In this assembling Iran rises with all his great stature to say: I resist against tyrannical fundamental regime of fascist mullahs.

So, it is a national and international obligation for all compatriots and all who respect human values  to participate in this action and announce his presence!