The National Nuclear Energy Day in Iran: Ahmadinejad Officially Announces Iran As an Atomic Fuel Manufacturer to the Industrial Levels

Monday 9th of April was the national nuclear energy day in Iran.

The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said in an speech held to honor the occasion: “The great Iranian nation, which for past centuries has been a pioneer of science, will not allow some bullying powers to put obstacles in its path of progress by influencing the international community. We will go on to reach the summits. With great honor, I declare that as of today, our dear country has joined the countries that produce nuclear fuel on an industrial scale.”

Also head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Reza Aqazadeh, said: “Installation of centrifuges will continue steadily until we have 50,000 operating. There is no way back.”

Nuclear expert, David Albright, told CFR: “I think Iran lowered the bar of what is industrial scale, even by its own definition, and then declared victory.”

So far, the Iranian government’s suspicious attitude has almost convinced the western countries that it intends to develop nuclear warheads.

UN International Atomic Energy Agency said that, “Iran would need four to six years to construct a nuclear weapon, which leaves sufficient time for a continuation of negotiations and convincing Iran to abandon its nuclear programme.”

U.N. nuclear inspectors have said that, “Iran currently has two cascades of 164 centrifuges each operating at an aboveground portion of the Natanz facility in central Iran. The two cascades have produced small quantities of non-weapons grade enriched uranium.”

But the Iranian officials, as expected, deny having any unpeaceful intentions behind the country's nuclear development activities. Interestingly, they also keep insisting that the Gulf countries, too, believe in their nuclear ambitions' peacefulness, which provenly has no truth in it.

Deputy foreign minister for economic affairs of Iran, Alireza Shaikhattar, told Gulf News that, “Gulf countries know we are not building any nuclear weapons. They rather fear Bushehr plant (currently under construction) may cause an environmental disaster. But we invite them to visit us and to carry out investigations and inspections of our facilities.”

“Our nuclear plant at Bushehr would have the best available safety standards. We are in search of peaceful and safe nuclear energy, and we are ready to make the Gulf countries or any other country confident by allowing access to the nuclear facilities. Unlike North Korea, we have not come out of the Non Proliferation Treaty. The United States is making a false case against us,” he continued.

“More sanctions would only hike oil prices with negative consequences for all. The United States is building a case against us, but it seems not to be aware of our capabilities and potential. We are an independent country in many regards, we produce everything internally and we can continue to develop our nuclear technology without any help. Our energy demand grows by more than 10 per cent per year. It is a matter of national interest and economic development,” Shaikhattar told Gulf News.

“Sanctions would not affect us seriously. This is why they are trying to paralyse our banking and financial system. But Iran has strong historical ties with financial and monetary institutions all over the world. They must consider the volume and capacity of our economy. They cannot ignore Iran,” he added.

Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, said: “We are ready to reach understanding with the Westerners through a corridor of real negotiations in the current situation, in which Iran’s nuclear activities have been concluded. The understanding regards assuring the other party about the peacefulness of Iran’s nuclear activities. But we do not give in our rights,” state television quoted him as saying.

Larijani added that, “Iran’s neighbors in the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) should actually be glad about Iran’s peaceful nuclear programme because they can share technology with it. Iran and the Gulf countries should put aside their historical disputes and cooperate following the model of the European Union.”

Head of the Strategic Research Centre in Iran, Hasan Rowhani, called for the creation of the Arabian Gulf Security and Cooperation Organization comprising GCC, Iran and Iraq.

Retired Army General and formerly head of the U.S. Southern Command, Barry McCaffrey, said that, “It is too late to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and Saudi Arabia is likely to follow. For sure, if the Persian Shia bomb becomes a dominant factor in the security of the Middle East, there will be a Sunni-Arab bomb to counter it.”

“The sad part is, they (the Iranians) are not going to be any safer. The region will be less stable, and they will be acutely at greater risk,” he said. If Tehran were to threaten the U.S. with a nuclear attack, it should expect the severest possible response, he added.

In that pastt few days, there have been many different and sometimes entirely opposite solutions suggested in some the U.S.’s most credible newspapers, in order to prevent the Iranian government from progressing in their suspicious nuclear development activities.

Wrote Max Boot in the Los Angeles Times : “The United States would be perfectly justified in hitting Iran now, before it acquires nuclear weapons.”

Suggested Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker that, “A clandestine plan has been in place for over a year now to launch air strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.”

But as Matthew Levitt of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy advises, “Squeezing Iran financially remains the most attractive option.”

CFR’s Ray Takeyh and Vali Nasr, wrote in the New York Times, “Washington adopt a three-prong strategy: Ending its provocative naval deployments in the Persian Gulf, easing its efforts to get European and Asian banks to divest from Iran, and inviting Iranian representatives to all regional and international conferences dealing with the Middle East.”

Recently, Russia has accepted one of the Iranian superior officials, General Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr, despite the UN's lately established resolution on prohibition of hosting the Iranian high ranking officials. Russia is known to be helping Iran with its nuclear projects, specifically for the gigantic financial interests that they have got in it.

The Iranian deputy interior minister for security affairs, General Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr, was quoted on the state TV Web site as saying that “My six-day journey to Moscow, which ended Monday, showed the ineffectiveness of the resolution.”

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Andrei Krivtsov, confirmed that Zolqadr visited Russia. He told The Associated Press that, “the resolution does not prohibit visits by the listed individuals, instead calling for heightened vigilance and attention, and this vigilance is directed first of all at people who are directly related to nuclear programs.”

The U.S. Assistant Secretary of State, Sean McCormack, said: “What we are looking for are reasonable Iranian leaders who view the cost-benefit calculation and see that it is not to the benefit of the Iranian people to continue to pursue the course on which they find themselves.”

The Truth Revealed: After Their Release, The British Troops Tell of the Maltreatment & Threatens They Had Faced in Iran

The freed British Sailors & Marines have many different stories to tell right after being released. They have now revealed all the maltreatments, threats & pressures which they had to face while under the Iranian government’s custody.

The interesting point is that for the first time, the British defense ministry decided to permit the 15 former captives to sell whatever stories they have, due to the huge media interest.

A British defense ministry spokeswoman said: “These are considered to be exceptional circumstances. After being seized by Iranian forces in the Shat al-Arab waterway between Iraq and Iran, they would be able to keep the money they received.”

But the opposition parties and many other government critics don’t seem to have liked the decision. Conservatives & Liberal Democrats have both objected the decision made by the Labor government, describing it as inappropriate, and harmful to the picture of the country's armed forces. The big debate is: why should those British servicemen/women who are killed in Iraq every single day receive the least support from the government and the least attention from the media, but those troops involved in such political games make the headlines become super stars and can make six figure profits over night. To many, it is an apparent sign of injustice, unfairness, and discrimination.

Defense spokesman for the opposition Liberal Democrats, Nick Harvey, said: “The decision would raise eyebrows. I sincerely hope this will not backfire into a loss of public sympathy for the service personnel. The ministry would be well advised to take a fresh look at the rules and consider whether they need revising,” Reuters reported.

A former commander of British peacekeeping forces in Bosnia, Colonel Bob Stewart, told BBC television that, “It’s just unprecedented. Iran’s seizure of the 15 was hardly one of the most glorious annals of royal naval history. The MoD had turned a military disaster into a media circus.”

The shadow defense secretary, Liam Fox, said: “One of the great things about our armed forces is their professionalism and dignity. Many people who shared the anxiety of the hostages’ abduction will feel that selling their stories is somewhat undignified and falls below the very high standards we have come to expect from our servicemen and women. The released hostages are behaving like reality TV stars. 'I am appalled that the MoD is encouraging them to profit in this way.”

The defense ministry said in an statement: “It was clear that the stories they had to tell were likely to have emerged via family and friends regardless of any decision the navy took.”

The commander officer of the crew when it was seized by Iranian forces on March 23, Lieutenant Felix Carman, told BBC that, “My main aim is to tell the story. There’s some people who might be making money, but that's an individual's decision, that’s very private, but that’s not something that myself or many of the others will do.”

The leader of the Liberal Democrats, Menezies Campbell, told the BBC that, “And there is, of course, the very understandable feeling of the families of those who have died in Iraq as to why it should be that those who have survived should profit in this way.”

Faye Turney's Exclusive Interview (Part 1 of 2):


Faye Turney's Exclusive Interview (Part 2 of 2):

The Iranian Government's Perspective on the Story:

Iran Frees the British Troops: The Truth Within

“This is vindication for the British diplomats, who came under a lot of criticism,” says Ali Ansari, an Iran expert at London’s Chatham house think tank. “Diplomacy worked. People should reflect on this: There are diplomatic options when we deal with Iran. It’s a very salutary lesson.”

The US undersecretary of State during the 1979-81 hostage crises, Hodding Carter, told BBC radio: “One of the conclusions to be drawn was that when hostages are taken it’s a very good time for governments to shut up. You’re better off conducting diplomacy behind closed doors. You are far more likely to be able to affect something if you are not out there beating your chest and letting them beat their chest in return.”

The British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, said: “Throughout we have taken a measured approach - firm but calm, not negotiating but not confronting either. Britain bore no ill will toward the Iranian people. Any disagreements we have with your government we wish to resolve peacefully, and we hope that in the future we will be able to do so.”

The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Said: “I hereby announce that the government of the Islamic Republic, with all powers and legal right to put the soldiers on trial, has forgiven those 15 captives and granted their release to the British people as a gift. And this comes from the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad.”

“On the occasion of the birth anniversary of the great prophet of Islam, and on the occasion of Easter and Passover, I would like to announce that the great nation of Iran, while it is entitled to put the British military personnel on trial, has pardoned these 15 sailors and gives their release to the people of Britain as a gift,” Ahmadinejad added.

Ahmadinejad said that, “From the beginning, I didn’t want to have any confrontation. We wanted our rights. The British government behaved badly, and it took longer.”

“We are grateful for your forgiveness,” said one of the British sailors to Ahmadinejad.

It seems that the recent event has tempted some countries to jump in and show off their negotiating skills! Iran's neigbour and closest alley in the region, Syria, has now claimed that it has played a role in putting an end to the UK-Iran stand off.

Syrian Foreign Minister, Walid al-Moallem, said that, “Syria exercised a sort of quiet diplomacy to solve this problem and encourage dialogue between the two parties,”

Some critics believe that the Iranian government has done what it did in accordance with their west provoking habits and to cover up their own wrong doings in the Middle East region, especially in Iraq. In the other words, to them, the Iranian government has deliberately designed such an smart game to help it succeed at its political goals, among them annoying the U.S. government and its allies, and sending them some threatening signals at the same time.

Writes George Kennedy, in the Massachusetts Daily Collegian:

“Motivationally, this act by Iran could be retribution for the capturing of five Iranians believed to have been teaching insurgents in Iraq how to make more effective roadside bombs. This is purely speculation; however, even if Iran kidnapped the sailors in response, they have become hypocrites in the process. By meddling in the affairs of the U.S.-Iraq conflict, Iran has done exactly what Iranian president Ahmadinejad has criticized the U.S. for doing.”

“It has become more than obvious that Iran has been making a habit out of provoking the U.S. and coalition forces. Iran probably wants it to play out like this: Iran continues to build up its nuclear program and attempt to provoke the U.S. while saying they are merely doing what they believe is right. Iran will finally do something that the U.S. simply cannot just ignore and be forced to take action. Iran will respond by claiming atrocities on the part of the U.S., and once again we will be engaged with a country in the Middle East. Having just gotten out of Iraq, which will be in a bloody civil war at this point, we will be further labeled an imperial power and will be hard pressed to find allies - well, true allies and not yes men like Tony Blair-.”

But not everyone thinks that the recent hostage taking was pre-planned by brains behins the Iranian government. There are some experts who believe that the Iranian officials were not generally happy with how things were going on and therefore wanted to end the story peacefully and as soon as possible, so that they can avoid any further international pressures. That’s why they think the Iranian government was after an excuse all the time to let the British troops go, as it couldn’t have been deliberately looking for more trouble.

“We got the sense that the Iranians were sort of taking stock during the course of Monday and Tuesday,” a government official said, speaking on condition that his name not be used, according to British government policy.

“I think Iran was becoming increasingly aware that what they had done was a mistake and that the longer they held these people, the more the whole thing began to resemble the ugly hostage crisis of 1979. The last thing Iran needed was to become involved in yet another affair that furthered the impression that Iran was dangerous and could be dangerously irresponsible in its behavior,” Wayne White, former deputy director of the State Department’s Middle East intelligence office, said in a telephone interview.

“Iranian leaders never imagined the consequences when they seized the sailors off Iranian or Iraqi waters. Televised confessions of the sailors provoked sympathy from the international public opinion, and such conditions were pushing Iran further into isolation,” said Mehrdad Serjooie, a political analyst at the Center for Strategic Research.

The co-author of The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the State of Iran, Meir Javedanfar, said in London that, “The resolution was a victory of sorts for the country’s pragmatists chief, among them Mr. Larijani. It just goes to show that the Iranian regime is prioritizing its needs, and that the priority is a nuclear program and trying to have an economic program and to avoid further sanctions. This has not been very helpful in international circles, where Iran is already isolated.”

The British Troops Hostage Situation Continues in Iran: UK-Iran Relations Go from Bad to Worse

“Margaret Thatcher and Margaret Beckett share a first name, but that’s all,” The Sun wrote in one of its editorials.

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said: “I think everyone regrets that this position has arisen. What we want is a way out of it.”

A member of Britain’s Chatham House think tank, Robert McGeehan, said: “However, Britain’s Conservative opposition has been relatively quiet - perhaps recognizing the fact that there seems to be little appetite in the country for a second Middle Eastern conflict - Blair, who at 53 probably harbors ambitions that extend beyond his last few months as prime minister, would be reluctant to add another war to his tarnished legacy. Being the author of a new war, even a limited one would not be a way to further his ambition.”

The Sunday Times said in an editorial that, “The crew proved humiliatingly vulnerable to a low-tech Iranian naval maneuver that has produced mocking headlines around the world.”

The 41-year-old stenographer Alan Bell says: “The government is in a very difficult position. It’s an act of provocation and it would be very easy to act in an inflammatory way. I would like to see them out but it will go on for a while. There’s a lot of political maneuvering left to do.”

The 40-year-old interior stylist, Melinda Ashton-Tanner, said: “The thing that concerns me is how long will it be before the Americans get involved? I don’t think it’s about the British. I have a sense that the Americans would use it as an excuse to get into Iran.”

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council chief, Ali Larijani, said: “There is no need for any trial of the sailors captured by Iran on March 23.”

Larijani told Channel Four News that, “Definitely our priority would not be trial. Our priority is to solve the problem through diplomatic channels. We are not interested in having this issue get further complicated.”

“It is at the beginning of the path. If they continue on this path then logically conditions can change and we can go toward ending this issue,” AFP quoted Larijani as telling Iranian state media today.

Larijani said that, “In order to resolve the impasse, Britain would have to admit its military personnel had intruded into Iranian territorial waters and guarantee this violation would not be committed again.”

“We would be interested in diplomatic discussions, and, in my view, it is quite resolvable. I believe there should be a delegation to clarify whether the British personnel intruded into Iranian waters,” he said.

The British Foreign Office in London said in a statement that, “Larijani’s comments, made in an interview yesterday with a U.K. broadcaster, are a foundation for a diplomatic solution to this problem.”

Iran’s official news agency quoted Ahmadinejad as saying in a speech in the city of Andinmeshk: “The British occupier forces did trespass our waters. Our border guards detained them with skill and bravery. But arrogant powers, because of their arrogant and selfish spirit, are claiming otherwise.”

“Instead of apologizing over trespassing by British forces, the world arrogant powers issue statements and deliver speeches,” Ahmadinejad told a crowd in southeastern Iran.

The head of the Iranian parliament’s foreign affairs commission, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, said that, “To resolve these problems, London needs to send an official mission to give explanations.”

“The British government has started diplomatic discussions with the foreign ministry to resolve the issue of the British military personnel. From the start it was intended to resolve this affair through bilateral contacts and that the other side would recognize its error but they behaved as if their violation of Iranian waters was something normal,” Larijani told state television’s central news agency.

British foreign office said in a statement that, “There remain some differences between us, but we can confirm we share his preference for early bilateral discussions to find a diplomatic solution to this problem. We will be following this up with the Iranian authorities given our shared desire to make early progress.

Prime Minister Tony Blair’s spokesman, Tom Kelly, said at a briefing in London that, “The Iranians know that stage-managed television appearances won’t affect our position. They know we have international support and the Iranians are in the wrong position.”

Tony Blair’s official spokesman also said that, “Britain is sticking by its position as fresh footage of the sailors and marines aired on Iranian TV. There is a lot going on behind the scenes, and the current public holiday season in Iran has inevitably impacted a bit on the process. The UK has replied to an initial note delivered to the British embassy, and is now waiting for Tehran’s response. We have made it quite clear they were seized in Iraqi waters, and we want them released.”

Tony Blair said: “The U.K. will try to keep negotiations with Iran over 15 captive sailors peaceful and calm while preparing to take a harder line. Iran the door is open to a diplomatic deal. The most important thing is to get the people back safe and sound.”

Blair said at a press conference in Glasgow that, “All the way through we’ve had two very clear tracks on this: one is to try to settle this by way of peaceful and calm negotiations, the other is to make it clear that if that’s not possible, we have to take an increasingly tougher position. The best way to deal with this is in a diplomatic way,” Blair said at a press conference in Glasgow.”

In a news conference with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva on March 31, the U.S. President, George W. Bush, said: “I support Tony Blair’s efforts to bring the situation to a peaceful conclusion. The detention of U.K. personnel was inexcusable. The Iranians must give back the hostages. The U.K. personnel are innocent, they did nothing wrong and they were summarily plucked out of the water.”

“Iran’s Foreign Ministry has issued a statement warning the US to stay out of the conflict,” Russian news service RIA Novosti reported from Tehran. “The U.S. president had better refrain from ill-considered and unreasonable comments,” the ministry said in a statement, RIA reported.

The UN Security Council said on March 29 that, “Iran should release the U.K. service personnel and called for “an early resolution to this problem.”

The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, said: “I appealed to Manouchehr Mottaki, the Iranian foreign ministry, that this issue should be resolved as soon as possible through political and diplomatic consultations. I would hope that this rhetoric, which is not desirable in helping resolve this issue, should be toned down. I know there are many issues involved. But it would be desirable for the international community to see early resolution of this issue in a diplomatic and peaceful way.”

German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, said: “Britain has the full solidarity of the European Union.”

Britain’s former ambassador to Iran, Sir Richard Dalton, said: “I am cautiously optimistic following Dr Larijani’s comments. It looks as though both sides are looking for a way to solve the crisis and to do so in the not-too-distant future.”

Tory former foreign minister, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, said: “It would have been more noticeable if Bush had not said anything.”

He told BBC1’s Sunday AM: “You need pressure. But if you are going to make threats of economic sanctions, for example, they have to be made privately because otherwise the Iranians are pushed into a humiliating climb-down.”

Britain’s transport secretary, Douglas Alexander, refused to be drawn on the prospect of a pan-European ban on flights in and out of Iran.

The Cabinet minister said: “The Government welcomes signs of international support, but there has to be a twin track approach. On one hand working closely with international partners to make clear the strength of international feeling that these British service personnel should be returned, and the other hand exploring the potential for dialogue with the Iranians, Sunday AM reported.

In past few days, some video footages of four of the British crew have been shown on the Iranian state TV, showing them saying they were captured in Iranian waters. In one of the footages, two of the sailors used maps to show the alleged location where they were seized.

Captain Air said: “So far we have been treated very well by all the people here. They have looked after us and made sure we are given enough food and treated very well by them, so I thank them for that.”

Lieutenant Carman said: “I would like to tell the Iranian people I can understand why you are so angry about our intrusion into your waters.”

A body language expert said: “There were exhibiting signs of nervous behavior, with both holding a pen close to their stomachs with both hands.”

Swansea East MP, Sian James, said: “I am disgusted and appalled at the showing of British military personnel on TV.”

Oil prices slipped Tuesday after Iran said it wanted to resolve a row over 15 British sailors and marines seized in the Gulf through diplomacy and without a trial. Prices had already begun unraveling late Monday when Ali Larijani, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, made the previously mentioned comments to Britain’s Channel 4 News.

15 British Troops Captured by the Iranian Guards: Border Violation, Another Silly Excuse to Strike At the West

“The European Union will demand the immediate release of 15 British navy personnel detained by Iran in the Gulf,” said the EU president.

The German Foreign Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, told reporters that “Berlin has obtained official confirmation that the troops are under arrest for an alleged border violation.”

“The EU presidency would issue a statement later demanding the immediate release of the soldiers”, he also said.

Iran says the sailors entered Iranian waters illegally while Britain says they were carrying out routine checks on shipping in Iraqi waters. Even in case if what the Iranian government claims is true, is the controversy over a simple border violation, or is Iran getting smart on the west by magnifying the issue, accusing a bunch of sailors and marines of spying for the UK? What is there in those limitless waters possibly worth spying on?

The Iranian government insists that the British troops had entered the Iranian waters intentionally, to lay the bed for an indefinite lock-up of them, so that country have the chance to continue playing on the west, ecpecially regarding its nuclear power issue.

Iran's semi official Fars news agency said: “Navigational equipment on the seized British boats show that the sailors were aware that they were operating in Iranian waters and Iranian border guards fulfilled their responsibility.”

Fars added that, “The 15 sailors and marines, who include a woman, were brought to the capital Tehran for questioning about what they were doing during what Britain insists was a routine anti smuggling patrol.”

The eight Royal Navy sailors and seven Royal Marines have just been transferred to Tehran for more interrogations.

The Islamic regime of Iran has claimed repeatedly that the troops have admitted to having violated the Iranian borders. But is there anyone who might possibly not confess to literary anything whilst under that government's notorious custody, where you know that anything can happen to you and being mentally & physically tortured is a trivial routine.

“The said personnel are being interrogated and have confessed to aggression into the Islamic Republic of Iran's waters,” A top military official, General Ali Reza Afshar told the state news agency IRNA and the semi official news agency, ISNA.

Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Mohammad Ali Hosseini, accused the British of “violating the sovereign boundaries of Iran,” calling the entry “a blatant aggression.”

He accused Britain of trying to cover up the incursion, saying: “They should refrain from putting the blame on others.”

This story has been a significant headline for almost any publications in the free world since a few days ago and the British government has reacted very firmly to this shocking, worrying and unexpected event.

Tony Blair said that, “It simply is not true that they went into Iranian territorial waters and I hope the Iranian government understands how fundamental an issue this is for us. We have certainly sent the message back to them very clearly indeed. They should not be under any doubt at all about how seriously we regard this act, which is unjustified and wrong.”

Britain's Defense Ministry said: “The Royal Navy personnel were in Iraqi territorial waters when they were seized.”

Commander Kevin Aandahl of the US Navy's Fifth Fleet in Bahrain said: “It is very clear they were in Iraqi waters. We've been on operations there for several years. Coalition vessels respect the 1975 treaty.”

On the other hand, there are some Iraqi officials who deny knowing anything about the operation and consider the possibility of the British troops having gone a bit too far.

“We were informed by Iraqi fishermen after they had returned from sea that there were British gunboats in an area that is out of Iraqi control. We don't know why they were there,” General Hakim Jassim told AP Television News, in the Iraqi southern city of Basra.

The Cornwall's commander, Commodore Nick Lambert, said: “I hope the detention is a simple mistake, stemming from the unclear border.”

300, the Movie: Hollywood Challenges the Iranians' Sense of Patriotism

“Hollywood declares war on Iranians,” read a headline in the Iranian newspaper, Ayende-No, on Tuesday.

“The film depicts Iranians as demons, cultureless and without feeling or humanity, who think of nothing except attacking other nations and killing people,” Ayende-No said in its Tuesday article.

“It is a new effort to slander the Iranian people and civilization before world public opinion at a time of increasing American threats against Iran,” it said.

Iran’s most circulative newspaper, Hamshahri, said “300 is serving the policy of the U.S. leadership and predicted it will prompt a wave of protest in the world. Iranians living in the U.S. and Europe will not be indifferent about this obvious insult.”

One alleged newspaper headline read: “300 Against 70 Million!”

The movie 300, which is based on Frank Miller's graphic novel, tells a fictional version of the Thermopylae battle in 480 B.C., in which 300 Spartans fight against a gigantic Persian army at a greek mountain pass for three days.

“The film sold an estimated 70 million USD worth of tickets in its first three days, setting a new record for a March release,” the film's distributor Warner Bros. Pictures said on Sunday.

This pro-Greek movie has twisted the story the other way round, and therefore lacks any historical credibility. The movie pictures the ancient Persians as a cruel, blood-thirsty nation, despite the historical fact that they have been very modest, friendly and culturally very rich.

Iran's officials described the Hollywood's blockbuster movie as “a hostile behaviour which is the result of cultural and psychological warfare.”

According to Time magazine's website, “Some Iranians believe that the movie was secretly funded by the US government to prepare Americans for going to war against Iran.”

A cultural adviser to Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, Javad Shamqadri, said: “300 is part of a comprehensive U.S. psychological warfare aimed at Iranian culture. Following the Islamic Revolution in Iran, Hollywood and cultural authorities in the U.S. initiated studies to figure out how to attack the Iranian culture. Certainly, the recent movie is a product of such studies.”

Government spokesman, Gholamhossein Elham, Told a news conference on Tuesday that, “Not only would no nation or government accept this, but it would also consider it as hostile behaviour which is the result of cultural and psychological warfare. Cultural intrusion is among the tactics always used by the aliens and calling such a fabrication of culture and insult unacceptable and hostile.”

“Four MPs urged Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and Culture and Islamic Guidance Minister Mohammad Hossein Saffar Harandi to ask other Muslim countries not to show ‘this anti Iranian Hollywood movie,’” ISNA news agency said.

But the struggle over the movie 300 is not limited to the world of politicians and many of the Iranian angry citizens have so far reacted to this story in their own special way.

Among them, is an Iranian who published a petition against the movie 300 on the Internet saying that, “It is a proven scholarly fact that the Persian Empire in 480 B.C. was the most magnificent and civilised empire.”

This Internet petition refers to the recent Warner Bros.' blockbuster movie as “irresponsible, unethical and unscientific.” 35,000 signatures have shown up on the petition so far.

Interestingly, the state owned/dependent news agencies have reacted most severely to the story, attacking Holywood and the Warner Bros. in particular, over their blockbuster movie. That is while the Iranian government normally is not at all concerned about or even happy with the persian ancient herritage, and only seems to be using this situation as an opportunity to criticize the old enemy.

The governmental Iranian news agency IRNA reported that, “Iranian government spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham termed the new film 300 part of the extensive cultural aggression aiming to degenerate cultures of world states, and added that the Iranian nation and those involved in cultural activities will respond to such a cultural aggression.”

IRNA added that, “The film has fabricated history in depicting a war between Iran and Greece, whereas no Greek king dared to stand up to the Persian Empire or the Emperor Xerxes.”

An Iranian news agency, Fars, reports that, “the movie 300 has angered the Iranian people due to its insults to the country's ancient culture and is being viewed by many, even non-Iranians, as ignorant and untruthful.”

Fars added that, “The Iranian state television had already aired several commentaries calling the film insulting, and had hosted Iranian film directors to point out its historical inaccuracies.”

The story has become nationally so important that even an archaeologist, Hamed Vahdati-Nasab, is leading a protest against Warner Bros. and the movie. “Announcing our disgust at such a heresy, we demand an immediate historical review and quick apology from the responsible people,” he said.

“What would people say if they made a film about Martin Luther King, showed him as a monster, and tried to defend it as a fiction? You can't do that. It's unethical. This is a national matter for all Iranians,” Vahdati-Nasab continued.

In a written complaint to Koichiro Matsuura, a group of Iranian cinematic figures including Dariush Mehrjuee, Majid Majidi, Mohammad-Ali Najafi, Mohammad-Mehdi Heidarian, and Mojtaba Raei, have suggested that, “Since UNESCO has previously complained against the threatening and demolition of historical documents and monuments belonging to various nations throughout the world, we expect the organization to prevent the cinema industry from humiliating and obliterating the historical identity which definitely leads to international cultural and social consequences.”

What no one seems to be paying attention to is the Warner Bros.’ continuous statements, underlining the entertaining side of the fictional story which the movie has been created based on, and rejecting any accusations of cultural confrontation with Iran.

A Warner Bros. spokesman has made an statement, saying to the Iranians that, “The studio developed this film purely as a fictional work with the sole purpose of entertaining audiences. It is not meant to disparage an ethnicity or culture or make any sort of political statement. The film 300 is a work of fiction inspired by the Frank Miller graphic novel and loosely based on an historical event.”

Multi Millionaire Mullahs: Plundering a Nation's Wealth

“Iranian Mullahs stash millions as their people struggle to survive,” CNN reports.

“24 years from the revolution, the mullahs have miserably failed to create this so- called idyllic society they were so emphatically referring to. Instead, Iran is in the throes of the biggest political, social, and economical crisis of its recent history,” says Peyvand, an Iranian popular news website.

“The ayatollah's denials will do little to dispel the widely-held view in Iran that a new class of millionaire mullahs are plundering the riches of the country,” Iran Voice reports.

The Mullahs in Iran keep adding up to their wealth endlessly. That is while the gap between the poor and the rich is getting bigger and bigger, and all the nations’ wealth is being circulated in the hands of a few people, mainly Mullahs, and all with high ranking governmental posts.

One of the people very interested in disclosing the Mullah’s financial abuse was the famous Russian Paul Klebnikov.

Klebnikov, the former Chief Editor of the Russian edition of Forbes Magazine, was shot to death in Moscow less than two years ago. Investigations are still on going.

Klebnikov was a graduate of the University of California at Berkeley and the London School of Economics.

Klebnikov was also the author of the book Millionaire Mullahs, which according to the Winds of Change news weblog “Tore the lid off of the organized corruption that lies behind the terrorist theocracy of Iran.” In the book he wrote:

“A looming nuclear threat to the rest of the world, Iran is robbing its own people of prosperity. But the men at the top are getting extremely rich.”

Soon after, Klebnikov reveal the illegal financial activities of the Grand Ayatollah Rafsanjani, perhaps the richest man serving the Islamic corrupt regime. He wrote:

“The 1979 revolution transformed the Rafsanjani clan into commercial pashas. One brother headed the country's largest copper mine; another took control of the state-owned TV network; a brother-in-law became governor of Kerman province, while a cousin runs an outfit that dominates Iran's $400 million pistachio export business; a nephew and one of Rafsanjani's sons took key positions in the Ministry of Oil; another son heads the Tehran Metro construction project (an estimated $700 million spent so far). Today, operating through various foundations and front companies, the family is also believed to control one of Iran's biggest oil engineering companies, a plant assembling Daewoo automobiles, and Iran's best private airline (though the Rafsanjanis insist they do not own these assets).”

Since Klebnikov’s death, there has always been this debatable issue wether the Iranian authorities had ordered his murder or not?

“Given their frequent practice of assassinations abroad, it would be foolish to dismiss the possibility,” Winds of Change suggests.

Seriously, what options does the free world have in order to prevent such rebellion regimes from continuing their terror and curroption?