ali khamenei

0

The following article appeared in the Jerusalem Post on the last day of August.

Things are certainly hotting up in the war of words between Israel and Iran.  According to the article, Netanyahu’s strong words are a response to the ‘anti-Semitic diatribe’ of Ayatollah Khamenei at the ‘Non-Aligned Meeting’ summit that just concluded in Tehran.

Personally, I’m not sure what the term ‘anti-Semitic’ here is intended to refer to. ‘Antisemitism’ would suggest that Khamenei is condemning the Israelis on the basis of their race or ethnicity, wouldn’t it? If the reference is to the quotes from the Ayatollah’s speech that appear in the article, I can’t see anything ‘anti-Semitic’ in them. Certainly the Ayatollah is condemning the crimes committed against the people of Palestine by the Israeli government (and rightly so) but there is surely nothing racist about that in itself? Perhaps there was other material in his speech that was overtly racist? I am open to be convinced.

Perhaps it’s the term ‘Zionist regime’ that is being taken as being anti-Semitic? I’m not sure. Certainly when media commentators speak of the ‘Assad regime’ in Syria they are not being accused of being racist or ‘anti-Syrian’ or wanting the country of Syria to disappear from the map. Feel free to educate me with your comments if you understand this better than I do.

Father Dave

PM to ‘speak the truth’ on Iran in UN speech

Netanyahu denounces Non-Aligned Movement’s silence on Iranian “blood libel”; Khamanei accuses “Zionist wolves” of “state terror.”

After two-thirds of the world’s countries listened silently Thursday to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei launch an anti-Semitic diatribe against Israel at the Non-Aligned Meeting summit in Tehran, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu announced he would respond at the UN General Assembly next month.

“In Tehran today, the representatives of 120 countries heard a blood libel against the State of Israel and were silent. This silence must stop,” Netanyahu said.

“Therefore, I will go to the UN General Assembly and, in a clear voice, tell the nations of the world the truth about Iran’s terrorist regime, which constitutes the greatest threat to world peace.”

Khamenei, speaking to the NAM gathering that included UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, said “an independent country with a clear historical identity called ‘Palestine’ has been taken away from its people through the use of weapons, killings and deception, and has been given to a group of people the majority of whom are immigrants from European countries.

“This great usurpation – which at the outset was accompanied by massacres of defenseless people in towns and villages and their expulsion from their homes and homeland to bordering countries – has continued for more than six decades with similar crimes and continues to this very day.”

Khamenei said the political and military leaders of the “usurping Zionist regime” killed the people, destroyed their homes and farms, arrested and tortured men, women and children, humiliated and insulted the Palestinians and tried to digest it all into the “usury-eating stomach of the Zionist regime.”

“Even now after 65 years the same kind of crimes marks the treatment of Palestinians remaining in the occupied territories by the blood-thirsty Zionist wolves.

They commit new crimes one after the other and create new crises for the region,” he continued.

Khamenei said the Zionists controlled the world’s media and were responsible for America’s “hateful image” in the region.

“Our standpoint is that Palestine belongs to the Palestinians and that continuing its occupation is a great and intolerable injustice and a major threat to global peace and security,” he said. Khamenei called for a referendum among all the Palestinians – “both the current citizens of Palestine and those who have been forced to immigrate to other countries but have preserved their Palestinian identity, including Muslims, Christians and Jews” – to chose the country’s political system.

Ban, whose presence at the parley is widely seen in Jerusalem as giving legitimacy to the Iranian regime, addressed the gathering and said he “strongly” rejected threats by one UN member state to destroy another, and “outrageous attempts to deny historical facts, such as the Holocaust.

Claiming that another UN member state, Israel, does not have the right to exist, or describing it in racist terms, is not only utterly wrong but undermines the very principles we have all pledged to uphold.”

His words, however, did little to soothe Israeli anger at his very participation in the event.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, at a gathering in Jerusalem marking 60 years of Israeli-Japanese ties, characterized the event in Tehran as “a march of folly and hypocrisy not seen since the 1930s. Against the background of all the threats to destroy the State of Israel, erase the State of Israel, attack Jews wherever they are, we see the representatives of 120 counties, with the UN secretary- general, come to Iran and give legitimacy to the regime of the ayatollahs.”

Liberman asked what Israel was supposed to understand from the willingness of so many world leaders to take part in the conference, and how this would impact on the future.

“How can we rely on them,” he asked. “What is the meaning of international guarantees of our security?” Liberman slammed the Palestinian Authority presence at the conference.

He said that a speech delivered by PA Foreign Minister Riad Maliki – accusing Israel of ethnic cleansing, apartheid and crimes against humanity – could have been written by Joseph Goebbels.

Maliki said Israel had stepped up military attacks against Palestinians and the sources of their livelihood.

“To the military attacks have now been added violent, provoking and inciting attacks by settlers through organized and systematic terror, which recalls the bloody events taken by the settler and armed gangs – like the Hagana and others – during the Nakba in 1948.”

Netanyahu, meanwhile, is scheduled to leave for the UN on September 27, immediately after Yom Kippur, and return to Israel on September 30, just before the onset of Succot.

Although there has been talk of a meeting at the UN with US President Barack Obama, no meeting has yet been officially announced.

Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey said Thursday that he did not want to be “complicit” if Israel chose to strike Iran’s nuclear program, saying a premature attack would dissolve the international pressure on the Islamic Republic, The Guardian reported.

Speaking to journalists in London, Dempsey said an attack would “clearly delay but probably not destroy Iran’s nuclear program,” but added that the “international coalition” pressuring Iran “could be undone if it was attacked prematurely.”

“I don’t want to be complicit if [Israel] chooses to do it,” he added.

The White House said on Thursday that it was closely studying a UN report that showed Iran has possibly expanded uranium enrichment machines and increased stockpiles of nuclear material.

“We are closely studying the details of the report, but broadly speaking it is not surprising that Iran is continuing to violate its obligations,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters when asked about the UN International Atomic Energy Agency’s quarterly report on Iran.

“As the report illustrates, we are in a position to closely observe Iran’s program,” he said.

The report showed Iran has doubled the number of uranium enrichment machines it has in an underground bunker. Carney said the US has made it clear to Iran that they have a limited window of time to stop its atomic work and diplomatic terms offered by the Western world will not remain open “indefinitely.”

0

Peers….  It’s time to stretch.  Let’s make sure we all understand what a Hudna is..  And let’s all make sure we understand what a Fatwa means to Muslims.  Because if another world war breaks out in the Middle East, nobody would win.  Everybody would lose.  The article pasted below will help us understand FATWA.   Peace, Roy  

Fatwa against nuclear weapons political milestone

Iranian soldier wearing gas mask during Iran-Iraq war

Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:51AM GMT

By Dr. Ismail Salami

The fatwa of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution can well serve as a beacon of light for Washington in order to find its way out of darkness and ignorance.

The fatwa issued by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei forbidding the production, proliferation and use of nuclear bombs is to be considered a political milestone in Iranian history and one which can salvage the Islamic nation from the spate of external threats and plots.

Fatwa is a religious decree issued by a Muslim leader against a specific issue and it is incumbent upon all Muslims to abide by it.However, in this particular case, the issuance of the fatwa has not only religious but political force as well as the leader in the Islamic Republic is the prime decision-maker.

The recent P5+1 talks, which the US officials hailed as “a step forward” and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton described as “constructive and useful”, were held in an ambience filled with optimism this fatwa inspired. Although the ten-hour talks between Iran and the six world powers apparently bore no tangible fruits, the two sides ended the talks with an air of sanguinity in a feel-good atmosphere. Further to that, the two sides seemed resolute to put an end to the long-standing dispute so stubbornly dragged on for years by the West.

Some Iranian officials have expressed hope and optimism the next round of talks slated to be held in Baghdad on May 23 will come to fruition.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters in Zagreb, Croatia, on Wednesday, “We are optimistic about the future of negotiations and want the other sides to put their words into action.”

The western pessimistic glasses have cast a dark haze over Iran’s nuclear energy program, making long-standing efforts to inculcate that Iran is seeking a nuclear weapons program.

Be it as it may, there is no point in believing that Iran is seeking to produce nuclear weapons as there is no evidence whatsoever pointing to this notion. Besides, modern history has proved that Iran has never been an aggressor; rather it has become a victim of aggression. During the Iran-Iraq war in 1983, the Iraqis used mustard gas, and in March 1984, they used tabun, a nerve agent used for the first time in war. The corrupt regime of Saddam Hussein continued to use chemical weapons until the end of war in August 1988 in violation of the 1925 Geneva Protocol on the use of chemical weapons. They also used the nerve agent sarin.

In March 1986, the then UN Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar formally announced that Iraq had used chemical weapons against Iran on the strength of the report of four chemical warfare experts sent to Iran in February and March 1986 by the UN. The report concluded that “Iraqi forces have used chemical warfare against Iranian forces”; the weapons used included both mustard gas and nerve gas. The report further stated that “the use of chemical weapons appear[ed] to be more extensive [in 1981] than in 1984.” However, the regime of Saddam Hussein made pointlessly egregious efforts to deny the report; yet, the influx of badly wounded chemical victims from Iran to Europe for receiving medical treatment was not something the Iraqi regime could easily deny.

In 1984 Iraq became the first country to use a nerve agent on the battlefield. Around 5,500 Iranians died as a result of the nerve agent between March 1984 and March 1985. Tabun kills within minutes. Also, over 16,000 Iranians were killed by the toxic blister agent mustard gas between August 1983 and February 1986.

In spite of all these inhumane atrocities perpetrated by a US-backed coup regime, the Islamic Republic never did the same to retaliate.

Painful as it is, the US government threw all its intelligence, financial and military support behind a regime it knew thrived on evil and havoc. In 1982, the US government started supplying the regime with dual-use vehicles such as heavy trucks, armored ambulances as well as materials for producing chemical weapons.

The then US President Ronald Reagan announced that the US “could not afford to allow Iraq to lose the war to Iran”, and that it “would do whatever was necessary to prevent Iraq from losing the war with Iran.” Then CIA Director William Casey personally spearheaded the effort “to ensure that Iraq had sufficient military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to avoid losing the Iran-Iraq war. Pursuant to the secret NSDD, the United States actively supported the Iraqi war effort by supplying the Iraqis with billions of dollars of credits, by providing US military intelligence and advice to the Iraqis, and by closely monitoring third country arms sales to Iraq to make sure that Iraq had the military weaponry required. The United States also provided strategic operational advice to the Iraqis to better use their assets in combat. For example, in 1986, President Reagan sent a secret message to Saddam Hussein telling him that Iraq should step up its air war and bombing of Iran. This message was delivered by Vice President George H. W. Bush who communicated it to Egyptian President Mubarak, who in turn passed the message to Saddam Hussein. Similar strategic operational military advice was passed to Saddam Hussein through various meetings with European and Middle Eastern heads of state” (quoted from the sworn court declaration of former NSC official Howard Teicher, dated 1/31/95, regarding ‘Iraqgate).

Under the encouragement and direction of the US government, how many bombs fell on the Iranian cities while people were sleeping? How many youths lost their lives in a war that dragged on for eight years? How many women were widowed? How many children were orphaned? Is there no remission to this political insanity?

The US government is morally and financially indebted to Iran. What seems to be the right course of action to be taken by the US government is that Washington should make it clearly known to Iran that it entertains good intentions about the Iranian nation and that it is resolute to compensate for the agony and havoc it has wrought upon Iran. In other words, it is Washington which should take first steps to dispel ambiguities as to its intentions.

There seems to be little hope the upcoming talks will bear splendid fruits unless the US dismounts its mule of obstinacy, puts an end to its animosity towards the Islamic Republic, forsakes its morbid cynicism and acknowledges that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

The fatwa of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution can well serve as a beacon of light for Washington in order to find its way out of darkness and ignorance.


Dr. Ismail Salami

The author of Human Rights in Islam and Iran, Cradle of Civilization, Dr. Ismail Salami writes articles with his main focus on the Middle East. His articles have been translated into a number of languages.

More articles by this author