Reflections on the Israel-Hezbollah Prisoner Swap Deal

Regarding the recent prisoner swap between the Zionist regime and Lebanon, I found this article by Khalid Amayreh* a fair reflection on this issue. The setback of the occupying regime is crystal clear but they, using their beloved western media, want to say it is not so. Reading this article will help you learn more.

 

The latest prisoner swap deal between Israel and Hezbollah is a healthy indicator that at least some Arabs are beginning to understand the depraved Zionist mentality, and act accordingly. Such mentality is based on arrogance, insolence, and religious and ethnic superiority.

Israel, a country whose collective mindset views non-Jews as virtual animals or at least lesser human beings, had to face a new enemy, an enemy that will not be scared by overwhelming brutality, but one that will meet Israel’s state terror with toughness, resilience, valor and defiance.

This is a new reality that Israelis, especially Israeli leaders, have yet to come to terms with, especially psychologically.

This explains the deep frustration that is apparent in the tone of Israeli leaders reacting to the latest swap deal, especially the fact that Israel has been forced to release the Lebanese guerilla Samir Kuntar.

Israel, utterly ignoring her own countless murderous sins, has come to view Kuntar as the prototype of the ultimate terrorist - as if the tens of thousands of Jewish murderers and terrorists who have enormous amounts of innocent blood on their hands were the Lord’s angels of love and mercy.

Indeed, if Israel were a normal state, and its people a normal people, it would have adopted an honest and just approach toward its neighbors, an approach that would not discriminate between “blood and blood” and “life and life.”

Undoubtedly, such an approach would have saved thousands of lives, Jewish and Arab, and spared the region and its peoples decades of pain and suffering. But then Zionism would be losing its face, mind and heart, and would morph into something entirely different.

Unfortunately, it is probably futile to preach morality to Zionism, a manifestly demonic movement which experience shows is not capable of behaving morally and humanely.

Well, let us examine some of the statements and remarks Zionist leaders have been making with regard to the latest swap deal with Hezbollah.

Shimon Peres, the hero of the Qana massacre of 1996, who is now Israel’s President, has been quoted as saying that “We don’t want murderers to go free, but we have a moral obligation to bring home soldiers whom we sent to defend their country.”

Peres also reportedly said that “my heart is torn over the decision to pardon Kuntar,” adding that his decision to that effect “in no way constituted forgiveness.”

Certainly no one, Arab or otherwise, is particularly infatuated with what Kuntar did in 1979, although the Israeli army then was at least partially responsible for the killing by the Lebanese guerilla of three Israelis, including a paramilitary policeman, a man and his daughter.

The three lives, like numerous other victims, Arab and Jewish, would have been spared had the insolent Israeli military establishment behaved wisely.

After all, Kuntar, and his friends who were killed in that rescue operation, didn’t come to Israel to kill and shed blood but to force Israel to release Arab prisoners.

Nonetheless, one is prompted to ask difficult questions, questions that most Israelis don’t like to hear - let alone answer, but when confronted with them, they either seek to evade or prevaricate and quibble in their answers.

Who has killed more innocent people, Shimon Peres or Samir Kuntar? Who has more blood, including children’s blood, on his hands, Shimon Peres or Samir Kuntar? Who has inflicted more terror, suffering and death upon innocent people, Shimon Peres or Samir Kuntar?

If honesty is to be the ultimate arbiter among men, then one can’t escape the inescapable conclusion that it is mass murderers like Peres, Ariel Sharon and other Israeli leaders, dead or living, who really need forgiveness for their horrible crimes against humanity.

In fact, Israelis should be reminded on this occasion that a Presidential post, a business suit with a necktie, and the ability to speak eloquent sound-bites in several languages and have audience with statesmen and VIPs from around the world, doesn’t really transform a criminal into a true human being.

A criminal is a criminal especially if he refuses to come to terms with his crimes and if he refuses to apologize to his victims. Needless to say, Peres has done neither. But then criminals are not concerned about their sins.

One elderly Israeli woman interviewed by the Ha’aretz newspaper lashed out at Hezbollah for having refused until the very last moment to tell if the two Israeli prisoners were dead or alive.

“It’s the saddest day for Israel. They kept us waiting until the last second to learn the fate of our sons,” the woman was quoted as saying.

I certainly sympathize with the woman at the personal level. However, I would want to ask the Jewish lady why she thought that Jewish lives were worth more than non-Jewish lives?

I also would like to ask her what she would tell the mothers, families and relatives of thousands of Arab prisoners who have been languishing in Israel’s dark, underground dungeons since 1967?

We are talking about POWs and MIAs and other ordinary people whose families have no way of knowing if their beloved ones are dead or alive. Aren’t these “forgotten prisoners” human beings, too? Are they children of a lesser God?

Unfortunately, most Israelis, thoroughly self-absorbed and self-centered, don’t like to be asked such questions lest their superiority complexes and collective psychosis be exposed.

Finally, the latest prisoner swap shows that Israel only understands the language of cold real politic which is by definition immoral and coercive.

For Palestinians, who have more than 10,000 of their beloved ones languishing in Israeli concentration camps, the message is very clear: If you want to get Israel to release your beloved ones, take Israeli hostages and swap them for the Palestinian captives.

*Khalid Amayreh is a journalist based in the Occupied Palestinian town of Dura.

 

 

 

Will Israel and / or the U.S. Attack Iran?

 

By URI AVNERY[i]

If you want to understand the policy of a country, look at the map - as Napoleon recommended.

Anyone who wants to guess whether Israel and/or the United States are going to attack Iran should look at the map of the Strait of Hormuz between Iran and the Arabian Peninsula.

Through this narrow waterway, only 34 km wide, pass the ships that carry between a fifth and a third of the world’s oil, including that from Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia , Kuwait , Qatar and Bahrain .

* * *

Most of the commentators who talk about the inevitable American and Israeli attack on Iran do not take account of this map.

There is talk about a “sterile”, a “surgical” air strike. The mighty air fleet of the United States will take off from the aircraft carriers already stationed in the Persian Gulf and the American air bases dispersed throughout the region and bomb all the nuclear sites of Iran - and on this happy occasion also bomb government institutions, army installations, industrial centers and anything else they might fancy. They will use bombs that can penetrate deep into the ground.

Simple, quick and elegant - one blow and bye-bye Iran, bye-bye ayatollahs, bye-bye Ahmadinejad.

If Israel attacks alone, the blow will be more modest. The most the attackers can hope for is the destruction of the main nuclear sites and a safe return.

I have a modest request: before you start, please look at the map once more, at the Strait named (probably) after the god of Zarathustra.

* * *

THE INEVITABLE reaction to the bombing of Iran will be the blocking of this Strait. That should have been self-evident even without the explicit declaration by one of Iran’s highest ranking generals a few days ago.

Iran dominates the whole length of the Strait. They can seal it hermetically with their missiles and artillery, both land based and naval.

If that happens, the price of oil will - far beyond the 200 dollars-per-barrel that pessimists dread now. That will cause a chain reaction: a world-wide depression, the collapse of whole industries and a catastrophic rise in unemployment in America , Europe and Japan .

In order to avert this danger, the Americans would need to conquer parts of Iran - perhaps the whole of this large country. The US does not have at its disposal even a small part of the forces they would need. Practically all their land forces are tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The mighty American navy is menacing Iran - but the moment the Strait is closed, it will itself resemble those model ships in bottles. Perhaps it is this danger that made the navy chiefs extricate the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln from the Persian Gulf this week, ostensibly because of the situation in Pakistan.     

This leaves the possibility that the US will act by proxy. Israel will attack, and this will not officially involve the US, which will deny any responsibility.

Indeed? Iran has already announced that it would consider an Israeli attack as an American operation, and act as if it had been directly attacked by the US. That is logical.

* * *

NO ISRAELI government would ever consider the possibility of starting such an operation without the explicit and unreserved agreement of the US. Such a confirmation will not be forthcoming.

So what are all these exercises, which generate such dramatic headlines in the international media?

The Israeli Air Force has held exercises at a distance of 1500 km from our shores. The Iranians have responded with test firings of their Shihab missiles, which have a similar range. Once, such activities were called “saber rattling”, nowadays the preferred term is “psychological warfare”. They are good for failed politicians with domestic needs, to divert attention, to scare citizens. They also make excellent television. But simple common sense tells us that whoever plans a surprise strike does not proclaim this from the rooftops. Menachem Begin did not stage public exercises before sending the bombers to destroy the Iraqi reactor, and even Ehud Olmert did not make a speech about his intention to bomb a mysterious building in Syria.

* * *

SINCE KING Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Persian Empire some 2500 years ago, who allowed the Israelite exiles in Babylon to return to Jerusalem and build a temple there, Israeli-Persian relations have their ups and downs.

Until the Khomeini revolution, there was a close alliance between them. Israel trained the Shah’s dreaded secret police (”Savak”). The Shah was a partner in the Eilat-Ashkelon oil pipeline which was designed to bypass the Suez Canal. (Iran is still trying to enforce payment for the oil it supplied then.)

The Shah helped to infiltrate Israeli army officers into the Kurdish part of Iraq , where they assisted Mustafa Barzani’s revolt against Saddam Hussein. That operation came to an end when the Shah betrayed the Iraqi Kurds and made a deal with Saddam. But Israeli-Iranian cooperation was almost restored after Saddam attacked Iran . In the course of that long and cruel war (1980-1988), Israel secretly supported the Iran of the ayatollahs. The Irangate affair was only a small part of that story.

That did not prevent Ariel Sharon from planning to conquer Iran, as I have already disclosed in the past. When I was writing an in-depth article about him in 1981, after his appointment as Minister of Defense, he told me in confidence about this daring idea: after the death of Khomeini , Israel would forestall the Soviet Union in the race to Iran . The Israeli army would occupy Iran in a few days and turn the country over to the much slower Americans, who would have supplied Israel well in advance with large quantities of sophisticated arms for this express purpose.

He also showed me the maps he intended to take with him to the annual strategic consultations in Washington . They looked very impressive. It seems, however, that the Americans were not so impressed.

All this indicates that by itself, the idea of an Israeli military intervention in Iran is not so revolutionary. But a prior condition is close cooperation with the US . This will not be forthcoming, because the US would be the primary victim of the consequences.

* * *

IRAN IS now a regional power. It makes no sense to deny that.

The irony of the matter is that for this they must thank their foremost benefactor in recent times: George W. Bush. If they had even a modicum of gratitude, they would erect a statue to him in Tehran ’s central square.

For many generations, Iraq was the gatekeeper of the Arab region. It was the wall of the Arab world against the Persian Shiites. It should be remembered that during the Iraqi-Iranian war, Arab Shiite Iraqis fought with great enthusiasm against Persian Shiite Iranians.

When President Bush invaded Iraq and destroyed it, he opened the whole region to the growing might of Iran. In future generations, historians will wonder about this action, which deserves a chapter to itself in “The March of Folly”.

Today it is already clear that the real American aim (as I have asserted in this column right from the beginning) was to take possession of the Caspian Sea/Persian Gulf oil region and station a permanent American garrison at its center. This aim was indeed achieved - the Americans are now talking about their forces remaining in Iraq “for a hundred years”, and they are now busily engaged in dividing Iraq ’s huge oil reserves among the four or five giant American oil companies.

But this war was started without wider strategic thinking and without looking at the geopolitical map. It was not decided who is the main enemy of the US in the region, neither was it clear where the main effort should be. The advantage of dominating Iraq may well be outweighed by the rise of Iran as a nuclear, military and political power that will overshadow America ’s allies in the Arab world.

* * *

WHERE DO we Israelis stand in this game?

For years now, we have been bombarded by a propaganda campaign that depicts the Iranian nuclear effort as an existential threat to Israel . Forget the Palestinians, forget Hamas and Hizbullah, forget Syria - the sole danger that threatens the very existence of the State of Israel is the Iranian nuclear bomb.

I repeat what I have said before: I am not prey to this existential Angst. True, life is more pleasant without an Iranian nuclear bomb, and Ahmadinejad is not very nice either. But if the worst comes to the worst, we will have a “balance of terror” between the two nations, much like the American-Soviet balance of terror that saved mankind from World War III, or the Indian-Pakistani balance of terror that provides a framework for a rapprochement between those two countries that hate each other’s guts.      

* * *

ON THE basis of all these considerations, I dare to predict that there will  be no military attack on Iran this year - not by the Americans, not by the Israelis.

As I write these lines, a little red light turns on in my head. It is related to a memory: in my youth I was an avid reader of Vladimir Jabotinsky’s weekly articles, which impressed me with their cold logic and clear style. In August 1939, Jabotinsky wrote an article in which he asserted categorically that no war would break out, in spite of all the rumors to the contrary. His reasoning: modern weapons are so terrible, that no country would dare to start a war.

A few days later Germany invaded Poland , starting the most terrible war in human history (until now), which ended with the Americans dropping atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki . Since then, for 63 years, nobody has used nuclear weapons in a war.

President Bush is about to end his career in disgrace. The same fate is waiting impatiently for Ehud Olmert. For politicians of this kind, it is easy to be tempted by a last adventure, a last chance for a decent place in history after all.

All the same, I stick to my prognosis: it will not happen.

---

[i] Uri Avnery is an Israeli journalist, member of Gush Shalom and contributor to The Politics of Anti-Semitism (AK / CounterPunch).

Operation of Iraqi Occupation

One of readers had a long comment in my last post, which needed a comprehensive response. That’s why this post is devoted to him. You can find his comment at the bottom of this post (or in last post’s comments).

Dear Flea,

Thanks for your careful reading and your brainstorming. On American power in military and other respects I said “No need to say that United States has most of the world’s resources and therefore, is world’s first military and economic power and in some other issues as well”. But I believe it is not as easy as having too many forces and equipment.

Actually I disagree on your ideas regarding defeating Saddam Hussein. Because US had only walked in Iraq, while there was no military obstacle in front them, except some public defense.

Again I disagree on what you call “Operation of Iraqi Freedom”. This is a wrong expression. Because as US officials confessed, they lied on the reason to go to Iraq (for WMD), whereas they couldn’t even find a small part approving their sayings in UN.

On the other hand, a quick comparison of Saddam’s regime to this time can easily make us believe that, Saddam’s era was much more better than now, in Iraqis eyes, and to the security of the region.

After the early months of the attacks, it was crystal clear that US was there for Iraqi oil, helping out its weapon factories and security and … contractors, and threatening Iran. So you can see that the expression of “Operation of Iraqi Freedom” is a total nonsense.

In spite of all the above mentioned ideas, if US could accept to get out of Iraq in due time according to UN, we probably could accept its true purpose of liberating Iraq but, as you could see and we all see, US officials do not tend to get out of Iraq in two centuries. Therefore I call it “Operation of Iraqi Occupation”.

I may be an ignorant person, but I would like to know what type of better life you mean US wants to give to Iraqis? Do you mean the deaths of one million Iraqis and wandering 2 millions as a better life? What on earth you are talking about?

Moreover, war is war. Soldiers are not going to Hawaii to play, they are supposed to fight. Back in the country, economic and political situations are also part of the war.

As a matter of fact, I can promise you, if the US leaves Iraq, the peace will come into the country. This is not only I believe but many other Iraqi citizens also believe the same.

At the end I would like to point out one more issue. As an Iranian, I respect all people on this planet including American people, whom I believe are more intelligent than their current movement. I don’t say what I believe is certainly true, but am sure that the western media are always playing with words, showing the untrue side of the world conflicts. Although i think we could come to a better conclusion by brainstorming in our weblogs.

- - - - - -

Flea Says:

Ghadeer,

I respectfully disagree with your thoughts on the strength of the United States military. The United States defeated Saddam Hussein’s military and took control of the country within a few weeks. Operation Iraqi Freedom began March 19, 2003 and by April 9, 2003, Baghdad was liberated (you may recall the topple of the statue of Saddam on this day).

Iraq invaded Iran in 1980, which after 8 years of bloody fighting, the war ended in stalemate.

Vietnam was lost due to political un-rest back in the United States more so than losing militarily. The people were sick of fighting war after war (finishing up World World II and the Korean war) and simply did not want another war to deal with so as political un-rest swelled, the reason to fight was lost.

Back to Iraq, you might content that while the United States defeated Saddam in three weeks, we are currently still there and suffering a few deaths every day. I would argue it’s not that the United States is not strong enough to finish this militarily, rather the United States is trying to re-build the country and help the Iraqi people have a better life than that under Saddam.

No other country in the history of civilization has fought a war and simultaneously tried to rebuild the country at the same time. I believe that is why the United States is perceived as either losing or occupying, because they are trying to rebuild the country while attempting to keep it safe.

I just want to make a few more comments Ghadeer. First of all, I hope you keep my post on your blog. I respect you and quite frankly I find it refreshing to hear from an intelligent person like yourself from Iran. Although I disagree with some of your opinions, as an American, I am glad to see you speaking your mind. I plan to follow your blog and read your post, because I value what you have to say.

Take care my friend,
-Flea#, 25
United States of America

Unknown Iran (part II); POWER

 

 

In the first part I talked about the ignorance of Iranian enemies who tend to much more ignoring than can be imagined, even about the very initial issues.

In this second part –after the Iranian Missile Test- I like to talk on Iranian power, something which is usually mocked on by Americans.

Power like the other abstract concepts does not have a definite meaning and reference. You can say “he is powerful”, but there would be some questions of, how? When? Why? And in front of who? In a Euro 2008 football matches, Russia defeated Holland 3-1, but Spain also defeated Russia 3-0, so is it possible to predict that Spain could defeat Holland in a football match?  

No need to say that United States has most of the world’s resources and therefore, is world’s first military and economic power and in some other issues as well. But this does not mean that he can defeat a less powerful country militarily. There are many examples of this kind including the US war against Vietnam. Vietnamese won, not paying attention that they are fighting with the more powerful country in the world.

Moreover, Americans are always deceived by their governments on their military power. The propaganda US government runs through its submissive media, makes the belief stronger and stronger every day, something that even the US government doesn’t believe in. one of the strongest media in this regard is Holly Wood. Conforming the film elements to pentagon needs and receiving supports instead, has made many directors to work in this way, showing a false and unbelievable image of the US military.  But these are not the things which happen in a true world.

In Holly Wood movies (unreal world) US can win in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq in a matter of second without even the smallest losses. On the contrary this was not the thing happened in real situation. United States with all its so-called power is still looking for Bin-Ladan after 7 years and having dead marines in Iraq every day.

In all these issues US common sense has forgot the difference between defense and transgression. The most powerful transgressor is not comparable in military power to the weakest defender. United States has mostly done as a transgressor rather than a defender.

In a nutshell, Unites States and its people should understand the difference between transgression and defense; and between the reality and Illusion.

I hope United States could understand these concepts which can cover its deficiencies during the last fifty years and won’t try to act the same once more, since this time the story will be really different.

Language of Missiles

If you are a bit familiar with the languages and different discourses around the world, you can easily understand that there are different discourses which are supposed to be used in their own places and times.

Iran has proved to be a peaceful country. After its revolution in 1979 even one case of an aggressive attack to a country even the smallest of its neighbors has not been taken place, while the world’s biggest military powers that tend to be on the side of the so called Human Rights have had different aggressive attacks to their neighbors or thousands of miles from their home territories.

Iran is a peaceful country and will remain a peaceful one, but it doesn’t mean that it should also accept the transgressions and threats from US and Israel and remain silent. The history –the big teacher- has proved these so-called world military powers –who believe themselves so because they watch Hollywood movies a lot- only understand the language of force. In this case with Iran, United States and Israel only understand the language of missile. We are happy that they have understood this language, but Iran is ready to speak even with more powerful languages, which depends on the language of the first speaker.

 

Unknown Iran (Part I); KNOWLEDGE

Iran, officially referred to as Islamic republic of Iran, is known as a country located in Middle East. Azerbaijan, Armenia, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Russia, and Kazakhstan, are its neighbors. Some of them have a direct land border with Iran but others are connected to it indirectly via sea from north and south.   

You probably are surprised because I started to introduce Iran from its geographical perspective. I don’t think it is strange. The reason I did that refers to my presuppositions and background knowledge of the people who want to read this and get some information on Iran.

You probably never teach literature and poetry to a person who doesn’t know English alphabet. So you build your steps according to your students’ knowledge. I am doing the same thing, though I am not a teacher.

Recently General David Petraeus, the US Commanding General of the Multi-National Forces in Iraq, pointed out that Iraq had “no desire to be the 51^st state of Iran!”

 This is a good example of what I say. I am sure –according to his statement- that this official doesn’t know that;

·         First of all, governmental system in Iran is not based on states. In Iran we always talk of provinces, not states. and,

·         Second, Iran does have 30 provinces. So how it is going to attach Iraq as 51^st?   

Now suppose this person is an American policy-maker on Iran issues. What happens? No need to say that he doesn’t know the a b c of Iran, so his decisions will be dramatically fall far short of conditions in Iran. This shows a true fact that most –don’t want to say all- US policy-makers make decisions on Iran based on their knowledge of the USA. Therefore, none of them work and now you can easily see that their policies do not fit in Iranian condition.

My example was one among many. In next parts I will write on Iran on the basis of this true presupposition.

 

 

A War Without Border

 Nowadays the wars do not reside in borders and are not only exercised through military arsenal and personnel. The wars have come to be more technical than the past. Sometimes a country is occupied while most of the people don’t feel anything. These are supposed to be the characteristics of the wars in 21^st century.

In the last six months, Lebanon has been suffering from a problem which is not having a president. The problem is basically of the constitution which allows such chaos. The institutional power, I suppose, is the most important thing in a country and the constitution which fails to cover such problems is not a good one. You can never see such a thing (of not having president, parliament, or the other institutions) in Iran, UK, France, or US.

In the last six months, Lebanon didn’t have a president while the previously appointed prime minister and its half-appointed cabinet continued to exist. Moreover, this half-cabinet is not powerful enough to run the country and as a result overcome the problems.

As it seems the problem of the Lebanon cannot be removed other than a change in the constitution. In the meantime as all the existing parties of the country are trying to tackle the issue, some other incidents came up.

After the Zionist Regime occupation of Palestine and some lands from Lebanon and the formation of some parties (Hezbollah, Amal), always Lebanon has been one of the most important countries in the region. On the other hand, Zionist regime remains to be the most respected country in the world by western countries due to some myths, so Lebanon, the only neighbor which has some military capabilities to fight the regime remains a very strategic country.

Undoubtedly the Zionist regime is backed by many world institutions and countries, namely UN, EU, US, UK, and many others. Also the current Lebanese government is backed by them too. While another part of the Lebanon (Hezbollah and its allies) is backed by Iran.

This is a true war without borders. It means that US and its allies want to influence the Lebanese political future while Iran wants to do the same thing. But there are some very interesting points in this regard.

If we are to count the allies in each side we easily understand that it is too crowded on the side of US. Lebanese government, all EU countries, Zionist regime, almost all Arab countries and many other countries in the world who follow the US just for their own interests and even are not truly aware of the world calculations are on one side, and Iran, Syria, Hezbollah are on the other side.

 Another remarkable point is that the first side has very direct influence in Lebanon. United States sends its warships in the region and tries to lead the war closely. George W. Bush sends military arsenal in his visit to Saniora, and all the western media are backing this side on the war. On the other side Hezbollah has been trained by Iran 30 years ago and the bulk of Iranian and Syrian support is not comparable to the other side. But the result of this game in which Saniora and Hezbollah are playing on behalf of their allies is incredible.

The war still continues since the Zionist regime continues to exist. I hope the meddlers in every country could understand the meddling criteria in each specific country so that never fire another war again. But I am sure that history is the best teacher. 

 

Islam, Religion of Hearts and Minds

After September 11, 2001, Islam was subject to attacks; whether Islam was insulted or Muslims were. Taliban and Al-Qaida were advertized as Islam. Their Barbarian beliefs were advertized as the pure Islam. But the point is, the conversion toward Islam was fastened rather than stopped.

According to statistics, Islam is the second religion in most countries and is changing into the first religion in the world in the future. In the last 6 years the military attitudes toward Islamic countries was shown fruitless, as a result cultural assaults against Islam and Muslims was born.

Distortion of Holy Koran and publishing new versions with some changes, drawing cartoons against the Holy prophet of Islam, entitled freedom of speech and lots of other activities were run. But could they stop the prevalence of Islam? Are the statistics or the researchers saying that the Islam is losing its followers? The answer is a big NO.

With all the above mentioned activities of the West, Islam is still finding pure hearts and minds and improving through them. Contrary to the incorrect beliefs, Islam has not been widely spread through military activities or insults to be stopped by them. Islam is truly the religion of hearts and minds and will always improve through them.

No need to say that, like all other religions, traditions and beliefs, Islam also suffers from some distortion which opens the way for some critics to undermine Islam unjustly. Christianity, Jewism and all other religions have some points to be criticized but never have been misused by Muslims to undermine them. Christianity and jewism are Devine religions and we love Jesus Christ and Moses as we do Muhammad (PBUT).

I wish Islamic world was strong and did not let such insults happen. Unfortunately it is neither strong nor even united. Ayatollah Khomeini once had used a Fatwa (Islamic order) against Salman Rushdi once, which removed insults to Islam and other religions for a while. I wish there was such a leadership in Islamic world again.

But the hopeful point regarding these insults and unfair attacks is that;

1. West knows that Islam is spreading throughout world rapidly, and

2. Finds his interests in danger, so

3. These (cartoons and films) are its loud screams which cannot hide, and

4. Shows that nothing cannot stop the spread of Islam.

In the Name of Democracy

Some years ago I was watching a movie entitled “Time Machine”. It was released in 2002 and was directed by Simon Wells, based on a novel by H. G. Wells. This fascinating movie supplies us with that reason in the form of Alexander’s ladylove, Emma (played by Sienna Guillory). On the verge of a “happily ever after” life together, a tragic accident befalls Emma causing her untimely death. Alexander, haunted by her death, asks himself the time traveling “what if” question. He becomes obsessed by the need to go back in time and reverse the events of that dreadful day. After working on his theories of travel through time and space for four years non-stop, Alexander’s time machine performs as he envisioned, but without the sought after results. Instead of bringing back his beloved, he’s forced to watch her die over again. His desire to bring Emma back to life unfulfilled, Alexander travels into the distant future to find the answer as to why he can’t change the past. However, the story does not point out a love or a tragedy, it indicates the human destiny in this small world. The beginning scenes start with a romance while it doesn’t finish in the same way or the ways you may expect. The most astonishing part of the movies is the end, where everybody may ask the question “what is the world be going be2 like in 100 years later?” Now, I ask the question, have you ever thought how the life may be in 100 years later? Is it going to be better or worse? Why?

 

In the movie, we are supposed to compare two points, one in past and the other in the future, whereas the former is in peace but the later in panic. And that will be shocking to know that the future of the world is going to be far more worst that the stone age. Why, do you think, it is going to be like this?

At that time I was thinking with myself, is the world going to be like this? Why? During the life we are all working hard to make a better life and the technology is developing every moment, but why the world in future should resemble the life in the early days or even worse??!!

Soon I got the answer. It is not difficult at all. We are living under some stupidest animals who believe themselves as the governors of this world. They attack the countries easily, kill thousands of people every day and commit international crimes, but the point is that no one blames them, or let’s say, no one can blame them. No one can charge them, since they are doing everything in the name of democracy.

They kill people, build nuclear bombs, take hostages, and spread cruelty in the world in the name of the sacred democracy.

 

On the other hand, there are some fascinating facts on democracy. First and foremost is the role of United States as a so called Global Police, where he believes himself to have a responsibility in this regard to change the world; no matter what the people of a country or international community think. What US think is and should be acceptable. For instance, what happened in Iraq was the same thing where even the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) disagreed on any attacks against Iraq; however US did not pay any attention to it. Another fact is that the democracy was not an important issue before and recently –after 9/11- won favor in United States. Ironically, it is still not clear cut what democracy might be, and to what extent it is acceptable for the United States, where they track double standards in this regard. A country where holds one election in every year – presidency, parliament, city council, etc.- is called undemocratic state and axis of evil, whereas a county in which no election is hold is a friend country.

I do not believe that the Problem of the world is the lack of democratic states, but the lack of a universal power to stop those stupids who imagine themselves as the absolute superpowers.

If this doesn’t happen, then no need to hesitate; make sure that the end of the world would be even worse than the early days, in the name of this so called democracy.

 

Trespassers not Guests

After the release of the British Royal Navy and marines - in an unexpected situation by Iranian Fundamentalist government and its so-called hard-liner president – some very astonishing incidents took place. They started from a prefabricated interview with six of captives where they were reading from papers and continued to let them sell their stories, which now Britain has banned over some new pictures and videos from Alalam News Channel. Therefore surprising comments were born.Primarily I can divide those remarks into two different ones while they have been born due to the same reason and from the same source. The first were those which mentioned they have not entered Iranian territorial water and have further said they have to stay seven years in prison if did not confess entering Iranian territorial water. In addition, the woman among them has said that her letter was a trick to do what Iranian officials wanted and not her personal beliefs saying, “I never meant a word of it.” These sets of notes could be classified as political ones.

The other set are the military ones, which have been said about their arrests, and the things happened during the thirteen days, such as; those who were arrested were blindfolded, were separated from each other in the first 5 days, or were given filthy blankets.

For the first set, although I believe that the Iranian government should have done better to remove any possible discrepancies, public opinion of the world is aware of the things happened and the British play. Nevertheless, I would like to say some points regarding the second set of words.

According to the confessions of British Royal Navy and marines, none of them has mentioned any torture. Therefore, I think its time to ask, are blindfolding, giving filthy blankets and separating captives are not from the rights of the government who is hosting some trespassers into its water? So what are the rights? Do you think a group questioning would be a better case? How about a restaurant, a coffee, and then letting to ask some questions? Do you think they should have been given clean blankets? So the question is, were they in hotels? So how about a shower and a laundry? Alternatively, they were captives and the story is a different one. On the other hand, if you still think there are no rights for Iran to behave like that, now answer this question. Do USA, NATO, and their allies behave like as the trespassers ask for? In order to answer this question, its better to visit Guantanamo or some other hidden prisons all over the world to see what the truth is.

Ironically, an Iranian diplomat (Jalal Sharafi, the second secretary at Iran’s embassy in Baghdad) was kidnapped and serving an unknown fate while British Navy and marines were given suits, some books and CDs, and were red-carpeted by Iranian officials. Furthermore, five of other diplomats are still lost, where every day Molly was watching her mom (Faye Turney) on TV or Royal Navy Lieutenant Felix Carman’s mother was watching his son. Surprisingly, even the Red Cross does not know where the Iranian diplomats who were kidnapped by the US are. Note that Mr. Sharafi has been severely tortured and it was confirmed by Red Cross rep in Iran and Iraqi ambassador to Tehran. He is now recovering in a hospital in Iran.

I think it is better to end up the text with quoting some notes from a British Blogger: “Unlike our own brave servicemen and woman, who had to endure the indignity of not washing for days, having to sleep on dirty blankets and being called names, Sharafi instead allegedly had the soles of his feet beaten with cables, as well as having his ankles drilled, wounds which have partially healed as they were inflicted at the beginning of his captivity. His back was also slashed, and he claims that his nose was broken. An official from the Red Cross confirmed that his injuries had been inflicted during his detention. The United States has denied that it had anything to do with the apparent mistreatment, despite Sharafi’s claims that an official connected with the US embassy was present during some of his interrogations, hilariously welcoming his release and return to Iran. One thing’s for certain though: he sure won’t be getting £100,000 in return for telling everyone “the story from his side, to see what he went through.”