Protest outside Iranian Embassy?

Húrin

I attended the protest at the American Embassy against the fuelling of the brutal war in Lebanon and it came to me that we should organise a protest at the Iranian Embassy.

Iran supplies Hizballah with weapons just as America supplies Israel.

The Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is located at 72 Mount Merrion Avenue, Blackrock, Co. Dublin.

Both sides must accede to an unconditional ceasefire. Thus our protests must target both sides here in Dublin.

Who would be interested? I must contact the anti-war movement...

Akrasia

H&#250 wrote: »

I attended the protest at the American Embassy against the fuelling of the brutal war in Lebanon and it came to me that we should organise a protest at the Iranian Embassy.

Iran supplies Hizballah with weapons just as America supplies Israel.

The Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is located at 72 Mount Merrion Avenue, Blackrock, Co. Dublin.

Both sides must accede to an unconditional ceasefire. Thus our protests must target both sides here in Dublin.

Who would be interested? I must contact the anti-war movement...

do we have an Iranian embassy? Do we have any diplomatic relations with Iran?

Look, there were no (or very few) protests against unionist violence in Ireland during "the troubles" That does not mean that Irish people were not against unionist violance during "the troubles". It just means that there is no point in protesting against something that the everybody in the entire country is against, or something that we have absolutely no influence over.

Frank Grimes

Akrasia wrote:

do we have an Iranian embassy? Do we have any diplomatic relations with Iran?

There's an Iranian embassy in Blackrock as the OP said. There's also an Irish embassy in Tehran.

Benedict XVI

Akrasia wrote:

It just means that there is no point in protesting against something that the everybody in the entire country is against, or something that we have absolutely no influence over.

I don't understand your point
To me it seems that the vast majority of Ireish people are against Israel in this, so by that logic no one should protest against Israel, or the US support for Israel, becuase

there is no point in protesting against something that the everybody in the entire country is against, or something that we have absolutely no influence over

Do we have a Syraina embasssy, that would be as valid a location for a protest as the US, Israel or Iran embassy

Akrasia

Benedict XVI wrote:

I don't understand your point
To me it seems that the vast majority of Ireish people are against Israel in this, so by that logic no one should protest against Israel, or the US support for Israel,

In ireland the protests against Israel aren't really directed at Israel, they're mainly directed at the irish and Government to influence their foreign policy towards Israel and America. If Ireland do have trade and relations with Iran, i would support protests against them as well, and i would hope that the Irish Government would sanction the Iranian government for actions in sustaining this war.

gandalf

Hmmm someone slap up a list of Iranian and Syrian products, they should be boycotted as well as the Israeli ones.

LostinBlanch

Frank Grimes wrote:

There's an Iranian embassy in Blackrock as the OP said. There's also an Irish embassy in Tehran.

Yes there is, it's on Bobby Sands St I think.

Oh no that's the British Embassy!

lostexpectation

hurin whats your opinion on the whole UNSC nuclear resolution and Iran threatening Iran to wipe Isreal off the map.

InFront

Lostexpectation that was a term that was lost in translation so to speak. As was later clarified, what was meant is that they wish to remove occupied Palestinian territory from the history books of time.

Wanting to remove the current Israeli territory from the face of the earth is something that would be seriously objectionable to all of Islam and, no doubt, the Iranian governement. The amount of times that has been clarified since Ahmedinejad's comments leaves no excuse for people to still be misrepresenting it.

If you want to protest against Iran, wouldnt a consumer boycott be more effective, like the one against Israel?
Protesting in Blackrock (or the Israeli's embassy for that matter) isnt going to achieve anything, nobody significant will take notice. Even if you are protesting against the Irish governemnt, what can they do that the UN couldnt do?

lostexpectation

i was asking hurin, hmm do we have syrian embassy...
or a lebanese embassy

Mick86

InFront wrote:

Lostexpectation that was a term that was lost in translation so to speak. As was later clarified, what was meant is that they wish to remove occupied Palestinian territory from the history books of time.

Maybe they should change translation services then since Mr Ahmadinejad has been "misquoted" on several occasions as has his Lebanese puppet Nasrallah.

Mick86

lostexpectation wrote:

i was asking hurin, hmm do we have syrian embassy...
or a lebanese embassy

We don't. Lebanon and Syria are represented here by their London embassies.

Lebanon
Embassy of Lebanon
15-21 Palace Garden Mews
London W8 4RA
Tel: 004420 7229 7265
Fax: 004420 7243 1699

Email: emb.leb@btinternet.com

Syria
Embassy of the Syrian Arab Republic
8 Belgrave Square
London SW1X 8PH
Tel: 004420 7245 9012
Fax: 004420 7235 4612


http://foreignaffairs.gov.ie/embassies/dublin.asp?m=e

mike65

gandalf wrote:

Hmmm someone slap up a list of Iranian and Syrian products, they should be boycotted as well as the Israeli ones.

Hmmm carpets, dates, and oil.

Mike.

gandalf

Naw not buying a carpet. I hate dates (the fruit that is!).

Better ask Statoil where their petrol comes from so.

Húrin

Akrasia wrote:

It just means that there is no point in protesting against something that the everybody in the entire country is against, or something that we have absolutely no influence over.

Almost everybody in the country is against Israel's warmongering. If we can send a message of opposition to the embassies of USA and Israel here, then we should also register our opposition with Iran's.

The thought of that embassy in Blackrock sitting there without a whisper of protest against its mother country is shocking.

Akrasia wrote:

If Ireland do have trade and relations with Iran, i would support protests against them as well

We do.

InFront wrote:

Lostexpectation that was a term that was lost in translation so to speak. As was later clarified, what was meant is that they wish to remove occupied Palestinian territory from the history books of time.

No, it was his holocaust denial that was lost. He didn't deny the Holocaust. But he did state that he agreed with a previous pronouncement by the Ayatollah, that "Israel should be wiped off the map".

He denies its right to exist.

Mick86

H&#250 wrote: »

I attended the protest at the American Embassy against the fuelling of the brutal war in Lebanon and it came to me that we should organise a protest at the Iranian Embassy.

Iran supplies Hizballah with weapons just as America supplies Israel.

The Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran is located at 72 Mount Merrion Avenue, Blackrock, Co. Dublin.

Both sides must accede to an unconditional ceasefire. Thus our protests must target both sides here in Dublin.

Who would be interested? I must contact the anti-war movement...

Would the anti-war movement be interested. It always strikes me that they just object to Israeli/ American/NATO sponsored wars.

mike65

Start an article on indymedia and see what happens

Mike.

Mick86

mike65 wrote:

Start an article on indymedia and see what happens

Mike.

They just delete the ones that don't follow the crusty agenda.

InFront

H&#250 wrote: »

No, it was his holocaust denial that was lost. He didn't deny the Holocaust. But he did state that he agreed with a previous pronouncement by the Ayatollah, that "Israel should be wiped off the map".

Mottaki, Foreign Minister:[QUOTE]Nobody can remove a country from the map. This is a misunderstanding in Europe of what our president mentioned," Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference, speaking in English, after addressing the European Parliament.

"How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognize legally this regime," he said[/QUOTE]

Im not one to defend Ahmedinejad, but this is a poltics forum and, particularly on an issue like this, its unfair to misrepresent people. I think its obvious that he meant wiping Israel off the map in the same way that the USSR, Chekoslovakia and The United Kingdom Of Great Britain and Ireland, have been "wiped off the map". That has been well understood in the media and has been clarified since last October many times.

Húrin

InFront wrote:

Im not one to defend Ahmedinejad, but this is a poltics forum and, particularly on an issue like this, its unfair to misrepresent people. I think its obvious that he meant wiping Israel off the map in the same way that the USSR, Chekoslovakia and The United Kingdom Of Great Britain and Ireland, have been "wiped off the map". That has been well understood in the media and has been clarified since last October many times.

Alright, so he wants to see the secular, democratic (if overly violent) government of Israel gone.

That's still pretty bad IMO.

Húrin

Mick86 wrote:

Would the anti-war movement be interested. It always strikes me that they just object to Israeli/ American/NATO sponsored wars.

I put it on www.indymedia.ie

I am prepared to be ripped to shreds. Why do some people think that one is anti-Muslim for opposing a terrorist group? Why do some people aim to "oppose America at all costs" to the point where they mute criticism of atrocities perpetrated by America's enemies?

New_Departure06

I think that while I am no fan of Iran or Hizbollah, that Israel deserves a military bloody nose to deter its warmongering and imperialism. So I won't attend such a protest.

H&#250

H&#250 wrote: »

I put it on www.indymedia.ie

I am prepared to be ripped to shreds. Why do some people think that one is anti-Muslim for opposing a terrorist group? Why do some people aim to "oppose America at all costs" to the point where they mute criticism of atrocities perpetrated by America's enemies?

Tens upon top of tens of thousands have died starving in Africa often as a result of wars and theres no mass protests or grumbling.
I'm of the firm view based on observing these things that you are not going to get many/any protests against Iran or Syria as its inconvenient to the bigger picture in the eyes of the anti war movement...

It could of course be viewed as both hypocrisy and partisanship.

As for war mongering,Israel are that,theres no doubt but I'm not so sure about the imperialist bit.Their stance on occupation has usually been for their own protection.They even appear to be moving away from that and want to outsource the occupation which is not being imperial.As someone else said its aggressive defensive behaviour which is actually not an uncommon trait in the human being.

I'd actually like to see what Israel would be like if they were let alone for ten years say.If their borders were defined and they did come to an agreement with Palestine...
Would Iran and Syria still fund and armour the disgruntled? Probably in my view.

LordSutch

Akrasia wrote:

Look, there were no (or very few) protests against unionist violence in Ireland during "the troubles" That does not mean that Irish people were not against unionist violance during "the troubles". It just means that there is no point in protesting against something that the everybody in the entire country is against, or something that we have absolutely no influence over.

I think you mean Loyalist violence, not Unionist!
There is a difference you know.

Mick86

InFront wrote:

Mottaki, Foreign Minister:[QUOTE]Nobody can remove a country from the map. This is a misunderstanding in Europe of what our president mentioned," Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference, speaking in English, after addressing the European Parliament.

"How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognize legally this regime," he said

The issue is that Ahmedinejad stated that he wants to wipe the citizens of Israel out. The land will obviously be needed for the Palestinians to recolonise. Also he is hardly likely to erase Jerusalem from the face of the earth. The Iranians are being disingenuous about a blatantly genocidal remark which incidentally the man repeated this week in Malaysia.

Although the main cure (to the situation) is the elimination of the Zionist regime, in this stage an immediate ceasefire should be implemented,"

You might also be interested in the following quotes from Hassan Nasrallah, Iran's man in Lebanon.

"if the Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide"

"It is an open war until the elimination of Israel and until the death of the last Jew on earth."

"There is no solution to the conflict in this region except with the disappearance of Israel."

Mick86

New_Departure06 wrote:

I think that while I am no fan of Iran or Hizbollah, that Israel deserves a military bloody nose to deter its warmongering and imperialism. So I won't attend such a protest.

Iran and Hezbollah are far greater warmongers than the Israelis. Israel obviously has no interest in building an empire by the way or it would have done so already. Lets try and have a sensible discussion and avoid the clichés. If you are genuinely anti-war you should protest against violence from both sides.

oscarBravo

Mick86 wrote:

The issue is that Ahmedinejad stated that he wants to wipe the citizens of Israel out.

Source, please.

Mick86 wrote:

The Iranians are being disingenuous about a blatantly genocidal remark which incidentally the man repeated this week in Malaysia.

...and again.

RedPlanet

There's no point in protesting outside the Iranian embassy just because they arm Hezb'Allah.
Iran themselves are not firing any missles at anybody.
If you decide to go that route, then you must surely protest outside the US embassy as they are arming Israel.

Húrin

New_Departure06 wrote:

I think that while I am no fan of Iran or Hizbollah, that Israel deserves a military bloody nose to deter its warmongering and imperialism. So I won't attend such a protest.

You're not a fan of Hezbollah, you only are hoping that they achieve their military goals?

Húrin

RedPlanet wrote:

If you decide to go that route, then you must surely protest outside the US embassy as they are arming Israel.

We did.

Mick86

oscarBravo wrote:

Source, please. ...and again.

Reuters

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/SP139983.htm

But it was Ahmadinejad, his hardline views on Israel reinvigorated by public backing from Iran's supreme clerical leader, who animated the emergency meeting as it strove to get the Muslim world's voice heard above the diplomatic din.

"Although the main cure (to the situation) is the elimination of the Zionist regime, in this stage an immediate ceasefire should be implemented," Ahmadinejad, who previously has said Israel should be wiped off the map, told the closed door meeting.

InFront

But that's nothing new - he'd like to get rid of the regime - that's not genocidal it's a legitimate political opinion. Whether you agree with it or not is your opinion, wanting to get rid of a government or an administration is not illegal.

Look, I think Ahmedinejad is an anti Semetic, but the comment you point to is obviously about a regime. Lets not exaggerate it. There is already enough propoganda coming from the news media (east and west) so lets not add to it on boards

InFront

InFront wrote:

wanting to get rid of a government or an administration is not illegal.

Wanting no.
Actioning yes.
Arming Hezbollah yes.

Húrin

My article was deleted from Indymedia despite breaking none of the rules.

here's your evidence. I would have thought that requiring evidence for Iran's supplying of Hezbollah would be equivalent to requiring evidence that the sky is blue!

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525807791&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/missile/index.html

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/19/news/missile.php

mr_angry

Earthman wrote:

Tens upon top of tens of thousands have died starving in Africa often as a result of wars and theres no mass protests or grumbling.
I'm of the firm view based on observing these things that you are not going to get many/any protests against Iran or Syria as its inconvenient to the bigger picture in the eyes of the anti war movement...

Yes, but outside of Nigeria, there's comparitively very little oil in Africa. Therefore our Western governments and media are happily prepared to ignore it. The reason the whole middle east thing is getting so much attention is because the West desperately needs Israel as an ally in the region so that they can assert their own influence and keep the oil flowing. If there was no oil, the Western governments would happily let every little tribe / country butcher each other until kingdom come*.


*Sorry, accidental potential Zionist phraseology there.

Mick86

InFront wrote:

But that's nothing new - he'd like to get rid of the regime -...

He referred to the Zionist regime not the Israeli government. Zionism is the ideology that supports a Jewish homeland in Israel. By Zionist regime, in my opinion, he means that Jewish homeland.

I would also question the legality of advocating the removal of a democratically elected government by the way. But as I said I don't think that's what he meant.

Mick86

H&#250 wrote: »

My article was deleted from Indymedia despite breaking none of the rules.

here's your evidence. I would have thought that requiring evidence for Iran's supplying of Hezbollah would be equivalent to requiring evidence that the sky is blue!

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525807791&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/missile/index.html

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/19/news/missile.php

Shocking.:D

Mick86

mr_angry wrote:

Yes, but outside of Nigeria, there's comparitively very little oil in Africa.....

There's no oil in Israel or Lebanon either.

New_Departure06

Mick86 wrote:

Iran and Hezbollah are far greater warmongers than the Israelis. Israel obviously has no interest in building an empire by the way or it would have done so already. Lets try and have a sensible discussion and avoid the clichés. If you are genuinely anti-war you should protest against violence from both sides.

They are already building an empire in the West bank through their illegal settlements which the US media largely covers up. Did you know CNN has a policy of calling the settlements "Jewish neighbourhoods"? Hence when they talk about a Hamas attack on an illegal Jewish colony on occupied land, they refer to it as an attack on a "Jewish neighbourhood" which is a blatently misleading portrayal. They have been bullied by the pro-Israel lobby in the US into sanitising langauge in this way. The settlements are an attempt by Israel to wreck the prospects of a viable Palestinian state. Even the 'generous' Barak plan would have left water-supplies and air-space under Israeli control, along with the West Bank's borders and Gaza's coastline. A huge volume of the settlements were also to remain bang in the middle of the West Bank, such that Israeli army checkpoints protecting them would divide the Palestinian state into a serious of 'islands' of territories that would not be contiguous. It would be like encountering British checkpoints to protect British settlements between say Dublin and Kildare etc. The Palestinians could never have accepted such a joke of a deal, which is probably which Israel proposed it.

The Intifada began with Sharon's provocative visit to the Temple Mount with a large security entourage. It was not, unlike what the pro-Israel crowd claimed, ordered by Arafat. When Israel left Gaza, it continued bombing it and killed 19 civilians on the beach. Maybe this was Olmert seeking to provoke a confrontation there so he could go back in (it wasn't Olmert who decided on the withdrawl). Hence we saw the capture of Cpl. Gilad Shalit. Everything has to be seen in context.

Mick86

New_Departure06 wrote:

They are already building an empire in the West bank through their illegal settlements which the US media largely covers up.....

If you want to go back far enough these problems began as soon as Jews began to move back to Palestine in the 19th century.The excuse of Sharon visiting the Temple Mount is fairly feeble. It's a Jewish holy site as well as a Muslim one. Four West Bank settlements were closed in 2005 at the same time as the Gaza Strip settlements. The reward for evacuating Gaza was an increase in terrorist attacks on Israel. The Palestinians have acted in bad faith as they always will.

However Israel has a serious PR problem. It is always presented as the aggressor by it's neighbours and by it's western enemies. Israel should bite the bullet, evacuate the West Bank, Gaza and Chebaa Farms and demand the UN secure these areas. Likewise the Golan should be occupied by a UN force. This should remove any excuse for attacking Israel.

New_Departure06

If you want to go back far enough these problems began as soon as Jews began to move back to Palestine in the 19th century.The excuse of Sharon visiting the Temple Mount is fairly feeble. It's a Jewish holy site as well as a Muslim one. Four West Bank settlements were closed in 2005 at the same time as the Gaza Strip settlements. The reward for evacuating Gaza was an increase in terrorist attacks on Israel. The Palestinians have acted in bad faith as they always will.

Those West Bank settlements were dismantled while the expansion of other settlements continued rapidly. Also the dismantled ones were little more than isolated and small outposts. The Gaza withdrawal was followed by continued Israeli Air Force bombing raids and Israeli "targeted killings", and the slaughter of 19 Palestinians on a beach in Gaza. This led to the capture of the Israeli soldiers. So it's not quite as simple as you make out.

Húrin

Mick86 wrote:

Shocking.:D

Seriously, the first reply I got to my article was "where's the proof that Iran is arming Hezbollah???" Where's the proof that the sky is blue??

mike65

H&#250 wrote: »

My article was deleted from Indymedia despite breaking none of the rules.

I just went looking for it and yep its gone. I trust you are e-mailing the leftist cabal who run the site.

I just e-mailed them.

Mike.

InFront

H&#250 wrote: »

Seriously, the first reply I got to my article was "where's the proof that Iran is arming Hezbollah???"

Seriously? Wow.

No, seriously. Show us the proof. Your earlier links (Jerusalem post, FAS (political group) and an article saying "we have no proof") does not constitute proof. I believe there is Iranian involvement with the terrorists, dont get me wrong, but actively arming them - wheres the proof? And Im not talking about FAS...

InFront

InFront wrote:

Seriously? Wow.

No, seriously. Show us the proof. Your earlier links (Jerusalem post, FAS (political group) and an article saying "we have no proof") does not constitute proof. I believe there is Iranian involvement with the terrorists, dont get me wrong, but actively arming them - wheres the proof? And Im not talking about FAS...

You believe theres Iranian involvement?
Your statement has the tone of it being a tiny involvement...
How about these guys opinion ? That unbiased enough for you?

http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=3&id=5884

And

http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=1&id=5651

InFront

Earthman wrote:

You believe theres Iranian involvement?
Your statement has the tone of it being a tiny involvement...
How about these guys opinion ? That unbiased enough for you?

http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=3&id=5884

And

http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=1&id=5651

It does not have the tone of a 'tiny' involvement. I for one am not so self confident as some, to say that I can prove the what the rest of the world cannot prove, including the UN and The USA - The extent of Iranian involvement with Hezbollah and whether or not Iran is actively arming Hezbollah, as Hurin has claimed to have proven. It has never been proven, by anyone.

There are close ties between Hezbollah and Iran and Syria. Since the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon earlier on in the year the Iranian involvement has probably gotten stronger. But I feel what is being suggested is that Iran (especially) is being targeted as Hezbollah in the pro-israeli side to take advantage of a weakness in the Western mind that is automatically suspicious of an Islamic state. Much of this is propaganda in my opinion.

What about Bonyad-e Shahid, one member (Fayad) is supposed to have sent around 50 million dollars to Hezbollah from his fundraising in South America. People are forgetting, or ignoring, that whatever the Iranian involvement is, there is much more going on than that. If Israel and Syria were wiped off the map (in terms of the respective regimes:rolleyes: ), there would still be a Hezbollah. How much, a value, that Hezbollah would be effected - nobody knows - there is no proof of how they are being supported by Iran and Syria. None.

Earthman, with respect, your links do not prove that Iran is arming Hezbollah. You might take that opinion from reading the last link to Asharq Al-awsat, but it is certainly nowhere near proof. The first article is a homepage for the paper , the second article an interesting read on the history of Hezbollah and the third is from an unnamed source that provides zero evidence to back up his claims. You have to be careful about who you believe in a war, especially if a source making very serious accusations is unnamed and there is consistent failure to prove his claims. The history of Iranian extremism with Hezbollah in the early 80s and again in more recent years is very inviting as 'proof', but unfortunately it does not equate to proof at all, no matter how much you bend and twist it.

So, Im not saying don't boycott Iran, in fact, bicycling can be good for the mind as well as the heart. What I am saying is that people who are throwing around claims of 'proof' or claiming that oh it's so obvious that proof isn't even required (so dont ask for it) have very hollow arguments. Personally, I dont like Iran, but Im not going to make claims about them that I can't back up with credible evidence.

You might remember the the last time we applied "it must be so" style proof to an Arab nation. And yet as Scott Ritter later told us, all of what Saddam had once had come to to rust and waste.

Mick86

New_Departure06 wrote:

Those West Bank settlements were dismantled while the expansion of other settlements continued rapidly. Also the dismantled ones were little more than isolated and small outposts. The Gaza withdrawal was followed by continued Israeli Air Force bombing raids and Israeli "targeted killings", and the slaughter of 19 Palestinians on a beach in Gaza. This led to the capture of the Israeli soldiers. So it's not quite as simple as you make out.

The attacks from Gaza did not stop despite a complete Israeli withdrawal. Naturally the Israelis retaliated against those attacks. No matter what concessions are given to teh Palestinians the will not buy peace.

Mick86

H&#250 wrote: »

Seriously, the first reply I got to my article was "where's the proof that Iran is arming Hezbollah???" Where's the proof that the sky is blue??

What did you expect? Indymedia, the anti-war movements and Palestine support groups operate to an agenda and with an automatic anti-Israeli, anti-American bias. They will not protest against Israel's enemies.

mike65

Heres the reply I got from indymedia

Hi

From your mail I have little idea of what you are
talking about as you provide neither a publication
date, author or title of the piece you claim was
'pulled.'

I can only guess the article you refer to was one
submitted by an autor called Ian and titled 'Protest
outside Iranian Embassy?' The reasons given for its
hiding in our editorial archive (note: you too can
join and view all editorial actions at
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-ireland-editorial)
was one I agree with, and was as follows: 'not
news/info in any shape, not an analysis, just a
question.'

So it was in breach of guideline 8 which encourages
people not to engage in the 'Asking of questions -
particular or general questions without any other
content' or in posting articles that consist of
'articles which consist entirely of unsubstantiated
opinions or personal musings without any supporting
evidence or other content.'

Mike.

InFront

Mick86 wrote:

.... operate to an agenda and with an automatic anti-Israeli, anti-American bias. They will not protest against Israel's enemies.

"Mr Fisk, are you on some kind of a crusade?"

lostexpectation

hurin your posting was weak, nothing better then any other smartarse could have said, you have to work at it much harder than that if your serious about it, go ahead and protest outside the Iranian place and then it will be news.