National News: "Suppression of Witness Names Underlines Battle in AIPAC Case
Ron Kampeas and Matthew E. Berger
JTA Wire Service
MARCH 23, 2006
Washington
Condoleezza Rice, Stephen Hadley, Anthony Zinni: For a few hours, the list of subpoenaed witnesses on the docket in the classified information case against two former staffers of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee read like a Who's Who of U.S. foreign policy.
And that probably was precisely the point for defendants eager to prove that trading inside information with the most senior government officials was par for the lobbyists' course.
Similarly, the suppression of the witnesses' names within hours last Friday was consistent with a prosecution -- and a court -- that is keeping as much of the case under wraps as possible.
Lawyers for Steve Rosen, AIPAC's former foreign policy director, and Keith Weissman, its former Iran analyst, subpoenaed 10 current and former administration officials ranging from Rice, the current U.S. secretary of state, and Hadley, the national security adviser to the White House, through Lawrence Franklin, the former mid-level Pentagon analyst whose guilty plea is the crux of the government's case against Rosen and Weissman. JTA obtained an original copy of the docket with the names intact.
The court, the defense and the government would not comment about the subpoenas or their subsequent suppression on the docket, but the roll call reflects what sources close to the defense have said will be their case -- that interactions of the kind described in the indictment last August were routine and above board."I presume it's an attempt to provide some context for the information that was disclosed," said Steven Aftergood, who directs the Secrecy Project at the Federation of American Scientists and who has been following the case closely. "If such information was already in public circulation or widely disseminated, that could arguably mitigate anything the defendants did wrong by communicating it."
The crux of the indictment is that Franklin leaked information on Iran to Rosen and Weissman on several occasions in 2003 and 2004.
In July 2004, Franklin joined the FBI in a sting against the two, telling Weissman that Iranian agents planned to kill Israeli and American agents in northern Iraq. Rosen and Weissman relayed the information -- which, according to the indictment, Franklin made clear to Weissman was classified -- to an Israeli diplomat, a Washington Post journalist and the executive director of AIPAC, Howard Kohr.
Rosen and Weissman have been charged under a never-used 1917 statute that criminalizes the receipt and dissemination of classified information.
AIPAC fired the two men a year ago, saying their actions did not comport with AIPAC practices, but stopping short of accusing the men of anything illegal.
Glenn Kessler, The Washington Post journalist, said he had not been subpoenaed. AIPAC would not comment on whether Kohr or anyone else had been subpoenaed.
Israeli officials have confirmed in the past that they are negotiating the terms of testimony for Naor Gilon, the diplomat who received the information from Weissman and Rosen. Gilon returned to Israel last summer after completing a three-year term as a political officer.
In addition to Rice, Hadley and Franklin, the defense subpoenaed David Satterfield, the current U.S. deputy ambassador to Iraq; William Burns, the current U.S. ambassador to Moscow; Ken Pollack, research director at the Saban Center, a Middle East think tank; Michael Makovsky, another mid-level Pentagon analyst; Elliott Abrams, the deputy national security adviser; Zinni, formerly the top peace envoy to the Middle East; and Richard Armitage, a former deputy secretary of state. Prosecutors and the witnesses themselves may challenge the subpoenas.
Satterfield and Pollack are significant, because -- like Franklin -- they appear in the indictment as alleged leakers to Rosen, but neither has been charged.
Pollack discussed Iraq policy with Rosen and Weissman over lunch in 2000, when he was on the Clinton administration's National Security Council.
Pollack told JTA last year that he could not imagine having relayed classified information to them. He told JTA this week that he had yet to receive a subpoena, but would not be surprised if he did.
Satterfield was an assistant secretary of state in 2002 when, according to the indictment, he leaked classified information on Al-Qaida to Rosen.
No one on the list, aside from Pollack and Zinni, returned calls from JTA asking for comment.
Zinni, who said he also had yet to receive the subpoena, said he had met Rosen just once."I met Mr. Rosen once at a dinner while I was the envoy," the retired Marines general and former head of U.S. Central Command wrote in an e-mail to JTA. "It was a casual event and we discussed the process I was then involved in. The dinner was with four others."
Zinni, who now is a consultant in the private sector, served as an envoy to Israeli-Palestinian talks in 2001-2002.
The court and the government would not comment on the subpoenas, but Aftergood says it's consistent with the secrecy that has enveloped the case. Judge T.S. Ellis III allowed the government to keep from the public and from the defense what apparently is the bulk of the transcripts of years of taps on Rosen and Weissman, although the recordings are principally of the defendants.
Ellis also has sealed pre-trial motions that principally argue established case law and do not reveal details of the case aside from those appearing in the already published indictment. The documents were eventually unsealed.
In contrast to Aftergood and a number of free speech groups that have weighed in on the case, Ellis made clear that he does not believe First Amendment issues have much bearing."Persons who have unauthorized possession, who come into unauthorized possession of classified information, must abide by the law," Ellis said Jan. 20 when he sentenced Franklin to more than 12 years for his role. "That applies to academics, lawyers, journalists, professors, whatever."
Ellis turned down a friend-of-the-court brief from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, saying it was inappropriate."Secrecy seems to be the default here," Aftergood said. "It appears the judge wants to discourage media coverage."
Laurie Levenson, a legal expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said the prosecution may move to quash the subpoenas, and could have requested the seal to keep the putative witnesses' names out of the spotlight until the judge rules on the motion.
"This leaves the spotlight off the witnesses and leaves it on the defendants," she said. "They'd rather keep the focus on the named defendants."
This story reprinted courtesy of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency."
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Sunday, March 19, 2006
Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections - Pipeline or pipe dream? The Kirkuk-Haifa scheme
Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections - Pipeline or pipe dream? The Kirkuk-Haifa scheme: "
volume 9, issue #6 - Thursday, March 25, 2004
Pipeline or pipe dream? The Kirkuk-Haifa scheme
By Thomas R. Stauffer
02-03-04 Bad pennies do recirculate. The latest to re-emerge is a resurrection of the scheme to build an oil pipeline from Kirkuk in northern Iraq to the Israeli port of Haifa. While on its merits it is difficult to take the proposal seriously -- such a pipeline makes no commercial sense whatsoever, and its political logic defies reasoned analysis-two counts of infeasibility may be no obstacle.
Given the level of ignorance in the White House, and the scope for graft in a project of that type, it could actually be realized, all financial and political argument notwithstanding. When not actually phanstasmagorical, the rationales offered for the pipeline are specious.
Israel-first proponents gush about the vast oil resources of Iraq: "Northern Iraq's oil fields are among the richest in the world." Somehow, one is told, direct access to those fields-through the new pipeline-would reduce Israel's energy costs and, miraculously, increase the diversity of supply to the United States.
Several sobering considerations present themselves, however. First, there is no shortage of outlets for exporting oil from Iraq, making construction of a new line quite superfluous. The existing pipeline from Kirkuk and Mosul to Turkey's Mediterranean terminal at Ceyhan, after building additional parallel lines and pumping stations, now has a nameplate capacity -- if repaired-of 1.65 mm bpd.
Moreover, both the line itself and the terminal at Ceyhan can readily be expanded at incremental costs well below those of any freshly built pipeline. Space is no constraint. There is adequate room in the port, and potential additional capacity to accommodate any likely volumes of oil from Iraq, as well as expected flows from Baku in Azerbaijan, can readily be constructed.
Further, Iraq has two additional oil export terminals on the Gulf. Although badly damaged by US bombs, both can be rehabilitated at modest cost-if not blocked by Israel or Washington. Together, Khor al-Amaya and Mina al-Bakr could export almost 3 mm bpd of oil into supertankers serving the world market. These ports, too, can be expanded by extending the quays or adding single-buoy moorings (SBMs)-although, over the longer run, congestion in the Upper Gulf poses constraints for all the export terminals in that area.
Finally, there are two more existing export pipelines, which, politics permitting, add to Iraq's export capacity and flexibility. There still exists a pipeline from Kirkuk to Banias on the Syrian coast-a leftover from the colonialist era of the Iraq Petroleum Company. The line is partly used by Syria to move its own oil, but some 200,000 bpd of capacity reportedly is unused, and that line-again, politics permitting-could easily be looped and more than doubled.
An even larger option might be reinstated, however. Southern Iraqi oil fields are also connected directly to the Red Sea by the two stages of the IPSA pipeline across Saudi Arabia. This large pipeline, built during the Iran-Iraq war to circumvent attacks by Iranon Iraqi tankers in the Gulf, later serving both Iraq and Saudi Arabia, has been closed by the Saudis since Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. While its realistic capacity is less than the theoretical figure of 1.6 mm bpd, nonetheless -- once more, politics permitting-it offers an outlet for perhaps another 1 mm bpd of Iraqi oil.
Nor are Iraqi oil exports in any sense constrained by lack of pipeline capacity. Existing lines could carry six-plus mm bpd -- twice the historic level -- and, with modest investment, could carry any like level of exports over the near- and middle term.
There is a further deception embedded in the proposed Kirkuk-Haifa project, however. Pro-Israel propagandists speak of "reopening" the line. The term "reopening" is a blatant lie. That line was built in the 1930s, when the oil market was radically different and when the refinery at Haifa, controlled by Shell, was of significance. But the facilities have either rusted away or were dismantled, so "it ain't there no more."
Israeli officials claim that the Haifa pipeline would save Israel 20 % of its energy costs-especially in reducing costly oil imports from Russia. Given the near-perfect price arbitrage in oil markets, this is quite implausible. Only two interpretations suggest themselves.
First, the Russian Jewish oil mafia has succeeded in bilking the Israelis -- a formidable task. Or, second, the Israelis and their allies in the Bush administration presume that they can force Iraq to sell oil into the line at a steep discount-part of the known plan to discredit and weaken any Iraqi government by demanding recognition of and oil sales to Israel, as bruited by Ahmad Chalabi.
Why the specious arguments? Why tout the scheme? History may provide the clue. A similar project was pushed in the mid-1980s-except that the terminus was Aqaba, not Haifa. The project was a multi-tiered scam, providing graft, kickbacks and influence-peddling to a spectrum of figures, from a bagman for the Mossad, Shimon Peres and the Labour Party, to a fewhighly-placed officials from the Reagan administration-including, reportedly, Ed Meese, William Clark and Donald Rumsfeld. The details trickled into the public domain during the special prosecutor's investigation of Reagan Attorney General Meese.
Key to the scheme was "influence" in Washington to obtain 100 % US government financing and guarantees for the commercially unviable project, out of which the payoffs were to be distributed. Influence was necessary since the US-export content of the pipeline was minimal, violating the criteria for Export-Import Bank or OPIC support. The scheme unravelled as an investigation into the dubious dealings of Meese unfolded, leaking many of the sordid details into the public record.
In its "born-again" version, the Kirkuk-Haifa smells and looks all too familiar. The bad penny has resurfaced, with specious rationalizations serving to divert attention from the real rationale. Because one must never underestimate the venality and gullibility of American political leadership, however, it is perfectly possible that this piece of political pork might be approved.
Thomas R. Stauffer is a Washington, DC-based engineer and economist who has taught the economics of energy and the Middle East at Harvard University and Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service.
Source: Enatres discussion list "
volume 9, issue #6 - Thursday, March 25, 2004
Pipeline or pipe dream? The Kirkuk-Haifa scheme
By Thomas R. Stauffer
02-03-04 Bad pennies do recirculate. The latest to re-emerge is a resurrection of the scheme to build an oil pipeline from Kirkuk in northern Iraq to the Israeli port of Haifa. While on its merits it is difficult to take the proposal seriously -- such a pipeline makes no commercial sense whatsoever, and its political logic defies reasoned analysis-two counts of infeasibility may be no obstacle.
Given the level of ignorance in the White House, and the scope for graft in a project of that type, it could actually be realized, all financial and political argument notwithstanding. When not actually phanstasmagorical, the rationales offered for the pipeline are specious.
Israel-first proponents gush about the vast oil resources of Iraq: "Northern Iraq's oil fields are among the richest in the world." Somehow, one is told, direct access to those fields-through the new pipeline-would reduce Israel's energy costs and, miraculously, increase the diversity of supply to the United States.
Several sobering considerations present themselves, however. First, there is no shortage of outlets for exporting oil from Iraq, making construction of a new line quite superfluous. The existing pipeline from Kirkuk and Mosul to Turkey's Mediterranean terminal at Ceyhan, after building additional parallel lines and pumping stations, now has a nameplate capacity -- if repaired-of 1.65 mm bpd.
Moreover, both the line itself and the terminal at Ceyhan can readily be expanded at incremental costs well below those of any freshly built pipeline. Space is no constraint. There is adequate room in the port, and potential additional capacity to accommodate any likely volumes of oil from Iraq, as well as expected flows from Baku in Azerbaijan, can readily be constructed.
Further, Iraq has two additional oil export terminals on the Gulf. Although badly damaged by US bombs, both can be rehabilitated at modest cost-if not blocked by Israel or Washington. Together, Khor al-Amaya and Mina al-Bakr could export almost 3 mm bpd of oil into supertankers serving the world market. These ports, too, can be expanded by extending the quays or adding single-buoy moorings (SBMs)-although, over the longer run, congestion in the Upper Gulf poses constraints for all the export terminals in that area.
Finally, there are two more existing export pipelines, which, politics permitting, add to Iraq's export capacity and flexibility. There still exists a pipeline from Kirkuk to Banias on the Syrian coast-a leftover from the colonialist era of the Iraq Petroleum Company. The line is partly used by Syria to move its own oil, but some 200,000 bpd of capacity reportedly is unused, and that line-again, politics permitting-could easily be looped and more than doubled.
An even larger option might be reinstated, however. Southern Iraqi oil fields are also connected directly to the Red Sea by the two stages of the IPSA pipeline across Saudi Arabia. This large pipeline, built during the Iran-Iraq war to circumvent attacks by Iranon Iraqi tankers in the Gulf, later serving both Iraq and Saudi Arabia, has been closed by the Saudis since Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. While its realistic capacity is less than the theoretical figure of 1.6 mm bpd, nonetheless -- once more, politics permitting-it offers an outlet for perhaps another 1 mm bpd of Iraqi oil.
Nor are Iraqi oil exports in any sense constrained by lack of pipeline capacity. Existing lines could carry six-plus mm bpd -- twice the historic level -- and, with modest investment, could carry any like level of exports over the near- and middle term.
There is a further deception embedded in the proposed Kirkuk-Haifa project, however. Pro-Israel propagandists speak of "reopening" the line. The term "reopening" is a blatant lie. That line was built in the 1930s, when the oil market was radically different and when the refinery at Haifa, controlled by Shell, was of significance. But the facilities have either rusted away or were dismantled, so "it ain't there no more."
Israeli officials claim that the Haifa pipeline would save Israel 20 % of its energy costs-especially in reducing costly oil imports from Russia. Given the near-perfect price arbitrage in oil markets, this is quite implausible. Only two interpretations suggest themselves.
First, the Russian Jewish oil mafia has succeeded in bilking the Israelis -- a formidable task. Or, second, the Israelis and their allies in the Bush administration presume that they can force Iraq to sell oil into the line at a steep discount-part of the known plan to discredit and weaken any Iraqi government by demanding recognition of and oil sales to Israel, as bruited by Ahmad Chalabi.
Why the specious arguments? Why tout the scheme? History may provide the clue. A similar project was pushed in the mid-1980s-except that the terminus was Aqaba, not Haifa. The project was a multi-tiered scam, providing graft, kickbacks and influence-peddling to a spectrum of figures, from a bagman for the Mossad, Shimon Peres and the Labour Party, to a fewhighly-placed officials from the Reagan administration-including, reportedly, Ed Meese, William Clark and Donald Rumsfeld. The details trickled into the public domain during the special prosecutor's investigation of Reagan Attorney General Meese.
Key to the scheme was "influence" in Washington to obtain 100 % US government financing and guarantees for the commercially unviable project, out of which the payoffs were to be distributed. Influence was necessary since the US-export content of the pipeline was minimal, violating the criteria for Export-Import Bank or OPIC support. The scheme unravelled as an investigation into the dubious dealings of Meese unfolded, leaking many of the sordid details into the public record.
In its "born-again" version, the Kirkuk-Haifa smells and looks all too familiar. The bad penny has resurfaced, with specious rationalizations serving to divert attention from the real rationale. Because one must never underestimate the venality and gullibility of American political leadership, however, it is perfectly possible that this piece of political pork might be approved.
Thomas R. Stauffer is a Washington, DC-based engineer and economist who has taught the economics of energy and the Middle East at Harvard University and Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service.
Source: Enatres discussion list "
Iran frees Anti Islamic Revolutionary Journalist -DAWN - Top Stories; March 19, 2006
Iran frees dissident journalist -DAWN - Top Stories; March 19, 2006:
Akbar Ganji a leader in the Anti Islamic Revolutionary Movement was reunited with his wife Massoumeh Shafie. It is anticipated that Ganji will soon travel to Washington DC to meet with AEI and AIPAC.
"Iran frees dissident journalist
TEHRAN, March 18: Iran’s most prominent political prisoner, dissident Akbar Ganji, was released late on Friday night after six years in prison. Visibly thinner and sporting a bushy beard, Mr Ganji smiled and greeted family and friends on Saturday but refused to make any comments.
“He was released at the end of his term,” Mr Ganji’s lawyer Yusef Molai said.
“To my surprise, prison officials brought him home at 10 last night. I did not expect it as the papers said he would not be released before March 30. I am extremely happy,” his wife Massoumeh Shafie said.
“I have asked him not to talk because I am very worried and do not want the same thing to happen again,” she added.
She denied there was any gag order on the fiery journalist and worried about his health after his gruelling stay behind bars.
“He has decided not to talk due to his physical conditions. He should not get tired,” Molai explained.
Mr Ganji, 46, was sentenced to six years in prison in 2001 after he wrote articles implicating several regime officials in a string of gruesome murders of opposition intellectuals and writers in 1998 — crimes that shocked Iran.
He did not give names, and instead kept readers guessing over the identity of the “Master Key” and the “Grey Eminence” — but the nicknames were widely interpreted as referring to former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and former intelligence minister Ali Fallahian.
In 2005, Mr Ganji, who for many symbolised the fighting spirit of Iran’s reform movement, denied having made any reference to Rafsanjani in his articles.
The uproar over the serial murders prompted official action, with the killings blamed on “rogue” intelligence agents. The alleged ringleader eventually committed suicide in jail by drinking hair remover.
Reformists rejoiced at the news of Ganji’s freedom even as the dissident returned to an Iran that was far more conservative than the one he left when he started his prison sentence.
“One of my best friends has been released,” said dissident cleric Mohsen Kadivar, who had come to welcome Mr Ganji at his modest Tehran apartment, two days before the Iranian New Year Nohrouz.
Mr Ganji, who was first jailed in 1997 after giving a lecture on “the theoretical foundations of fascism”, was arrested a final time in April 2000 following his participation in an academic and cultural conference at the Heinrich Boell Institute in Berlin. He was sentenced in 2001 to 10 years in prison, but the sentence was later commuted to six.—AFP"
Akbar Ganji a leader in the Anti Islamic Revolutionary Movement was reunited with his wife Massoumeh Shafie. It is anticipated that Ganji will soon travel to Washington DC to meet with AEI and AIPAC.
"Iran frees dissident journalist
TEHRAN, March 18: Iran’s most prominent political prisoner, dissident Akbar Ganji, was released late on Friday night after six years in prison. Visibly thinner and sporting a bushy beard, Mr Ganji smiled and greeted family and friends on Saturday but refused to make any comments.
“He was released at the end of his term,” Mr Ganji’s lawyer Yusef Molai said.
“To my surprise, prison officials brought him home at 10 last night. I did not expect it as the papers said he would not be released before March 30. I am extremely happy,” his wife Massoumeh Shafie said.
“I have asked him not to talk because I am very worried and do not want the same thing to happen again,” she added.
She denied there was any gag order on the fiery journalist and worried about his health after his gruelling stay behind bars.
“He has decided not to talk due to his physical conditions. He should not get tired,” Molai explained.
Mr Ganji, 46, was sentenced to six years in prison in 2001 after he wrote articles implicating several regime officials in a string of gruesome murders of opposition intellectuals and writers in 1998 — crimes that shocked Iran.
He did not give names, and instead kept readers guessing over the identity of the “Master Key” and the “Grey Eminence” — but the nicknames were widely interpreted as referring to former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and former intelligence minister Ali Fallahian.
In 2005, Mr Ganji, who for many symbolised the fighting spirit of Iran’s reform movement, denied having made any reference to Rafsanjani in his articles.
The uproar over the serial murders prompted official action, with the killings blamed on “rogue” intelligence agents. The alleged ringleader eventually committed suicide in jail by drinking hair remover.
Reformists rejoiced at the news of Ganji’s freedom even as the dissident returned to an Iran that was far more conservative than the one he left when he started his prison sentence.
“One of my best friends has been released,” said dissident cleric Mohsen Kadivar, who had come to welcome Mr Ganji at his modest Tehran apartment, two days before the Iranian New Year Nohrouz.
Mr Ganji, who was first jailed in 1997 after giving a lecture on “the theoretical foundations of fascism”, was arrested a final time in April 2000 following his participation in an academic and cultural conference at the Heinrich Boell Institute in Berlin. He was sentenced in 2001 to 10 years in prison, but the sentence was later commuted to six.—AFP"
Saturday, March 18, 2006
Iran Foolishly Allows Akbar Ganji Freedom
Independent Online Edition > Middle East: "18 March 2006 22:39 Home > News > World > Middle East
Iranian dissident returns home after six years in jail
By Saeed Komeijani
Published: 19 March 2006
Iran's most prominent political dissident, Akbar Ganji, has been released from prison after six years behind bars for criticising some of the most powerful figures in the Islamic Republic.
Mr Ganji, a journalist, was jailed in 2000 after writing articles linking senior officials to the serial killings of political dissidents in 1998. His articles targeted the powerful cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran's President from 1989 to 1997.
A cheerful but thin and heavily bearded Mr Ganji yesterday welcomed reporters into his Tehran apartment. He stuck to pleasantries and avoided politics. "Thanks for coming," he said, grinning. "I am so sorry it is such a small place."
Lawyer Youssef Mowlaie said Mr Ganji had been released late on Friday evening. But he predicted a legal wrangle over whether he would have to return to Tehran's feared Evin prison for a few more days. Mr Mowlaie said he reckoned his client's jail term ended on 17 March, but the judiciary disagreed.
Mr Ganji spent stints in solitary confinement and fell gravely ill in July, weakened by a hunger strike aimed at persuading the authorities to release him. The reporter's case sparked outrage in the US and Europe.
Iran's most prominent political dissident, Akbar Ganji, has been released from prison after six years behind bars for criticising some of the most powerful figures in the Islamic Republic.
Mr Ganji, a journalist, was jailed in 2000 after writing articles linking senior officials to the serial killings of political dissidents in 1998. His articles targeted the powerful cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran's President from 1989 to 1997.
A cheerful but thin and heavily bearded Mr Ganji yesterday welcomed reporters into his Tehran apartment. He stuck to pleasantries and avoided politics. "Thanks for coming," he said, grinning. "I am so sorry it is such a small place."
Lawyer Youssef Mowlaie said Mr Ganji had been released late on Friday evening. But he predicted a legal wrangle over whether he would have to return to Tehran's feared Evin prison for a few more days. Mr Mowlaie said he reckoned his client's jail term ended on 17 March, but the judiciary disagreed.
Mr Ganji spent stints in solitary confinement and fell gravely ill in July, weakened by a hunger strike aimed at persuading the authorities to release him. The reporter's case sparked outrage in the US and Europe."
Iranian dissident returns home after six years in jail
By Saeed Komeijani
Published: 19 March 2006
Iran's most prominent political dissident, Akbar Ganji, has been released from prison after six years behind bars for criticising some of the most powerful figures in the Islamic Republic.
Mr Ganji, a journalist, was jailed in 2000 after writing articles linking senior officials to the serial killings of political dissidents in 1998. His articles targeted the powerful cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran's President from 1989 to 1997.
A cheerful but thin and heavily bearded Mr Ganji yesterday welcomed reporters into his Tehran apartment. He stuck to pleasantries and avoided politics. "Thanks for coming," he said, grinning. "I am so sorry it is such a small place."
Lawyer Youssef Mowlaie said Mr Ganji had been released late on Friday evening. But he predicted a legal wrangle over whether he would have to return to Tehran's feared Evin prison for a few more days. Mr Mowlaie said he reckoned his client's jail term ended on 17 March, but the judiciary disagreed.
Mr Ganji spent stints in solitary confinement and fell gravely ill in July, weakened by a hunger strike aimed at persuading the authorities to release him. The reporter's case sparked outrage in the US and Europe.
Iran's most prominent political dissident, Akbar Ganji, has been released from prison after six years behind bars for criticising some of the most powerful figures in the Islamic Republic.
Mr Ganji, a journalist, was jailed in 2000 after writing articles linking senior officials to the serial killings of political dissidents in 1998. His articles targeted the powerful cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Iran's President from 1989 to 1997.
A cheerful but thin and heavily bearded Mr Ganji yesterday welcomed reporters into his Tehran apartment. He stuck to pleasantries and avoided politics. "Thanks for coming," he said, grinning. "I am so sorry it is such a small place."
Lawyer Youssef Mowlaie said Mr Ganji had been released late on Friday evening. But he predicted a legal wrangle over whether he would have to return to Tehran's feared Evin prison for a few more days. Mr Mowlaie said he reckoned his client's jail term ended on 17 March, but the judiciary disagreed.
Mr Ganji spent stints in solitary confinement and fell gravely ill in July, weakened by a hunger strike aimed at persuading the authorities to release him. The reporter's case sparked outrage in the US and Europe."
Tuesday, March 14, 2006
JTA - AIPAC Spies Supeona Rice and Hadley
JTA - Breaking News: "
Ex-AIPAC staffers subpoena Rice, Hadley
Two former American Israel Public Affairs Committee staffers subpoenaed top Bush administration officials to testify at their trial.
Steve Rosen, AIPAC’s former foreign policy director, and Keith Weissman, its former Iran analyst, filed subpoenas last Friday for Condoleezza Rice, the U.S. secretary of state; Stephen Hadley, the national security adviser; Elliott Abrams, the deputy national security adviser; William Burns, William Burns, the State Department’s former top envoy to the Middle East; David Satterfield, Burns’ former deputy and the current deputy ambassador to Iraq; and a number of former officials.
The court later suppressed the names on the subpoenas, but JTA viewed a copy of the original docket with all the names.
At least one of the targeted witnesses said he has yet to receive a subpoena.
Rosen and Weissman are charged under a never-used statute in the espionage act that criminalizes the receipt and dissemination of classified information.
They plan to argue that the conversations at the center of the indictment were routine for AIPAC lobbyists and others. AIPAC fired the two men a year ago, saying their actions did not comport with AIPAC’s standards."
Ex-AIPAC staffers subpoena Rice, Hadley
Two former American Israel Public Affairs Committee staffers subpoenaed top Bush administration officials to testify at their trial.
Steve Rosen, AIPAC’s former foreign policy director, and Keith Weissman, its former Iran analyst, filed subpoenas last Friday for Condoleezza Rice, the U.S. secretary of state; Stephen Hadley, the national security adviser; Elliott Abrams, the deputy national security adviser; William Burns, William Burns, the State Department’s former top envoy to the Middle East; David Satterfield, Burns’ former deputy and the current deputy ambassador to Iraq; and a number of former officials.
The court later suppressed the names on the subpoenas, but JTA viewed a copy of the original docket with all the names.
At least one of the targeted witnesses said he has yet to receive a subpoena.
Rosen and Weissman are charged under a never-used statute in the espionage act that criminalizes the receipt and dissemination of classified information.
They plan to argue that the conversations at the center of the indictment were routine for AIPAC lobbyists and others. AIPAC fired the two men a year ago, saying their actions did not comport with AIPAC’s standards."
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
Mubarak Warns Cheney Not to Attack Iran - Yahoo! News
Mubarak Warns U.S. Not to Attack Iran - Yahoo! News: "Mubarak Warns U.S. Not to Attack Iran 1 hour, 14 minutes ago
CAIRO, Egypt - Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak strongly advised the United States not to attack Iran, warning that military action would create more terrorists in neighboring Iraq, according to comments published Wednesday.
ADVERTISEMENT
Mubarak also told Egyptian newspaper editors he warned Vice President Dick Cheney that ground troops "will have a hard time" in such a conflict.
"If an airstrike (against Iran) takes place, then Iraq will be turned to terror groups," Mubarak was quoted as saying by the daily Al-Gomhouria.
He said Shiite Muslims in the Gulf region also could turn against the United States because "Iran generously provides for Shiites in every country and these people are ready to do anything if Iran is attacked."
"Listen to my advice for once," he recalled telling Cheney in English. "You have vital interests in the Gulf region, especially oil."
The United States and other Western governments suspect that Iran's nuclear research program is a cover for weapons development and fear that Tehran is seeking to build an atomic bomb.
Tehran insists it only wants to generate electricity.
International negotiations over the crisis are under way. Mubarak said he hoped the issue would be resolved peacefully.
When asked, he said it was unlikely Israel would launch a nuclear attack against Iran "because Iran owns ballistic missiles that it will launch against Israel and there will be huge destruction."
Mubarak added that such an attack also would spark revenge from Iraqi groups, extremists religious parties and organizations such as the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Mubarak spoke to the editors on his way back from a tour of Gulf states, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia."
CAIRO, Egypt - Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak strongly advised the United States not to attack Iran, warning that military action would create more terrorists in neighboring Iraq, according to comments published Wednesday.
ADVERTISEMENT
Mubarak also told Egyptian newspaper editors he warned Vice President Dick Cheney that ground troops "will have a hard time" in such a conflict.
"If an airstrike (against Iran) takes place, then Iraq will be turned to terror groups," Mubarak was quoted as saying by the daily Al-Gomhouria.
He said Shiite Muslims in the Gulf region also could turn against the United States because "Iran generously provides for Shiites in every country and these people are ready to do anything if Iran is attacked."
"Listen to my advice for once," he recalled telling Cheney in English. "You have vital interests in the Gulf region, especially oil."
The United States and other Western governments suspect that Iran's nuclear research program is a cover for weapons development and fear that Tehran is seeking to build an atomic bomb.
Tehran insists it only wants to generate electricity.
International negotiations over the crisis are under way. Mubarak said he hoped the issue would be resolved peacefully.
When asked, he said it was unlikely Israel would launch a nuclear attack against Iran "because Iran owns ballistic missiles that it will launch against Israel and there will be huge destruction."
Mubarak added that such an attack also would spark revenge from Iraqi groups, extremists religious parties and organizations such as the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Mubarak spoke to the editors on his way back from a tour of Gulf states, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)