Babak Namdar

I’m glad an Iranian singer has decided to use their fame for educating Iranians.

The track’s chorus basically says that when you are choosing between bad and worse its no longer an election.  Basically Ebi is saying boycott the [s]election.

There’s this idea that the reason Ahmadinejad came to power was because Iranians “boycotted”, um… according to the numbers released by the Islamic Republic, last term’s [s]election numbers certainly don’t support this idiotic assertion.

If you compare now the slogans of what Iranians are saying during protests and with what was said four years ago, you’ll definitely notice a shift towards more radical slogans.  There are youtube clips floating around with people yelling “death to the dictator”, “revolution again, again” and “we women and men are are warriors, start the fight so we can end it”.  Why is this significant, because many “experts” claim that Ahmadinejad has drastically stifled dissent, and yet we see an increase in the number of protests and more and more radical slogans being used.

May 31, 2009

The Islamic Republic’s 2009 [s]election is shaping up to be just as it has been before; a “hardliner” wanting to curb “westernization” of Iran and an enlightened “reformist” promising liberal policies. And just as previous [s]elections, the theocracy has put its propaganda machine into overdrive, arguing that to boycott the [s]election means the enemy, which is defined as anyone who is against the Islamic Republic, will win.  In keeping with tradition, the various factions within the regime are receiving various forms of support from foreign forces.

Rafsanjani has gone so far as to spell out explicitly the Islamic Republic’s fears, stating that if less then 40 million Iranians vote, the legitimacy of the regime will come under question and if more then 40 million participate, the regime has insured itself for another four years.  The regime has even lowered the legal voting age to 15 to help bolster voter turnout.  The theocracy’s king, Khamenei, has declared that Iranians must vote so as to provide legitimacy to the ruling clique.

Out of the more then 475 applicants only four were vetted to run for the presidency by the Guardian Council.  In other words, less then one percent of the applicants were allowed to run.  Unsurprising, all the women applicants were disqualified.

The four candidates that were approved by what Khamenei referred to as the regime’s “microscope” are Ahmadinejad, Karoubi, Mousavi and Rezaei.
One just needs to look back in these last four years to get a good idea of Ahmadinejad line of thinking, however the histories of the other three candidates is much more obscure to the world.

Mehdi Karoubi is currently campaigning on a platform of human rights and women rights, though he supports gender apartheid, such as Shariah laws that states a woman’s word is worth half a man’s in the court of law and a woman’s life and limb being worth half as much as a man’s.  When Karoubi was the head of the Foundation for Families of Martyrs he became famous for the various sexual scandals involving widows of the Iran-Iraq war and the sheer amount of corruption in the said foundation.  When Karoubi was the speaker of the majority-reformist parliament during Khatami’s presidency, Khamenei issued an edict that the bill to ease censorship in the press should not be brought to a vote, and Karoubi obliged and removed the bill, even though Karoubi had campaigned on easing of press restrictions.

Mir-Hossein Mousavi, a cousin of Khamenei has worked in the Expediency Council for last twenty years or so.  Mousavi was also responsible for closing the universities immediately after the hijacking of the revolution of 78, to conduct cultural re-education.  During the Iran-Iraq war he served as the Islamic Republic’s prime minister, helping extend the war for 5 long years  even though at a point Iran had taken back all its cities from Iraq and the Arabs were willing to end the war and make huge financial compensations.  Mr. Mousavi presided over mass executions of 80-81 and the dark summer of 1988 where over thirty thousand political prisoners were executed and buried and mass graves.   Given the amount of blood on his hands it’s difficult to not to laugh when Mousavi speaks of creating a human rights council if [s]elected.  As far as his anti-West views go, he stated in 1981 in the magazine Payameh Enghelab that “We are ready to participate within an armed force to fight Israel… We have repeatedly announced that we are ready to have an actual, real and  military presence in Southern Lebanon and on the borders of the occupied Palestinian lands…we believe that with the support of the popular forces in Lebanon we shall be able to gradually find effective and powerful bases in the area for fighting Israel …we believe if the flow of oil in Muslim Lands is in the hands of Muslims and if the ideology of Islam controls the opening or closing of the oil valves we shall be able to bring the World Arrogance to its knees, to strike Israel and to destroy it.”

Mohsen Rezaei is a former chief commander of the Islamic Republic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC) and currently serving as Secretary of Expediency Council.  During his reign as the head of IRGC, he ordered the bombing of Iranian Kurdistan Province in western and north-western Iran.  He even boasted about how he didn’t have room for three Iranian Kurds POWs, and thus simply beheaded them and traveled back with their heads.  Rezaei is wanted by Interpol for connection to the Argentine Jewish center bombing in 1994.

With such a candidate roster, one has to wonder what type of government would let people who have committed crimes against humanity run for public office.  But then one remembers this is the Islamic Republic, having blood on one’s hands is a prerequisite for holding high public office.

As with previous regime [s]elections, we reiterate that the Marze Por Gohar Party does not recognize the Islamic Republic as the legitimate representative of Iran and therefore we will not take any part in the regime’s [s]elections and encourage others to do the same.  Even within the theocratic framework of the Islamic Republic, Iranians have the right to boycott the [s]elections.

The freedom Iranians have earned during the reign of this regime have not come about from working “within the system” and thus voting only serves to give legitimacy to a government which is only answerable to God not Iranians.

Long Live Iran.

Marze Por Gohar Party

In intelligence, the where can be just as important as the what.

What I mean is, even if I don’t know what communication was exchanged, the mere fact that you met with someone is very valuable.

This paradigm also applies to internet traffic analysis.

While there are secure methods to exchange data online via HTTPS (the what), there are ways to cover up the where.

To get a better idea of how traffic analysis can yield the “where” information here’s a quick overview of a typical set of events that take place.

1. you type ‘marzeporgohar.org’ in your browser
2. your browser queries a DNS server asking what the IP address is
3. DNS server replies with the IP of marzeporgohar.org
4. browser requests data from the webserver with the ip

At this point you might be wondering what is this DNS server?

Let’s say the IP address of mpg’s site is 10.10.1.14.  Well, you can paste the IP address into your browser and the site will come up, but most people don’t memorize IP addresses, rather domain names. Memorizing marzeporgohar.org is a lot easier then 10.10.1.14

This is where a DNS server comes in, it basically maps an IP address to a domain.

Here’s a sample exchange:

Query
From (you): 192.168.0.10
To (DNS Server): 66.75.160.63
Standard query A marzeporgohar.org

Answer
From (DNS Server): 66.75.160.63
To (you): 192.168.0.10
marzeporgohar.org: type A, class IN, addr 64.34.168.37

So why should you care? Well lets say you are in Iran and you are look up https://marzeporgohar.org.  The Islamic Republic can’t intercept the HTTPS traffic because it is encrypted, however the initial DNS query to get the IP address of marzeporgohar.org can be.

So while they may not know what you are doing on mpg’s site, the mere fact that you visited may be enough to begin building a profile on you.

Even if you are using a proxy (I like SSH tunnel proxies), you are open to DNS traffic analysis.

So what is the solution?

One solution is to use SOCKS5 proxies and enable remote DNS proxy in firefox.

Now all your DNS queries will be done through the proxy server (which is obviously outside Iran).

Well you knew it was coming and finally a senior military official stated as much.

When asked whether the Islamic Republic could keep their nuclear program, Admiral Michael Mullen replied “that’s certainly a possibility“.

While the State Department says that “We want to keep the focus on Iran and what Iran is doing, and what we can do collectively in order to try to persuade Iran to take a different course“.

The two statements taken together basically means “Ok, you win”.

The Islamic Republic obviously now feels uninhibited, thanks for to the American government, in attacking Iranian identity.

The regime has butchered the “Ey Iran” anthem to a pro-regime piece.

But two can play at that game, let’s see how they like an MPG remake of the Islamic Republic’s national anthem.

Interesting that when the regime mocks the Iranian national anthem the Islamic Republic believes in free speech but when cartoons of Mohammad are published the Islamic Republic goes on a rampage.

The Islamic Republic’s judiciary spokesperson declares that there have been a “huge development” in the laws of the regime, which should decrease the number of “unnecessary executions.”

In other words, the regime is executing people just because they can!

Naturally the spokesperson does not explain what “huge” developments in the field of law and order he’s referring to.  However let us not forget that the regime stones males as well as females; perhaps this policy of “we don’t discriminate when it comes to stoning” is the “huge” development that Jamshidi is referring to.

So the next time you read about an execution in Iran, remember the executions are being conducted just because.

One of the platforms on which the Islamic Republic came to power was that the Shah provided preferential treatment to Americans.  For example, during the Shah’s time American’s could not stand trial in Iran, they had to be extradited back to the States.

It’s very interesting to see the Islamic Republic doing the same thing that their arch enemy the Shah once did.

When the American Iranian journalist, Roxana Saberi, was first charged with espionage there were statements from regime officials seeking a fair trial.  When was the last time an official of the Islamic Republic has sought a “fair” trail for an Iranian citizen?  Saberi was found guilty and was handed a eight year sentence; almost immediately after the regime’s selected president, Ahmadinejad, declared that she could appeal to Khamenei to lighten or pardon her sentence.

It’s interesting to note that when Saberi went on a hunger strike and her health deterioted, she was sent to the prison hospital so she could recuperate.

The charge of espionage is not something to sneeze at for Iranian citizens.  Three Basiji members were charged with spying for Israel and were subsequently sentenced to be executed.  Not only did we not hear anything regarding a “fair” trail from Islamic Republic officials, there was not even a faint suggestion that these Iranians seek a pardon from Khamenei.

Iranian citizens, particularly political dissidents, that get imprisoned certainly do not receive these kid-glove treatments.  Iranians that don’t have dual nationality, especially when their second passport is an American one, don’t get sent to the prison hospital when ill.  Omidreza Mirsayafi, an Iranian blogger, died in prison when the prison guard refused to allow him to be admitted to the prison hospital for his heart condition.

As far as the Islamic Republic is concerned, nationality is a matter of life and death.

American’s can go free when they allegedly commit espionage in Iran, but Iranians who allegedly commit espionage are executed by the Islamic Republic.

Update: The Appeals Court apparantly has decided that Saberi is free to leave Iran.

The American president’s Iranian New Year message has made the rounds, and while some have voiced support or opposition to the message, I haven’t seen an analysis of the actual text.

So I here’s my attempt.

I’m only going to quote the parts that are of interest obviously.

“This holiday is both an ancient ritual and a moment of renewal, and I hope that you enjoy this special time of year with friends and family.”

While I completely understand that the United States has initiated various economic stimulus programs due to the horrendous economic conditions, I am hopeful that the American administration still has some funds left over to hire a competent expert on Iran. Had the American president hired an Iranologist instead of lobbyists, he would have been made aware that the Islamic Republic has sought to marginalize or outright ban any festivities or holidays that are pre-Islamic. The Iranian New Year has existed more then 1000 years prior to the advent of Islam.
I can also name one person who didn’t spend the Iranian New Year with “friends and family,” namely Omidreza Mirsayafi, an Iranian blogger who died in prison as a result of the same regime Mr. Obama is congratulating, not providing Mr. Mirsayafi with the necessary medication.

“In particular, I would like to speak directly to the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

People of Iran, or Iranian people and the Islamic Republic that occupies Iran are two separate matters. The Islamic Republic is a theocracy, in other words, it’s the government of God, not Iran. By calling Iranians the people “of the Islamic Republic,” Mr. Obama has declared that the theocracy is the legitimate representative of Iranians. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians have sacrificed their lives and fought the Islamic Republic and to have someone disrespect their struggle is very offensive. Here we have a head of state of a superpower, so desperate to establish relations with the Islamic Republic that he’s willing to disrespect Iranian sacrifices and tarnish Iranian’s generally positive view of the United States. This is not the first time American’s are supporting a tyrannical regime in Iran; last time it ended with a revolution that overthrew the monarchy.

“Nowruz is just one part of your great and celebrated culture.”

When he says “your” he again is trying to fuse the Islamic Republic and Iranians together. Iranians consider the Islamic Republic to be the second Arab invasion and occupation of Iran, thus they clearly see a difference where the American government can’t. Anyone who follows news regarding Iran knows that the clerics have been insulting Iranian culture and history for decades now. One has to ponder, what other anti-Iranian activities does the regime have to commit before the regime is recognized as not being an Iranian entity.

“Over many centuries your art, your music, literature and innovation have made the world a better and more beautiful place.”

Let’s cite all the positive influences the Islamic Republic has had on the subjects mentioned above. Music was banned by the Islamic Republic for being tools of Satan – yes contributions indeed. Literature? Oh, he’s referring to the Arabization of the Persian language and the re-writing of history textbooks belittling pre-Islamic Iranian national folk heroes. Lest we forget the “book burning” rituals they initiated to destroy pre-Islamic literature. Who could forget the “innovations” the regime has brought the world in the field of stoning women, suicide bombings, arbitrary executions and public hangings. Hey, cranes used to hang people don’t just test themselves you know.

“For nearly three decades relations between our nations have been strained.”

I’m not completely sure that relations between the Iranian nation and the American nation are strained. There is however substantial “strain” in knees of the American government as it begs for the Islamic Republic to improve ties – even if it comes at the expense of Iranians.

“Within these celebrations lies the promise of a new day, the promise of opportunity for our children, security for our families, progress for our communities, and peace between nations. Those are shared hopes, those are common dreams.”

I’m not sure who he is addressing here. Iranians are leaving by the droves for countries that have some semblance of freedom. There’s no security for Iranians; you can be apprehended without cause and summarily be sentenced to death. If the American president is referring to the children of the clerics, then yes they have plenty of “opportunities” as they buy whatever they please all with Iranian oil money their parents have looted. The children of clerics are also making progress in their communities by means of extortion and racketeering schemes.

“So in this season of new beginnings I would like to speak clearly to Iran’s leaders.”

Interesting when referring to the Islamic Republic, it’s “Iran’s leaders” but when referring to Iranians it’s “the people of the Islamic Republic.”

“You, too, have a choice.”

The “you” the American president is referring to is the Islamic Republic. Iranians have no say – or “choice” in this form of government, and cleric after cleric has made the same point that within a theocracy the sovereign is God, not the people (unlike a democracy).

“The United States wants the Islamic Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the community of nations. You have that right — but it comes with real responsibilities, and that place cannot be reached through terror or arms, but rather through peaceful actions that demonstrate the true greatness of the Iranian people and civilization.”

Mr. Obama claims that regime cannot find its “rightful place” through terror, but the Islamic Republic has used terror pretty successfully to get the American president to capitulate to its demands. Doesn’t the old American mantra go something like “if it aint broke don’t fix it”? Well why would the Islamic Republic stop using terrorism against Iranians and other states when in fact terrorism has provided the opportunity for the American president to plead for engagement?

“It’s a future with renewed exchanges among our people, and greater opportunities for partnership and commerce.”

Mr. Obama seems to be under the impression that there’s a thriving middle-class in Iran that can readily afford to travel to the US. Iranians are working three jobs just to make ends meet.  The only people that can weather the financial costs for travel to the United States are either the rich, who have never had a problem visiting the US to begin with, or regime sponsored programs which will no doubt only choose candidates that share their Islamists ideology. As far as commerce is concerned prior to the drop in oil prices, the Islamic Republic’s revenue was increasing year after year, however Iranians were becoming poorer and poorer.

“It’s a future where the old divisions are overcome, where you and all of your neighbors and the wider world can live in greater security and greater peace.”

The regime will not experience “security” or “peace” until Iranians have it. And seeing as Iranians view the Islamic Republic as an obstacle to “security” and “peace” it goes without saying that the Greater Persian Gulf Region will experience the “stability” and “peace” Mr. Obama is seeking, when Iran is governed by an Iranian government. By supporting the regime’s actions against Iranians, the United States government is clearly saying that in the fight between Iranians and the Islamic Republic, the United States has chosen to side with the theocracy.

“Thank you, and Eid-eh Shoma Mobarak.”

If you’re going to wish Iranians a happy new year, please don’t use Arabic words.

A topic that comes up repeatedly in talks with Iranians inside and outside the motherland is how to surf the web more securely.

The topic itself is very broad and thus I’m just going to concentrate on one of the more easier ways you can view sites more securely.

I’m sure you’ve seen http and https before appear in the url bar of your favorite browser.

So what really is the difference between HTTP & HTTPS as far as security goes?

Here’s what the network traffic looks like for http:

Content-Disposition: form-data; name="emailto"

blah@blah.com
-----------------------------147344601515699300481942305708
Content-Disposition: form-data; name="emailpriority"

0
-----------------------------147344601515699300481942305708
Content-Disposition: form-data; name="emailcc"

-----------------------------147344601515699300481942305708
Content-Disposition: form-data; name="emailbcc"

-----------------------------147344601515699300481942305708
Content-Disposition: form-data; name="emailsubject"

this a test
-----------------------------147344601515699300481942305708
Content-Disposition: form-data; name="emailmessage"


this is just a test


-----------------------------147344601515699300481942305708--

Now lets take a look at a piece of the https traffic:

T.....QF..u...K...w.@....)U...d?.....|.....x..%..J{-.Y...(..W.R..C...p.n..v..h.(.J;.GA*.......
..Q^....A....L...t...*:}.#......8.\d...)Y.......&...]&..`..(ac...u.@..]..|.b.S..Q." ..U9.X;. u
......J....q..eo.....`o.N.$...3w..~..k(].....Az.J.j.R..t....).......+/or....qd85.7w6{~..?3.).
w$..-..9........{...|ZE0..qh.....Ktl.=7..E..1H....
8$N........WVP..mw.......&....t...L.*T.ujZc8..j.. ....0.......+.....Q..;2...\.+...J.I.Z..OeKB.
v.G[.U...Q%]@........I......G.EI...<..X..`]Z.Gf.#..M.^..+)<..)..#.G.@X\.....m.lPgx......%^.
.~..a....b\?.P....C".9py.w.k.'...8....x~>q..p...l.
..O.L..2.._...|.$....&.
...n.|O~Q....5h4.1m...=..V............p..L...O...<`.~3...[AT?N..w....L.....kf..et..J....r+..k
c.C:.K.
......n....o........p....qv;_......\.........D
1.R...j....O...:+.V...KHbM.M..w>v...~f;o..E..T........D/..k2g9...;g..b.E3A..`... ..g.
\>Q{6o...."H.....
......rH..Fb.`f...pf..X..l?..e....seS`0................TU...z.Z.z !.l.....1....3..w"h.-.
;_.l..<....Z8.....:'....Q{....,...E./.Q.u**].Z.
.*.R...]..a.......3*..#..J..!7N..........t_\..<.P....7.xF...r.UzvJW'X....2.
..+...]&\..K.......1l...n.......f.q.F.
.aRy..hZ..
...k.za..f.a..
.i..q8..d...>`.a.....Y..b...wx...e.$I..{...4v^....i...c.h..i....i./.T.D...Y.1........L.\
N....lgs9.<...w._.......:.Z`xH.|...J(.d.<.(........0.......%........e*7.....%.....*..\!T.c^.
|....a.v.."_.F.+.....1.......A...m.....O...%...t5=...Ld..K0Y....@.5.....}(.h.....Uz`{.5.
.3..!.^........1..t..O<.z.7.....5.....Z......<._.hU1.....b.N.9....A.X.=.#2.:+g.i:.&...c....6
#.>..2.s...lc..W....%.m.RN.0...?...............L.i{
..Eh........2x8.........$~..
....[..-.;.M...B..W..cE..CCCF........l.k.7m..}..:In;e...7.....{.<@.....'.......X.I>...
.P..7.dI.x5..oY.@.p.a.....y...M.Y&.hL.2F...r. ..34..G...../.h.+aW..
.A.f
...q.
........D.N.D..g.D|....~....\..-.....$.F...u..P.......qN.N ....1.,mt.W.m..z.e

You’ll notice the https traffic looks like gibberish.

The reason https looks illegible is because the information is first encrypted then sent to the server and vise-versa.

That’s why when you’re making credit card payments over the internet, you almost always see https.

Mining information from network traffic over http is a pretty trivial matter, especially for a regime like the Islamic Republic that is flush with oil money.  And there have been reports from inside Iran, how the Islamic Republic is using text-mining technologies to sift through network traffic and gleam information on political dissident in Iran.

Gmail has an option under “Settings” (at the very bottom) that says “Always use HTTPS” and so everytime you login Gmail will automatically use HTTPS.  Using HTTP would mean that while you’re reading / writing an email, a person with access to the network traffic could read what you are reading / writing.

When reading / writing emails or chatting on websites (like facebook), you should try to use HTTPS, as it will drastically lessen the ability for someone to intercept the network traffic and actually learn something from the data.

While using HTTPS is a good start, it is by no means the be-all-end-all for secure surfing.

I’ll try to post more entries about technologies you can use to minimize eavesdropping on your internet activities.

The Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, has publicly stated that human rights will not prevent the United States and China from working more closely together.  Human rights organizations expressed shock and disappointment at Clinton’s statements, but they should not worry as the spokesperson for State declared that human rights would be discussed “…when appropriate.”  One gets the idea that it will never be appropriate as far as the State is concerned.

The American government’s new diplomatic strategy seems to involve not raising issues that have been raised previously because as Secretary of State to eloquently stated “…we pretty much know what they are going to say.”

These developments have direct implications on America’s policy towards the Islamic Republic and Iranians.  Clinton has bluntly stated that human rights will not hinder closer business relationships with nations around the world.  What happened to those cherished “American values”?

I don’t mind that a state is trying to further it’s interest, as a matter of fact it’s normal.  What is ridiculous is that for all the talk about American values and ideals, when there are business interests – those values spontaneously all turn into a paperback shade of green.

This should serve as a very-much needed wake up call for all those Iranians who thought the US could be counted on to provide moral support.  We’ll be lucky if the American government doesn’t start openly siding with the regime as opposed to Iranians as the US did during Shah’s tenure.

Those who are clamoring for normalized relations between the regime and the US, seem to think everything will turn from bad to good when in fact history shown to be the opposite.  Those who are wealthy will be able to travel the US, very much like the are now, and those who are poor (currently the vast majority of Iranians) won’t.

As it is, the revenue generated by the sale of oil (a resource which belongs to all Iranians), never really reaches the average Iranian, so what will happen if business is conducted between the US and Islamic Republic?  Probably not a whole lot, the regime will just skim more profits.  With normalized relations the theocracy can do as they feel completely unrestrained, because as long as the US can do business with them, silly things like human rights and equality won’t matter to either party concerned.

And what about those protests or executions of women, minors and political dissidents?  Well simple, the US will just bring up the subject a couple times to the attention of the Islamic Republic and since “we pretty much know what they are going to say” the US will stop bringing it up.

Easy huh?