What we Learned in the Halls of Berkeley!

Bradley Braston:

...Muslims should be able to worship without other Muslims blowing them to mist. Muslim children should be able to go to school and back without other Muslims shattering their bodies with automatic gun fire. Muslim women should be able to live life without worrying that their husbands are within their rights if they beat and threaten to kill them.

And we, as non-Muslims, should be able to say something about it.

Not a simple issue. Especially for those of us Jews and leftists who were educated at places like Berkeley, where we received our degrees in Selective Blindness, with a minor in Understanding the Roots of Violence When Practiced by Muslims.

We were taught to sniff out, publicize and condemn every instance of racism, violence, injustice and humiliation practiced by Israeli Jews against Palestinian Muslims. And that was as it should be. But we were also taught that it was racist to impose our Western values on the acts of Muslims - even, or especially, when it came to the most extreme of Muslims. We can, with facility, therefore, comprehend all Muslim atrocities against Muslims in Iraq as the direct, understandable and legitimate response to the American-British occupation.

We were taught wrong.

We can understand terrorism in Bali, in London, against the Twin Towers, as an outgrowth of anger over American expansionism and Israeli military repression.

We were taught wrong.

There are, of course, many Jews whose selective blindness works in the other direction, condemning Muslims at every opportunity, as though that makes wrongdoing by Jews eminently forgivable and forgettable. As though we are somehow made moral by the moral failings of our neighbors.

This is what we should have been taught: Violations of human rights are violations of human rights, regardless of the cultural background of the perpetrator, regardless of the background of the victim.

This is what we should have retained: One way to demonstrate compassion for victims is to stop showing sensitivity to their tormentors. Even if both are Muslims. Because it's our business to cry out. Because the victims are human beings. Because villains deserve to be denounced.

We were taught to feel guilt, when we should have been taught that wrongdoing is the work of the wrongdoer.


...In the end, those of us who excuse Muslim fanatics their outrages against their own, those of us who explain away their crimes by blaming them on the West, or on ourselves, are guilty of racism as well. We are saying, in effect, that they cannot be considered responsible for their actions, as would any other human being.

We are saying, in effect, that we made them who they are.

We are saying, in effect, that the suicide bomber who kills his own lacks the ability to discern right and wrong. We are also saying, in effect, that they can do what they like, to their own.

There is racism in our view, and megalomania, and arrogance, and cowardice, and weakness. Terrorists know this. They feed on it.

They were taught well.

Read more!

Punishing Masochists!

Price of adventurism
Amir Rostam Begli Beigie
March 31, 2007


Tony Blair is paying the price for getting rid of an able Foreign Secretary and replacing him with an incompetent yes-woman. If it wasn't for how dangerous the situation has become it would have been comical to watch how the British Oxbridge-educated political elite squirm in the hands of the ex-Islamic Student Society geeks and thugs.

The problem facing the British and the West in general is that they have no way of punishing masochists. Instead they seem to be giving vent to their anger which is playing into the hands of Iranian regime.

What the West must realise is that the current rulers of Iran positively welcome foreign threats for a multitude of reasons. The Foremost is the survival of a regime that is loathed by its own populace. It has since its inception depended on sustaining confrontation.

Yet the above fairly simple point seems to have been lost on generations of policymakers in the West, particularly in the case of Americans, when dealing with rogue states. Almost certainly, the Castro regime in Cuba has lasted far longer than it would otherwise because of the siege imposed by Washington. Conspiracy theorist will argue that it is on purpose rather than incompetence...more

Read more!

Iranian Rap: Rezaya & Nazgol (Watch it; it's so cute!)

Read more!

Déjà vu

The latest hostage crisis continues to unfold as I expected.

After the failure to secure UN condemnation of Iran’s action, the Times reports that the EU has refused to impose sanctions on Iran. As I've indicated many times in my posts, Iran is EU's client state. The EU is single-handedly responsible for survival and prolongation of the Islamist Iran reign of terror. Germany is Iran's largest trading partner. According to Spiegel online, forty-eight percent of Germans think that the United States is more dangerous than Iran with only 31 percent believing the opposite.

France, Iran's second-largest trading partner wants more pathetic dialogue with a bunch of politically and emotionally immature thugs who can only think of short-term solutions to hold on to power by engineering crisis after crisis since their usurpation of power in 1979.

Contrast this with the confrontational chutzpah of the Islamist Iranians (aka TAZI meaning Raiders in English; this is name given to Isamo/arabs after wiping out Iranian civilization and imposing Islam on Iranians by the sword). As the BBC reports today, Iran's ambassador to Russia has said that the British servicemen could face trial for violating international law. "It is possible that the British soldiers who entered into Iranian waters will go on trial for taking this illegal action," Gholamreza Ansari told Russian television channel Vesti-24.

Given the state of popular opinion (manufactured by disinformation and propaganda) in Iran, what do we think the outcome of such a show trial might be? As that Times piece says: "In Iran tens of thousands of football fans reportedly chanted “Death to England” while tourists burnt an effigy of Mr Blair dressed as a pirate."

In other words, our lack of will has emboldened our enemies beyond the point of considering the release of their hostages. They are now hinting at the possibility of keeping them a lot longer. Sound familiar?! They've done this in 1979 and have gotten away with it absolutely unpunished, so why stop now.

Ahmad Khatami, one of Iran's theocrats views this fiasco this way:

Today, Britain is a failed, isolated power who acts as a middleman for America. If they continue their bullying they will pay a high price. This Iran is a great Islamic and powerful Iran who is standing against America, who is the master of Britain.

Anyone still think the Iranians are intimidated by our (non-existent) "ratcheting up" of rhetoric?

Read more!

Remember Passover

Photo: One of many Jewish Synagogues in Iran, Shiraz. This one is
in the area of Jolfa.



Happy Passover to all my Jewish-Persian friends. This year we can celebrate Pesach (Passover) with our newly elected Mayor of Beverly Hills, Jimmy Delshad who makes us all proud. May Pesach be filled with happy times for everyone and may the joys you share remain throughout the year.


More info on Jewish-Persians here.

Read more!

Religion of Peace!

Read more!

The Suspended Spider*

The Suspended Spider*

By Javaid Zeerak

There is a common thread running throughout Camus’ and Dostoevsky’s writings. Widely accepted as prime examples of literary existentialism along with Sartre’s works, the message that these two authors’ writings deliver is one that emphasizes the utter meaninglessness of life (in its objective sense) and the futility of human beings’ struggle to fill this void of meaning. The solutions that they offer for this situation –though slightly different- share some very basic common elements.

From where these two authors look at man and the universe, they see a sorrowful sight. They see man thrown –or rather abandoned- into this world, without having asked for it. Once here, he finds himself faced with a cold and uncaring universe. Longing for a meaning for his life, he is again faced with the same coldness and indifference. It slaps him in the face wherever he turns it. He feels his life is absurd and meaningless, and as such, objectively valueless.

I believe Camus’ absurd man (and eventually his absurd hero) and Dostoevsky’s underground-man have both experienced the experience of nothingness. This experience is central and essential to an individual’s attaining of the existentialist attitude that ultimately leads him to molding a value for his life out of void. The experience of nothingness –the source of human predicament- is a rather new phenomenon (it is noteworthy that "the experience of nothingness" is not the same thing as "nihilism" but two completely different phenomena- this is explained later.)

The source of the experience of nothingness can be traced back to man himself. "The source of the experience [of nothingness] lies in man’s unstructured, relentless drive to ask questions." It is by means of this "drive to ask questions" that the modern man shatters all the myths surrounding him. He starts asking questions about everything, and very infrequently he finds satisfying answers to these questions. This is how his world of "synthetic values" crumbles. Often he conducts this inquiry with himself alone- thinking. It is to this kind of inquiry that Camus refers as "thinking" when he says: "Beginning to think is beginning to be undermined." Thus modern man while thinking to himself, asking questions, and doubting society’s myths, begins to undermine himself.

Suddenly he finds himself in a dark vacuum. Man’s situation is most interesting at this juncture. I like to think of man at this moment as a spider in an empty and dark dungeon- not falling, yet suspended without support. I think all of us, all the humanity, everyone, has the situation of this spider suspended from nowhere, in that dark dungeon with no bottom and no top. I am tempted to analogize the universe to this dungeon that has no bottom and no top and is void of both light and gravity, and where man (the spider) is suspended helpless and hanging and not supported by anything.

Once man has shattered the myths that were supporting him and giving him a sense of direction and a foothold, he experiences nothingness. When he sees that all his supports were artifices and synthesized by himself he realizes that they too like himself are suspended in the dark: god, law, values, norms, and all the other myths. He realizes that all along he had been putting his trust on things that were as unreliable and as vulnerable as his own situation. He is disheartened when he finds that all along he had been involved in a game of make-believe…

All else in the existentialist thought follow from here and from this moment of truth: man is faced with a tremendous choice- to look up or to look down it is all the same. There is no up and no down, no top and no bottom. But to let oneself remain where one is and as one is, is against man’s nature. It is not comfortable for man to realize everything and choose to do nothing. For his own sake, and to lend value to his life he must imagine the world a cylindrical shape with a top and bottom. He must invent a sense of dimension and direction for himself. And so he makes his universe in the image of a cylinder, with a top and a bottom. He makes it such that from the top a slight stream of light is shining through, and he imagines the bottom scary and never ending and empty. Man thus gives himself the most important choice of his life, to ascend to light, or to let go and fall in a never-ending fall.

The moment that man has imagined the world as a cylinder with a top letting in some light and a bottom without a bottom, he is past the experience of nothingness. The universe once again has a comprehensible shape and he has once again invented a myth; a new and completely different one, but still a myth. He can say where he stands, and he can choose where he goes. The world is not as frightening as it was when he began to ask questions. The spider can cling to life again.
Camus’ absurd hero and Dostoevsky’s underground man are both like the spider in the dungeon. They have experienced the experience of nothingness, and they have seen how utterly meaningless life is. This moment of harsh truth determines the hero. According to Camus, the absurd hero is he who out of this void imagines the world a cylinder and tries to move upwards, in the direction of the light. He does not necessarily get closer –every time Sisyphus rolls the rock back to the top he is not necessarily approaching the end of his unending labor- but he has made his life meaningful.

For the sake of this thought experiment, I imagine the top as the end that is attainable through existentialist attitude, and the bottom a nihilistic end. Man who has experienced nothingness and shattered all his myths finds himself on a four-way crossroad. If he lets go of everything and falls a non-ending fall to the bottom, he has chosen nihilism. If he decides to kill himself and thus ruin the absurd, he has acted cowardly. If he decides to stay where he is –suspended in void- he has committed what Camus calls "philosophical suicide" and is even more cowardly. What Camus and Dostoevsky have both favored in their writing is the way upwards.
This is the way to absurd heroism: to struggle towards the light, and at the same time as realizing that the distance remains the same, never give up: To rebel against one’s fate, and prove oneself superior to it, to endeavor upwards with a constant reasonless passion. This is the only way one can give meaning to a life that has no objective meaning. This is how one can imagine Sisyphus happy: "The struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart." Everything is in the struggle itself. The struggle of the life itself is its meaning. To not surrender, to choose not to fall, to choose not to stay idle, to choose not to kill oneself, to wickedly defy fate, and to constantly rebel, is the attitude favored by both Camus and Dostoevsky in relation to the absurd. This is how one can find values in void and meaning in absurd.

Ruining the absurd would be senseless; one is given one’s existence in this universe to prove oneself worthy of it. Giving up is not an option. The only way an objectively meaningless and valueless life can be given a meaning and a value is by subjectively living it. One does not find the meaning of life, one lives it out. Meaning of life is not a reachable destination, it is a traversable highway. Meaning of life is not in an end, it is found in the process itself.
Absurd hero lives the meaning of his life.
*
The original title of this article was "Meaning in the Meaningless", but my philosophy professor preferred the lighter title -the suspended spider- that I took out of a metaphore used in the article.

Visit Javaid Zeerk's blog here. He is a blogger from Afghanistan.

Read more!

U.N.'s Utter Disregard for Human Rights in Iran and Uzbakistan

From NCRI:

The Iranian Resistance strongly condemns the decision by the U.N. Human Rights Council not to monitor the systematic and flagrant violation of human rights by a regime which is the world’s record holder of execution in Iran. The decision is the disgraceful domination of the Council by the countries which are themselves notorious violators of human rights and it is a catastrophe for human rights. In 2002, the same countries prevented the UN Human Rights Commission from condemning the Iranian regime’s human rights violations. Half of the members of a special committee which was formed to examine Iran’s human rights’ violations have abysmal records in human rights violations.

Only three months ago, in December 2006, The UN General Assembly adopted a strongly worded resolution, condemning the human rights violations by the Iranian regime. Therefore, yesterday’s vote by the members of the Council is contrary to the decision made by the highest international body. It farther indicates that the members of the Council in no way represent the international community.

The U.N. council’s action amounts to an endorsement of crackdowns on human rights in Iran and Uzbekistan. It shows utter disregard for the human rights activists who are struggling in these countries.

Read more!

Victor David Hanson on Dennis Miller Radio

Listen to the show on MP3

Read Dr. Hanson’s take on the Iran hostage situation over at Pajamas Media:

Jimmy Carter established the Western precedent, amplified by Ronald Reagan in the arms-for-hostages deals, that there is almost nothing a Western government won’t do to retrieve its kidnapped citizens. Now we see his ripples, as Iran promises to release the female soldier. If there are any minorities among the 15, expect them to follow as in 1979. Iran has “issues” with plenty of other governments. Why not kidnap a Russian diplomat in protest of cessation of fissionable material? The cynic answers that Russian assassination squads and worse might be turned loose.
Iran is betting that that a guilt-ridden and exhausted British public—scolded for decades over its past in Persia, furious at the Iraq war of “Blair-Bush,” having gutted the British military for social programs that bring demands for more rather
than gratitude—won’t or can’t do anything.

Read more!

The NewsHour (TV Program) Last night!

IAN CUTHBERTSON, a former analyst in the British Foreign Office.
" No, the British are not Italian. They don't make deals to release hostages. It's possible that, if the sailors were released, then a few weeks and months from now the Iranians may be released, but I don't see a quid pro quo situation."




John Pike from GlobalSecurity.org
"The problem...is that nobody went into this expecting that they were going to have to producecourtroom-quality evidence to back up their claims."



Karim Sadjadpour from Carnegie Endowment for Int'l Peace
"You see this almost mood of schizophrenia out of Tehran, that on one day, they're talking about one thing, a diplomatic resolution to the nuclear issue, and then another day you see the taking of British sailors detained."


Three analyists discuss the British hostage situation on "The NewsHour", PBS. Read the whole transcript here.

Read more!

Britain to Iran: " Have no Fear".

photo of American Hostages kept for 444 by the Khomeinist regime in 1979 (This incident is called by many the "Second Revolution" of 1979)

From the LONDON (AFX) ("Whole Series of Measures") came the following:

British Prime Minister Tony Blair has warned Iran that thereis a "whole series of measures" that could be taken to pressure the Islamic republic to hand over 15 British navy detainees. "What we have to do in a very firm way, is step up the pressure," he told ITV television, as British sought an agreement on a United Nations Security Council statement about the dispute. "The next step is the UN statement. There's a whole series of measures we can take," he added, giving no further details. "We are going to have to step up pressure not just with them in the UN and the European Union, but see what further measures are necessary to get them to understand it's not merely wrong but only going to result in further tension so it's sensible to resolve it now.

The Security Council's statement was a watered-down version of a stronger draft sought by Britain to "deplore" Iranian actions and urge the immediate release of the prisoners, primarily because Russia opposed putting blame on the Tehran regime.

"I'm not interested in confrontation for its own sake, the most important thing is to get 15 personnel back safe and sound."

"The important thing is we just keep making it very, very clear to the Iranian government it is not a situation that will be relieved by anything but the unconditional release of all our people," Blair said.

"There's no alternative but to release them and the longer it goes on, the more the pressure will be stepped up.

"I think we should take this a day at a time at the moment," Blair added.

Blair's official spokesman said Britain wanted to resolve the crisis quickly and without having a "confrontation over this." "We are not seeking to put Iran in a corner.

We are simply saying, 'Please release the personnel who should not have been seized in the first place,'" said the spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with government policy.

While Tony Blair is livid by another letter apparently written by Turney call in for withdrawal of British troops from Iraq and dictating British foreign policy, some of these British officials (anonymous sources) are indicating to the Iranians quite openly that they have nothing to fear in the way of British reprisals whatsoever. I should also add for the umpteen times that Mr. Blair's (or any other Western leaders and appeasers) stated reliance on Iranian regard for "international law" is simply a stupid joke. The Iranian regime has not changed a bit since 1979, if anything, they have become bolder and more sophisticated in manipulating and deceiving Western leaders and media.

The message so far to the mafiaso running Iran is this: Give us back our marines. But, if you don't, so be it - you have nothing to fear.

This is ominously starting to look like the 1979 hostage crisis. Apparently both the UN Secretary-General and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana have held talks with Iran on the issue. But Iran has refused to release the 15 British personnel until Britain apologises for the alleged incursion. I have little doubt that this seizure was planned by the IR rather than being the action of an impulsive local commander. A few days earlier, speaking of the impending United Nations Security Council vote that condemned Tehran for its nuclear stance, Khamenei had declared that such a vote would be "illegal" and that Iran's response could therefore be similarly "illegal".

What so bemusing is that the IRI has never tried to hide its actions and intentions. They are quite open about their goals in their Constitution and their actions in regards to spreading their revolution and defeating the arrogant powers since they came to power in 1979.

“an advisor to the new Iranian govt says his country’s objective is the destruction of the evil in the world perpetuated by England and the nations derived from England”
“The [Iranians] President’s chief strategist, Hassan Abbassi, has come up with a war plan based on the premise that “Britain is the mother of all evils” – the evils being America, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, the Gulf states and even Canada, all of whom are the malign progeny of the British Empire. “We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization,” says Mr Abbassi. “There are 29 sensitive sites in the U.S. and in the West. We have already spied on these sites and we know how we are going to attack them… Once we have defeated the Anglo-Saxons the rest will run for cover.””

They waited for their chance, and when it came they took it. They can now shore up their failing legitimacy by parading the hostages around, much as they did back in 1979.

And if the British decide to take military action, such military action will only galvanize that the 10 million Basiji into martyrdom.

This incident, then, isn't about humiliating The West; it's about a shaky regime attempting to maintain its grip on power and shift the domestic attention of its fed up citizens from horrendous economic and social problems to external enemies. The regime has no other goal but to perpetuate its existence in any shape or form.

Iran has had enough time by now to act as a reasonable nation would and release the British sailors without making a creepy show of their captivity. But apparently an international provocation and a war are just what the Islamic Republic is itching for.

With this new crop of hostages, Allah now has his meal-ticket and the thug-in-chief and his military junta (IRGC & Quods) will have their "third revolution".Like the hostages in '79-'80, this show is just going to go on and on and on.

Read more!

Blaming The British Hostages!

From Harry's Place:

Put aside for a moment the almost-certainly coerced "confession" of trespassing and praise for her captors from British seaman Faye Turney.
Consider how easily and reflexively a couple of the antiwar movement's leading lights blame the victims.

Former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan turned Stop the War Coalition star attraction Craig Murray writes on his blog that Iran was fully justified "in detaining foreign military personnel in waters to which they have a legitimate claim" and "[t]he Iranians can feel content that they have demonstrated the ability to exercise effective sovereignty over the waters they claim."
Having done this, said Murray (apparently unaware that one of the captives is a woman), "the Iranian authorities, their point made, should now hand the men back immediately."
The official Islamic Republic News Agency liked at least some of Murray's comments enough to publish a carefully-edited version of them.

Now Murray is claiming:

The Iran/Iraq maritime boundary shown on the British government map does not exist. It has been drawn up by the British Government. Only Iraq and Iran can agree their bilateral boundary, and they never have done this in the Gulf, only inside the Shatt because there it is the land border too. This published boundary is a fake with no legal force.

So because Iran and Iraq haven't agreed on a boundary in the Gulf, Iran has a right to seize any ship in what it unilaterally declares its territorial waters?

Can anyone who knows anything about the Law of the Sea make sense of Murray's claims?

[snip]

Whether or not the British sailors were in Iranian waters is disputed. But what is not in dispute is that Britain has joined the US in pouring warships into the Gulf while pressuring and threatening Iran.

Not a word of sympathy or concern for the sailors or their families.
Everywhere you go this week, make sure people are asking: what on earth are British gunboats doing in Iraqi or Iranian waters in a place called the Arabian or Persian Gulf thousands of miles from home?
In case Galloway really doesn't know, they are operating under a United Nations mandate. But after the sickening video of Faye Turney, I have a feeling that's not what people are going to be asking.

David T adds
Philosopher-king, Chris Bertram says:
I found Murray's discussion of the problem of maritime boundaries - in which he draws on his own experience of negotiations - very interesting. His point about the detention being correct is simply that any state that allowed "trespassers" over disputed territory to which it was laying claim would be in danger of making a concession in the dispute. A token interception and rebuke is just the diplomatic equivalent of a Tom-cat spraying - Murray is saying this it was OK for the Iranians to do that, but stupid and excessive and escalatory for them to do more. ...AFAICS there has been no detailed attempt to refute Murray's claims in this thread or anywhere else, by anyone who actually knows what they are talking about. Instead, there's the usual bunch of blowhards calling people names.

Another Brett responds:
I've done a bit of research on this boundary issue and Galloway and Murray are wrong. While it is true that the maritime borders are not demarcated, the baselines used by Iran to determine its maritime borders are not accepted by any other country in the Gulf and contravene the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Seas. Iran is a signatory to the Convention and is obliged to obey it under international law. If there is an argument over the boundary, as Murray claims, then the IRGC units are as guilty as the British navy in entering disputed waters.

Murray is absolutely wrong - the maritime borders were not imposed by the British government, they were drawn up by the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein. The present Iraqi government has accepted the territorial borders demarcated by the Saddam regime. As foreign forces are there on a UN mandate, they are obliged to defend Iraqi territory.

Even if one accepts the Iranian boundary, Iran is still not permitted to arrest these personnel. If the military forces or civilians of another state violate territorial waters, the first action by the Iranian would be to ask them to leave. These kind of border violations are usually solved by border officials, not by gunboats. Iran has previously abided by this convention by requesting that Azerbaijani boats crossing into territorial waters claimed by Iran in the Caspian Sea leave the area, which they do. Murray should know this, having worked as a diplomat in the region. Moreover, the naval personnel were not belligerent - their light weaponry could not even be used to take out one IRGC boat.

Iran does have a defence, if its territorial claims could be backed by international law (which does not appear to be the case). While military units do have the right to innocent passage through territorial waters, the British naval personnel were not in the process of passage and Iran could argue that they were not innocent. Nevertheless, they would still be obliged to request the personnel to leave in the first instance.
The rights and the wrongs of the Iraq War do not enter into the equations. If Murray and Galloway want to justify these arrests by supporting Iran's spurious legal claims, they are going to lose the argument. Moreover, it makes you wonder whether they are simply spokesmen for a corrupt and despotic regime.

It is surprising that Murray - who rightly condemned Uzbekistan's atrocious human rights record and the practice of rendition - would seek to defend a regime with an atrocious human rights record and which kidnaps and assassinates civilians living abroad.

Read more!

Iranian Basiji: 15 British Aggressors Must be Executed

The Sign above reads: " Don't Release the Scarecrows"; and "This is how defeat looks like ".



photo by CNN


Who are the Basiji? Basij (also Bassij or Baseej, Persian: بسيج‎), is an Islamic Republic paramilitary force that was founded by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in November of 1979 to provide volunteers for "human wave" defensive attacks in the Iran-Iraq War. The Basij are currently a branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Basij commander Brigadier General Mohammad Hejazi estimated the number of Basij personnel at 10.3 million in March 2004 and 11 million in March 2005. On 14 September 2005 he said that the Basij has more than 11 million members across the country. Russian news sources have claimed Iran has plans to make a third ground force consisting of one million basij members. However these plans have not been confirmed by Iran.[1]
Basij forces often undertake general security checks in urban areas such as setting up street inspection posts to intercept drug smuggling and potential terrorism, although the number of Basij check points dramatically decreased after the Iran-Iraq war and following the disarmament of MKO in Iraq. According to the Jordan Institute of Diplomacy and GlobalSecurity.org Basij forces also enforce Iran's Islamic codes together with other law enforcement entities. The Basij has a quasi-decentralised network with branches in almost every Iranian mosque.[1][2]

Human rights issues

The Basij have been criticised as belonging to the paramilitary forces using child soldiers because of their underage recruitment practices and for having relied extensively on "human wave" defensive attacks during the Iran-Iraq War, particularly around Basra.[1][2][3] Many were used as cannon fodder and for mine-clearing martyrdom. [2]
Following the UNHCR "tens of thousands of Basijis had been ordered to prowl about every factory, office and school to ensure that everyone adhered to the Islamic code. [...] After the summer 1992 riots Basij units were revived, rearmed and sent out into the streets to help enforce Islamic law. The Basijis are reportedly under the control of local mosques. It was further said that the Basijis set up checkpoints around the cities and stopped cars to sniff their occupant's breath for alcohol and check for women wearing make-up or travelling with a man not their close relative or husband. It was reported that the Law of Judicial Support for the Basijis, published in the Official Gazette No. 13946 of 8.10.1371 (December 1992), provided no redress against arbitrary detention by the Basijis." Iran's permanent representative to the U.N. denied these charges.[4]
Amnesty International tells that "investigations by Parliament and the National Security Council indicated that actions by Revolutionary Guard officials and Basij (Mobilization) forces, among others, precipitated the unrest and injuries following the July 1999 students demonstrations".[5]

In July 1999, Ezzat Ebrahim-Nejad was shot dead in Tehran University dormitory by a member of Basij military force. The event initiated a huge demonstration.

Source: Wikipedia

Read more!

daily consciousness tune-up

"What you see is what you get."

NOT!

Unfortunately, we fixate on material proof and tangible results to justify our spiritual work. However, there is no time, space and motion in the 99% realm, and therefore, no waiting in line, no money, and no need for travel. Everything you need exists in the here and now.

In what ways are you too attached to the outcome of your efforts in life? Spend time today detaching - focus on the process and not the end result.

source: kabbalah

Read more!

Delerium--Euphoria (Firefly)

Read more!

Safrang

Photo by Javaid Zeerak

Read more!

Divestment: Will California Take On the Mullahs?

PJM:
The divestment tool, often used by enemies of the state of Israel, may now be used by the state of California against Iran’s mullahs. Iranian-American filmmaker Ardeshir Arian has the story direct from “Tehrangeles” for Pajamas Media.

by Ardeshir Arian

MARCH 28 - Today California will become the first state to decide whether or not it will continue to do business with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The State Assembly will hear proposed legislation (AB-221) by Republican Joel Anderson of El Cajon, and Democrat Jose Solorio of Anaheim that will require state pension funds to divest from companies that do business with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Iranian-American community and many exiled Iranians are supporting this legislation. Several prominent Iranian-American activists have announced they will testify in support of AB-221, and Iranian groups as far away as Sweden and Turkey are backing the measure. Support for the bill has also come from the Prince of Iran, Reza Pahlavi but it is opposed by William Reinsch, Undersecretary of Commerce during the Clinton administration. IRI promoters and apologists like the NIAC are also opposing the legislation. (National Iranian American Council).
The California initiative is the nation’s first, and has inspired similar action in Massachusetts, Maryland, Georgia, Ohio and Missouri.
CBS “60 minutes” stated on January 4, “Just about everyone with a 401(k) pension plan or mutual fund has money invested in companies that are doing business in so-called rogue states”. California’s colossal state pension funds, CalPERS and CalSTRS, have invested about $24 billion in hundreds of companies doing business with the Islamic Republic of Iran, according to figures released by private consulting group Conflict Securities.
On a federal level, Representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R - FL), and Tom Lantos (D - CA) introduced legislation a few weeks ago that would require all U.S. government pension funds to divest stocks of companies that have invested more than $20 million in the Islamic Republic’s oil and gas sector.

Read more!

UCLA: 17TH ANNUAL CELEBRATION OF IRANIAN CINEMA

3.31.07 - 6.10.07
UCLA Film & Television Archive and the Bijan and Soraya Amin Foundation present the
17TH ANNUAL CELEBRATION OF IRANIAN CINEMA
2007 marks the Archive’s 17th Annual Celebration of Iranian Cinema, now in its home at the Billy Wilder Theater in the heart of Westwood’s “Tehrangles.” This year’s offerings feature a greater number of films than ever before, including 13 films from Iran and the diaspora. Featured in the series this year are works by established filmmakers whose films we have showcased in the past (Bahman Farmanara and Rakhshan Bani-Etemad) and works by emerging directors. Also included are five new documentaries that illuminate Iranian life, art, and popular culture. Some of this year’s themes include male bonding and friendship, emigration, censorship, music and, in our opening night film, mouth-watering Persian food (When Fish Fall In Love). In addition, we are delighted to welcome several guests who will be present to discuss their work in person. This year’s generous selection of recent narrative and documentary films and videos attests to the enduring quality and diversity of Iranian filmmaking.
All films are in Persian with English subtitles, unless otherwise noted.
Special thanks to: Mark Amin; Barbara Scharres–Gene Siskel Film Center; Bo Smith, Rebecca Mercer–Museum of Fine Arts Boston.

Saturday April 7 2007, 7:00PM ( Buy Ticket )
17th Annual Celebration of Iranian Cinema
WHEN FISH FALL IN LOVE(MAHIHA ASHEGH MISHAVAND)(2005, Iran)
Directed by Ali Rafiee
Political prisoner Aziz (Kianian) returns to his seaside home after two decades behind bars only to find his former flame, Atieh (Nonahali), running a restaurant on the estate. To protect the family business, Atieh's daughter, Touka (Farahani), conspires to woo Aziz's heart with the promise of rekindled romance, and his stomach with mouth-watering dishes.
Screenwriter: Ali Rafiee. Cast: Reza Kianian, Roya Nonahali, Golshifteh Farahani. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. 35mm, 96 min.

Saturday April 7 2007, 9:30PM ( Buy Ticket )
17th Annual Celebration of Iranian Cinema
WHEN FISH FALL IN LOVE(MAHIHA ASHEGH MISHAVAND)(2005, Iran)
Directed by Ali Rafiee
Political prisoner Aziz (Kianian) returns to his seaside home after two decades behind bars only to find his former flame, Atieh (Nonahali), running a restaurant on the estate. To protect the family business, Atieh's daughter, Touka (Farahani), conspires to woo Aziz’s heart with the promise of rekindled romance, and his stomach with mouth-watering dishes.
Screenwriter: A. Rafiee. Cast: Reza Kianian, Roya Nonahali, Golshifteh Farahani. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. 35mm, 96 min.

Saturday April 14 2007, 7:30PM ( Buy Ticket )
17th Annual Celebration of Iranian Cinema
MEN AT WORK((KARGARAN MASHGHOULE KARAND))(2006, Iran)
Directed by Mani Haghighi
Based on a story by Abbas Kiarostami, director Mani Haghighi's film, which equally invites and defies allegory, pits four middle-aged men against a seemingly immobile rock. While the boulder remains stubbornly upright, the characters' quest to topple it drives them further and further into comic madness, and what begins as macho tomfoolery transforms into emasculating obsession.
Screenwriter: Mani Haghighi. Cast: Attila Pesyani, Mahmoud Kalari, Ahmad Hamed. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. HD, 77 min.

Preceded by...MEN UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER BETTER(MARDHA HAMDIGAR RA BEHTAR MIFAHMAND)(2006, Iran) Directed by Marjan Alizadeh
When his wife doesn't return home one evening, an upset husband phones his friend for solace and advice.
Cast: Alireza Amirhajebi, Maryam Yavari. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. HDcam, 8 min.
In person: Mani Haghighi (schedule permitting)

Wednesday April 25 2007, 7:30PM ( Buy Ticket )
BEST IN THE WEST(2006, Iran)
Directed by Maryam Kashani
Director Kashani's first-person documentary focuses on her father and his close-knit group of male friends who maintained their tight bonds after emigrating from Iran to the San Francisco Bay Area in the 1960's and '70s. Their personal stories are interwoven with a political and industrial history of Iran in the last century and the struggle to control the country's most coveted natural resource: oil.
Screenwriter: Maryam Kashani. Cast: Mansour Kashani, Nasser Kashani, Farhad Ahmadi, Sohrab Ahmadi, Abbas Barzgar, Rahman Farsi, Saeed Ghazi, Mohammad Talai. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. 16mm, 71 min.

NOSE, IRANIAN STYLE(DAMAGH BE SABKE IRANI)(2005, United States)
Directed by Mehrdad Oskouei
With a humorous touch, documentary filmmaker Oskouei shines a light on Iran's booming nose job market, where a startling 60,000 to 70,000 men and women go under the knife each year.
Screenwriter: M. Oskouei. Cast: Mandan Karimi, Alireza Bahrami. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. Beta-SP, 52 min.
In person: Maryam Kashani

Friday April 27 2007, 7:30PM ( Buy Ticket )
SOUNDS OF SILENCE(SOT-E SOKUT)(2006, Iran/United Kingdom/Germany)
Directed by Amir Hamz and Mark Lazarz
Hamz and Lazarz's documentary illustrates a slice of Tehran's diverse underground music scene and the performers who must contend with the government's cultural gatekeepers, the Ershad, who hold the authority to ban performances and CDs. Some musicians have taken foreign sounds and made them uniquely Iranian–including a rock band inspired by a 14th century Persian poet, and a rapper who quotes from the Koran.
Cast: Shadi Vatanparast, Shahram Sharbar, Babak Akhoondy. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. Video, 97 min.
Preceded by...BACK VOCAL(SEDAY E-DOVOM)(2005, Iran) Directed by Mojtaba Mirtahmasb
Nearly three decades after Iran's Islamic revolution, female singers are still forbidden to perform solo. Mirtahmasb's short documentary follows several women struggling to make their voices heard within the limits of the law.
Cast: Kiana Kiaras, Darya Dadvar, Mamak Khadem, Pari Maleki. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. Video, 40 min.

Sunday April 29 2007, 7:00PM ( Buy Ticket )
MAINLINE(KHOON BAZI)(2006, Iran)
Directed by Rakhshan Bani-Etemad and Mohsen Abdolvahab
Bride-to-be Sara (Kosari, Bani-Etemad's real-life daughter) relapses into heroin abuse while her fiancé is studying in Canada. Sara's mother (Farahi), desperate to clean up her daughter before the wedding, loads her into a car and heads for a rehabilitation center near the Caspian Sea.
Screenwriter: R. Bani-Etemad, Farid Mostafavi, M. Abdolvahab, Naghmeh Samini. Cast: Bita Farahi, Baran Kosari, Masoud Rayegan. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. 35mm, 78 min.

Friday May 4 2007, 7:30PM ( Buy Ticket )
A LITTLE KISS(YEK BOUS-E KOUCHOULOU)(2005, Iran)
Directed by Bahman Farmanara
Farmanara's richly symbolic drama follows writers and friends, Sa'adi (Kianian) who has recently returned to Iran after 30 years spent in Europe, and Shebli, who stayed behind, eventually enjoying success as his homeland's most acclaimed novelist.
Screenwriter: Bahman Farmanara. Cast: Reza Kianian, Jamshid Mashayekhi. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. 35mm, 100 min.
Preceded by...A LITTLE BIT HIGHER(KAMI BALATAR)(2005, Iran) Directed by Mehdi Jafari
A deceptively prosaic encounter between two crane operators – one an elderly former teacher, the other a romantically troubled younger man.
Screenwriter: Mahin Abbas-Zadeh, M. Jafari. Cast: Ahmad Reza Asadi, Javad Emami. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. 35mm, 12 min.

Saturday May 5 2007, 7:30PM ( Buy Ticket )
IRAN: A CINEMATOGRAPHIC REVOLUTION(IRAN: UNE RÉVOLUTION CINÉMATOGRAPHIQUE)(2006, France)
Directed by Nader Takmil Homayoun
This engaging and informative overview of Iranian cinema includes fascinating interviews with renowned Iranian film directors. Interspersed with archival footage from the Shah's reign through the tumultuous time before and during the revolution, and with an incredible array of rare film clips, Homayoun's film is an eye-opening portrait of Iran through its cinema of the past 70 years.
Screenwriter: Nicolas Bertrand, N. T. Homayoun. Cast: Mohsen Makhmalbaf, Amir Naderi, Dariush Mehrjui, Feredoun Goleh, Bahman Ghobadi, Rakhshan Bani-Etemad, Farokh Ghafari. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. Video, 98 min.

Friday May 11 2007, 7:30PM ( Buy Ticket )
TO BE A STAR(SETAREH MI-SHVAD)(2006, Iran)
Directed by Fereydoun Jeyrani
When an aspiring actress wrangles a small role for her out-of-work father (Entezami, in a tour-de-force performance), the man finds only abuse and ultimately heartbreak on-set. Condemned by Iran's censors, who banned the film and destroyed the negative, this print is the only surviving uncut version of the film.
Screenwriter: Fereydoun Jeyrani. Cast: Ezatollah Entezami, Andisheh Fouadvand. Presented in Persian dialogue with English subtitles. 35mm, 98 min.

Read more!

An Ear A Kiss

via liquid

Read more!

Singularity!

Link via Safrang

Read more!

News Flash!!! "You can't find Moderates in the Islamic Republic, Gate Says"

Washinton Post: Gates has repeatedly criticized Iranian involvement in providing weapons to fighters in Iraq, including roadside "explosively formed projectiles" -- considered one of the most lethal munitions used against U.S. troops.

Drawing on a Cold War analogy, Gates recalled how he and then-national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski met with Iranian leaders in November 1979 with an offer of diplomatic recognition -- only to be met with Iranian demands that they hand over the shah. Three days later, he said, 66 Americans were seized at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.

"The American search for elusive Iranian 'moderates' is a recurring -- and mostly fruitless -- theme since the revolution in 1979," he said.

Read more!

Bebe--Ella

Read more!

Bebe--Con Mis Manos

Read more!

"U.S. Navy denies rumors of Iranian missile shot"

An Iranian News Agency(www.Presstv.ir) is reporting that the U.S. military has denied reports that Iran fired a missile at a U.S. Ship in Persian Gulf:


...The rumors of an attack had sent oil prices soaring, but Lt. Cmdr. Charlie Brown of the U.S. Navy 5th Fleet said all ships in the Gulf had been checked and the rumors were untrue. The British government, which is entering the sixth day of its standoff with Iran over 15 British sailors Iran seized in the Persian Gulf, also said that none of its forces had been attacked. Crude oil futures had jumped nearly eight percent Tuesday in a matter of minutes, topping $68.00 as rumors of a military confrontation in the Persian Gulf spurred panic buying, Dow Jones reported. Meanwhile, the U.S. kicked off a military training operation in the Persian Gulf on Tuesday that commanders said was meant to send a message to Iran. The operations are the largest show of U.S. force in the Persian Gulf since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

CNN also reports " Oil spikes $5 on rumors of Iran attack".

Read more!

Scorpions "Carterizing" Tony Blair

The mullahs following their proud tradition of win-win hostage-taking ploy are acting just like the proverbial scorpion. And the "America [read: Britain] can't do a damn thing", Khomeini's charming slogan during the US hostage crisis.

Compare this with the subdued British Navy's Admiral West talking about the rules of engament, "The rules are very much de-escalatory, because we don’t want wars starting. The reason we are there is to be a force for good."

Is Tony Belair being "Carterized"?

Read more!

Arizona Sunset

If you spend your life worrying about losing happiness,
you will neglect to enjoy what you have,
when you have it.

The results of an hour well-spent will live on forever
but an hour lost is never regained.

Read more!

The Iranian Revolution in Iraq

Gene: Michael J. Totten has an interesting post on his blog (with lots of good photos) about setting out to meet a group of leftwing Iranian exiles in Iraqi Kurdistan, accidentally ending up at the compound of another group of leftwing Iranian exiles, and not realizing the mistake until after he and a friend had met with the group's leaders, drank tea and had lunch.

Read more!

Khatami, the Darling of the Liberal/Left, in India

The Show Must Go On:

...In the meantime Mohammad Khatami is to continue to perform his role of deceiver, by posing as a moderate. To lead and present the deception the Council found someone photogenic and who smiles a lot. No one can out beam Khatami, except perhaps professional actors, he can turn it off and on like a light, but occasionally, if you watch him closely, flashes of his hatred of the West and India come through. Those are the two main targets of Iran's war effort, the West, Iran's main rival for economic prominence and India as Tehran's way of supporting Pakistan and the people of Kashmir in order to control India's economic future. The India of today under Iran's control tomorrow. The Council basically told Khatami, fool people for as long as you can, but when Iran's foreign policy becomes more obvious your real character will be revealed.

Tehran wants to see if they can repeat Persia's successful invasion of India in the early 18th century. What is now Pakistan was part of Persia then and it was during the invasion Tehran looted a lot of gems, which it added to its collection left over from the first Persian Empire. The collection is part of the Iranian State Treasury housed in the vault of Iran's Central Bank, whose website is linked to Crossfire War. You can view some of the collection by clicking the site's link. Of course, not the entire state treasury has been seen by outsiders, not even by the House of Boucheron, which helped Tehran arrange some of the collection for viewing. The gems are one of the sources of financing for Tehran's foreign policy.

Islamabad has never had this kind of financial support before so of course they are going to take advantage of it, but before the war against India becomes allout the deception campaign continues. Khatami beamed at Delhi when he attended India's Republic Day ceremonies in January 2005. He beamed at the UN when he attended the September 2000 opening in which he spoke and proclaimed 2001 as the year of the dialogue. It was after Iran's 2005 Presidential election that August; Khatami was appointed Head of the Association of Combatant Cleric, as announced on crossfirewar.com, Aug. 8, 2005.

Link vai Winston

Read more!

British Marines & British Aircraft To Delight Islamic Republic

British-made aircraft sold to Iran

Read more!

Mayor Makes History

Jimmy Jamshid Delshad will be sworn in as Beverly Hills Mayor

Mayor makes history
Beverly Hills to install U.S.'s top Iranian-American
BY TONY CASTRO, Staff Writer

BEVERLY HILLS - Persians who celebrated their new year last week will mark an even bigger occasion tonight, when Jimmy Jamshid Delshad is sworn in as Beverly Hills mayor, becoming America's highest elected Iranian-American official...

Congratualtion!

Read more!

Video: "The opposite of love is not hatred; it's indifference".

Watch it Here.

Filmmaker: Hossein Fazeli (Naanaam) is a writer and film director. His movies have ... all » won 15 international awards and been broadcast on networks such as CBC, Canal + and ARTE. Send comments to: commentship@gmail.com

Read more!

History of Khomeini's Misogynistics views of Women

Mitra Nikanpour, Miss Iran 1966, on the Cover of Women magazine, April 1965.

More Miss Iran

Equal Rights and its Enemies in Iran

by Ramin Ahmadi


"ما وسیله نداریم. مطبوعات دست ما نیست. علما را بد معرفی کرده اند. شماببینید بیست و چند سال از این کشف حجاب مفتضح گذشته است. حساب کنید چه کرده اید؟ زنها را وارد کرده اید در ادارات. ببینید در هر اداره ای که وارد شدند آن اداره فلج شد. فعلاً محدود است. علما می گویند توسعه ندهید. به استانها نفرستید. زن اگر وارد دستگاهی شد اوضاع را به هم می زند، می خواهید استقلالتان را زنها تأمین کنند؟ کسانی که شما از آنها تقلید می کنید دارند به آسمان می پرند. شما به زنها ور می روید؟"

آیت الله روح الله موسوی خمینی – 11/9/1341

We don't have the tools of the Media in our hand. They (Late Shah's Regime) have painted the Clergies in a bad light. Consider this, twenty plus some years have passed since the putrid Emancipation of women (Where the late Shah decreed removal of the veil, mandatory for women and gave them other rights) . They have entered women into offices. See in every office the women have entered, they have paralyzed it. Now its limited. The clergies suggest that do not expand this. Don't send them to provinces. If any woman enters in any system, they stir up the situation. You want women to provide you your independence? Those who emulate you are jumping to the sky. And you want to play with women?--Khomeini, 1962


از سال 1341 صدای مذهبی مخالف با رژیم شاه تفاوتی بنیادی و محسوس کرده بود. رهبری جنبش اسلامی ایران از دست آیت الله کاشانی و جناح او به کلی خارج شده بود و مردی که حالا پرچمدار مخالفت با نظام حاکم بود بر یکی از حساس ترین معضلات فرهنگی جامعه ایران انگشت گذاشته بود و ازآن بهره برداری تبلیغاتی و سیاسی می کرد. خمینی به فراست دو گانگی عمیق فرهنگی جامعه ایران را در رویارویی با حقوق زن دریافته و آنرا پایه و اساس مخالفت خود با نظام شاهی قرار داده بود. او درست می گفت. در سال 1341 بیش از بیست سال از کشف حجاب گذشته و موقعیت اجتماعی و فرهنگی ایران تغییر اساسی کرده بود. زنان در سطوح مختلف جامعه وارد بازار کار شده بودند و مسئله تغییر قوانین به منظور تأمین برابری زن و مرد در برابر قانون، برخورداری زنان از حق رأی، حق طلاق و مساوات در همه سطوح قانونی، مسئله روز شده بود. در این باره اما جامعه ما یکپارچه نبود. از آغاز، کشف حجاب بر جامعه تحمیل شده بود و با وجود تغییر قوانین فرهنگ زن ستیز جامعه ایرانی تغییر اساسی نکرده بود. این امر چندان عجیب نبود و ارتباطی با دیکتاتور بودن نظام شاهی نداشت. مشابه این موقعیت اجتماعی را درنظامهای غربی نیز می توان سراغ کرد. در آمریکا بعد از این که زنان صاحب حق رأی شدند و یا سیاهان از نظر قانونی به عنوان شهروند و دارای حق رأی شناخته شدند، جامعه همچنان به تبعیض و روابط نابرابر ادامه داد. تغییر فرهنگ جامعه بر خلاف تغییر قوانین یک شبه امکان پذیر نبود. اما در ایران عقب بودن فرهنگی جامعه ایران از قوانین اصلاحی و ریشه دار بودن زن ستیزی در فرهنگ پدر سالار جامعه، اسباب سیاستی موثر را برای ابراز مخالفت در دست رهبری مذهبی قرار می داد. خمینی از اولین سخنرانی ها و اعلامیه های خود در سال 1341 مخالفت با حقوق زن را یکی از سرلوحه های خود قرار داد. در این دوره به ندرت به سخنرانی و یا نوشته ای بر می خوریم که این عنصر را بر جسته نساخته باشد. نگاهی نزدیک به گفتمان ضد زن خمینی عناصر فرهنگی آنرا به آسانی نشان می دهد.

From 1962, the voices of the religious establishment( clergies and Ayatollahs) against the Shah's regime had changed and the fundemantal differences with the regime were palpable. The leadership of the Islamic movement was out of control of Ayatollah Kashani and now the new leader and standard-bearer against the Shah's regime was putting his finger on one the most sensetive cultural issues (women issues) and was exploiting it politically and for propaganda purposes. Khomeini with acuemen had discovered that he can exploit and frame his opposition to the Shah's regime in terms of opposing the womens emancipation issues which presented the Iranians society with a deep relgious dichotomy. He was right. Twenty plus some years had passed since the emancipation of women in (1936) and the social and cultural status of Iran has gone under fundamental transformations. Iranian Women in 1962 had entered the job market in all different areas and facet of the society. And equality and other equal rights for women such as right to vote, divorece and other equal legal rights were topics of everyday discussion in the society. On this issue though the Iranian society was not united or consistent. From the beginning (1936), the removal of the veil was imposed on the society and although the laws had changed in favor of women, not many fundamental changes could be seen in the misogynistic culture of the society. This issue was not unusual and had no connection with the Shah's dictatorial regime. We can find similar phonemonon occuring in Western societies too.

In the US, after women were allowed to vote, or the African-Americans given the right to vote by law, the society continues its prejudices and discrimination against both women and African-Americans. Change in the culture of the society because of the changes in the laws of the society was not possible overnight. But in the backward society of Iran, the deeply rooted misogynistic culture in a patriarchal society provided the political and propaganda tool in the hands of religious leadership to be used against the shah's regime. Khomeini from the beginning in 1962 in all his lectures placed his objection against women's rights as his rubric. In this period, you will rarely find in Khomeini's lectures or writings that did not give prominenace to this element. Closely examining Khomeini's anti-women quotations and debates, easily shows these cultural elements.

از نگاه خمینی تلاش برای تساوی حقوق زن و مرد مخالفت با اسلام است. مردم نسبت به اسلام تعصب دارند و با تساوی حقوق مخالفند و بنابراین دولت هربار که با مخالفت مردم روبرو می شود ناچار عقب نشینی می کند. می گوید:

"در روزنامه ها با قلم درشت نوشتند که بانوان را حق دخالت در انتخابات داده اند لکن شیطنت بود. برای انعکاس نظر عامه مردم به آن موضوع بود که نظرشان به القا اسلام و القا قرآن درست نیافتد ... دیدید آقا قضیه، قضیه بانوان نیست. این یک امر کوچکی است. قضیه معارضه با اسلام است ... باز همان مسائل خبیثشان را از سر گرفتند. همان مطالبی را که ابطال کرده بودند دوباره از سر گرفتند. درباره «تساوی حقوق من جمیع الجهات»، تساوی حقوق من جمیع الجهات پایمال کردن چند حکم ضروری اسلام است. نفی کردن چند تا حکم صریح قرآن است. بعدش باز دیدند که مصادف شد با یک ناراحتی ها ... حاشا کردند ... در روزنامه ها به صراحت لهجه نوشتند که بردن بانوان به سربازی، تصویبش در دست تنظیم است، لکن بعد از این که دیدند خیلی فضاحت بار آمد، مردم ناراحت شدند ... گفتند اکاذیب است." (خمینی- 10/1/1341)

From Khomeini's point of view, efforts to reach equal rights for women was UN-ISLAMIC and showed one's objection against Islam. People in Iran are sensitive..."They have written in their newspapers with big headlines that "the women should participate in elections" was mischief and a lie. And they're reflecting public opinion...they did not succeed to null and void Quron and Islam. You see, it's not women's issue. This is war against Islam....Equal rights for women is synonymous with destroying the essential mandates of Islam...It's rendering explicit quoranic commands null and void...and when the newspaprs heard people's objection against allowing taking women to military...they said it was a lie and they denied it..."--Khomeini, 1962

نظام حاکم در مقابل مقاومت فرهنگی جامعه و ایستادگی بخشی از روحانیت مجبور به عقب نشینی های موقت می شود. خمینی از این عقب نشینی ها بعنوان پیروزی علما یاد می کند تا به جنبش خود روحیه بدهد:

The Shah's regime in 1962 faces cultural resistence of the society and oppositon of the part of the religious establishment and has to back off temoprarily from reforming the women's law and giving them more liberty. Khomeini in 1962, takes this as a victory for the clerical establishment and uses it to motivate and boost the morale of his constituents in this movement.

"بد شد امسال برای اینکه این مطالب واقع شد و خوب شد برای اینکه شما آقایان زنده کردید اسلام را، ایستادید،در مقابل ظلم ایستادید. اگر نایستاده بودید خدا می داند که حالا رفته بودند تا آن آخر. ایستادگی شما اسباب این شد که حاشا کردند مطالبشان را، گفتند: خیر، طلاق به دست مرد است. کی ماگفتیم؟ ... از این طرف می گویند، از آن طرف می گویند کی ما گفتیم طلاق به دست زن باشد؟ نخیر، طلاق به دست مرد است. از آن طرف می گویند نخیر کی ما راجع به ارث گفتیم؟ نخیر ارث هم همانطوری که خدا گفته است. از آن طرف هم می گویند کی ما گفتیم زنان بروند به نظام وظیفه؟ تو روزنامه هایتان است آقا." (10/1/1341)

He says, " It was bad this year that these issues happened but it was good that YOU SIRS, revived Islam, you resisted against iniquity. If you had not stood up this, God knows what would have happened..You caused them to deny the fact that they were going to allow divorce be in the hands of women? NO, divorce is in the hand of men. Then they denied, that they were giving equal inheritance rights to women...they had to deny it but we said, it's in your newspapers."--Khomeini, 1962



خمینی مخالفت با تساوی حقوق زن و مرد را وظیفه شرعی خود می داند. عدم تساوی حقوق را نیز به طور مبهم و کلی بیان نمی کند. بطور مشخص با حق طلاق، ارث برابر، شرکت زنان در ادارات و نظام وظیفه دشمنی خاص دارد. به عبارت دیگر تساوی حقوق را در عرصه خانوادگی، اقتصادی و اجتماعی نمی پذیرد. زیرکی و مهارت سیاسی او در مساوی نشان دادن عدم تساوی حقوق و اسلام است و تکیه بر احساسات سنتی و «تعصب ناموسی» فرهنگ پدر سالار. سرلوحه پیام او به ملت ایران در سال 1341، اولین جمله های اعلامیه،چنین نوشته می شود:

Khomeini views objection to womens equal rights as his religious duty. He doesn't express lack of equal rights in abstract terms. He is specific. He has a special anamosity towards divorce rights, equal inheritance rights, and participation of women in the job market and military.
In other words, he doesn't accept equal rights for women in the family, economic, and societal arena. His cleverness and his political skillfullness lie in making the women's rights issues synonymous with blasphemy and a spiritual war against Islam and emphasizing and capitalizing on traditional sensibilities and dogmatic honor issues and cultural patriarchy. In 1962, his message to the Nation of Iran starts with this sentence:


"انا لله و انا الیه راجعون. دستگاه حاکمه ایران به احکام مقدسه اسلام تجاوز کرد و به احکام مسلمه قرآن قصد تجاوز دارد. نوامیس مسلمین در شرف هتک است و دستگاه جابره با تصویب نامه های خلاف شرع و قانون اساسی می خواهد زنهای عفیف را ننگین و ملت ایران را سرافکنده کند. دستگاه جابره در نظر دارد تساوی حقوق زن و مرد را تصویب و اجرا کند. یعنی احکام ضروری اسلام و قرآن کریم را زیر پا بگذارد. یعنی دخترهای 18 ساله را به نظام اجباری ببرد و به سربازخانه ها بکشد. یعنی با زور سرنیزه دخترهای جوان عفیف مسلمان را به مراکز فحشا ببرد." (1341)

Some arabic verse that I can't translate...."The Shah's regime has raped the holy Islamic mandates and decrees and it has also every intention of raping Islam itself. Islamic laws are going to be defamed and dragged through the mud. And the regime with ratifying legislations that are against Islam and the constitution wants to make the Pure and innocent Iranian women into disgraceful and shameful women and dishonor our nation. The regime is contemplating ratifying and implementing equal rights for women and men. This means, that essential mandates of Islam and holy Quron are going to be trampled on. It means, that they can conscript 18 year old women and make our young pure moslem women in to centers of prostitutions."--Khomeini, 1962


تا پایان سال 1341 (اسفند ماه) دیگر مراجع تقلید و آیات عظام حوزه علمیه قم با او هم سخن شدند و اعلامیه ای مشترک خطاب به دولت در مخالفت با حقوق زن نوشتند. از جمله آیت الله شریعتمداری و مرتضی حائری نیز آنرا امضاء کردند. این اعلامیه استدلال می کند که از نظر تاریخی زنان حق شرکت در انتخابات را نداشته اند و شرکت آنها مخالف قانون اساسی و نیز مخالف شرع و اسلام است. با صراحت می گویند: "تصویبنامه اخیر دولت راجع به شرکت نسوان در انتخابات از نظر شرع بی اعتبار و از نظر قانون اساسی لغو است." و نیز تذکر می دهند که "دخالت زنان در انتخابات یا اعطای حق زنها یا وارد نمودن نیمی از جمعیت ایران در جامعه ... جز بدبختی و فساد و فحشا چیز دیگری همراه ندارد."

At the end of Iranian year of 1962 (March), other religious clergies and ayatollahs of Quom agreed with Khomeini and send their objection against women's rights in a joint statement addressing the government of the Shah. Ayatollah Shariatmadari and Morteza Haeri also signed this statement. This statement argues that from historical perspective women have never had the right to participate in elections and their participation is against the constitution and agains the Islamic Sharia. It explicitly states: "the recent ratified legislation of the government about participation of women in election from the Sharia perspective is invalid and constitutionally null. And it also warns that participation of women in election or giving them their rights or entering half of the women population in the society as workers is nothing would carry nothing but misery, prostitution, preversion and decay.

خمینی فرهنگ زن ستیزی ایران را دستمایه جنبش سیاسی خود در مخالفت با نظام حاکم قرار داد و در این راه در جلب حمایت طبقات سنتی جامعه موفق بود. از شهرستانها موج نامه و تلگراف های حمایتی خرده مالکان و بازاریان آغاز شد. در جواب به تلگراف اصناف همدان نوشت:

Khomeini exploited this misogynistic culture in his political movement to oppose the Shah's regime. And in this endeavor he attracted the support of traditional/religious segment of the society. From provinces he received waves of letters and telegrams expressing semi-feudal and the merchants. In his reply to their telegram he wrote:

"کراراً در نطقهای مبتذلشان تصریح به تساوی حقوق زن و مرد در تمام جهات سیاسی و اجتماعی کرده اند که لازمه اش تغییر احکامی از قرآن مجید است و چون با عکس العملی از طرف مسلمین مواجه شدند، مزورانه انکار نمودند و عذر بدتر از گناه خواسته اند ... دخترها را به سپاه دانش دعوت یا تشویق می کنند و خودشان تصریح می کنند که باید قبلاً به سربازی بروند و چون مواجه با نفرت عمومی می شوند به انکار بر می خیزند ... دستگاه جبار گمان کرده با زمزمه تساوی حقوق می تواند راهی برای پیشرفت مقاصد شوم خود که آن ضربه نهایی به اسلام است باز کند ... " (12/2/1342)

" In their abominable speeches they have stipulattion for equal rights for men and women in all political and societal aspects that require changing the Quronic Laws and because they have been confronted with moslems' resistance, deceitfuly, they have denied it...They've invited and encouraged women to join Litearcy Corps (or troops) and stipulations are that before that they have to be drafted and because they are faced with hatred of the public, they denied it. The tyrannical regime thinks that they can proceed with these women rights issues and achieve their ominous goals of ultimate destruction of Islam."--Khomeini 1962


خمینی اما برای کارزاری (کمپین) که علیه تساوی حقوق زنان با مردان براه انداخته بود به مشارکت فعال همه وعاظ و گویندگان دینی احتیاج داشت. همه جا مراکز مذهبی می بایست تبدیل به تریبونی برای ابراز مخالفت با تساوی حقوق زن و مرد می شد. در همان سال در پیامی خطاب به وعاظ نوشت:
"از تساوی حقوق اظهار تنفر کنید و از دخالت زنها در اجتماع که مستلزم مفاسد بیشمار است، ابراز انزجار و دین خدا را یاری کنید و بدانید "ان تنصر و الله ینصرکم و یثبت اقدامکم."
(28/2/42)

But Khomeini in his campaign against equality of men and women needed other clergies and religious leaders. He said every religious center must be converted to a platform for expressing our objections against equal rights for men and women. In the same year, he wrote to Islamic leaders and clergies to "express your hatred toward equal rights for women, express your disdain for participation of women in Iran that will essentially lead to inumerable perversions, Help the Religon of God and know that....(something in Arabic)

از پانزدهم پانزدهم خرداد 1342 تا سیزدهم آبان 1342 که به ترکیه تبعید شد، تکیه اصلی بیانیه ها و سخنرانی های خمینی بر دشمنی با تساوی حقوق است. اما در آخرین ماههای قبل از تبعید کم کم تم اصلی جای خود را به حمله به آمریکا و اسرائیل می دهد. با لایحه کاپیتولاسیون، خمینی کارزاری تازه می یابد. از سوی دیگر با فراست دریافته که مسئله حقوق زنان رفته رفته در جامعه ایران جا باز کرده است. در این دوران اشاره به مبارزه با تساوی حقوق را ادامه می دهد اما آن را بیشتر در بحث های جانبی و بصورت «کاری از کار گذشته» مطرح می کند:

From the June of that year, until sometimes in October, Khomeini was sent to exile in Turkey. The main emphasis of Khomeini's speeches and declrations is his animosity toward equal rights for women. But in the last months of before his exile, they gradually the main theme is replaced with attacking the US and Israel. With the enactment of Capitalization bill, Khomeini finds a new battle. On the other hand with shrewdness, he understands that the women rights issue in the Iranian society has opened up and people are more receptive. At this period, he continues to fight against equal rights for women but mostly expresses it in the periphery and as a fait-accompli that he can no longer do anything about.


"هیئت حاکمه به جای اینکه برای اقتصاد ایران، برای جلوگیری از ورشکستگی های بازرگانان محترم، ... فکری بکند، به کارهای مخرب مثل آنچه گفته شد [می پردازد] از قبیل استخدام زن برای دبیرستانهای پسرانه و مرد برای دبیرستانهای دخترانه که فساد آن بر همه روشن و اصرار به آنکه زنها در دستگاههای دولتی وارد شوند که فساد و بیهوده بودنش بر همه واضح است. " (4/8/1342

The government instead of thinking about Iran's economy and preventing honorable businessmen from going bankrupt...have decided to conduct destuctive policies such as employing women for boys' highschools and employing men for womens' highschools, which is clear to evryone how if women enter into states institutions will cause corruption and perversion.


جنبش سیاسی خمینی در آستانه تبعید او به ترکیه ریشه دار شده بود. بازرگانان محترم از صرف سرمایه و کمک مالی دریغ نکرده بودند. تبلیغات وعاظ او را به عنوان رهبر بلامنازع مذهب سیاسی مطرح کرده بود. در چنین حالی او نوک پیکان حمله را متوجه آمریکا، اسرائیل، یهودیان و بهاییان کرد و سالها به انتظار نشست تا با کسب قدرت سیاسی دوباره به سراغ زنان ایران بیاید.

Khomeini's political movement before departing to exile had taken roots. The Merchants gave him financial support and other clergies propagandists called him the undefeatable Leader of political Islam. Under these conditions, Khomeini had begun to shift and direct his attacks on the US, Israel, the jews and the Bahai. He waited for many years to gain the political power and go back to the fight against women.


امروز هم «جمهوری اسلامی» در دشمنی با زنان و اصرار بر عدم تساوی حقوق تنها ادامه دهندۀ خواسته و نیت بنیانگذار خویش است که اندرین صندوق جز لعنت نبود. یکی از پایه های اصلی نهضت خمینی ستیزه با حقوق زنان بود و این عنصر، ستون اصلی جمهوری اسلامی نیز هست. جمهوری برادران بر پایه تبعیض ایستاده است و بر این پایه به حیات خود ادامه می دهد.

Still, to this day, the Islamic Republic in his animosity toward women and their fights for equal rights, only perpetuates and promotes the desires and intentions of its founder, Khomeini, which inside this chest there is nothing but curse and anathema. One the cornerstone of Khomeini's movement was "war on women's rights" and this element, is the main foundation and a key pillar of the Islamic Republic. The Republic of these brothers stands and its existence depends upon prejudice and gender apartheid and will continue to survive on this very basis.

End Translation--

Today, Khomeini's Islamic Republic can boast about his Jihadists and whores and highest rate of opiate addicts in the world with one out of seven living on $1 a day. (see my archived posts)

(Persian Link via Sheema)

Read more!