Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Seiful Islam

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Seiful Islam

  • Rank
    Neither Western nor Eastern

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location
    Every Land is Karbala!
  • Religion

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,112 profile views
  1. اللهم انصر أسد العروبة و الاسلام بشار الأسد

  2. Morality, religion and an illegitimate war As we are being prepared for a longer and probably more destructive war in Iraq than was initially projected, voices opposed to the war grow louder, challenging the legitimacy of the decision by the United States and Britain to use military force to disarm Iraq and achieve a regime change there. Victory in itself will not establish legitimacy. By acting outside a United Nations mandate, the coalition partners deliberately took the risk of conflict with international law, hoping that quick success would silence those who questioned the wisdom and legitimacy of their undertaking. But now the question is being raised anew, and it may well being to haunt the governments involved. The U.S. administration seems intent on reinstating the old imperial logic of power that "might makes right," and that the fear of superior power, acting as a deterrent, subsumes legitimacy. But a unilateral exercise of power is unacceptable in a highly interdependent world. The development of international law reflects the recognition that a viable international order can no longer be built on mere balance of power. The exercise of power and its legitimacy must be subjected to legal norms and procedures. The system of international law is still fragile and incomplete, and the instruments of law enforcement are weak. Nevertheless, it has become an indispensable source of legitimacy, especially where the use of force in resolving international conflict is concerned. Having deliberately stepped outside the framework of international law, the coalition governments are in a dilemma. They increasingly employ moral arguments, suggesting that they are conducting a "just war", and appeal to patriotic sentiments about freedom. They even affirm a "divine calling" to defend humanity against the forces of evil. But the use of moral or religious arguments to justify political decisions is precisely what characterizes those fundamentalist political forces that they set out to combat in the post-Sept. 11 war on terror. It can be disastrous to translate moral imperatives into political action without submitting them to critical judgment as to the possible consequences of such action. Legal norms, when rooted in the recognition of moral values and standards, can mediate between morality and politics. They protect the community against oppressive moral rigorism as well as against arbitrary political decisions. Of course, the simple fact that a certain exercise of power is within the law does not automatically establish legitimacy. Outside or in opposition to international law, morality cannot provide legitimacy. An appeal to religious values is even more risky. In all cultures, divine sanction is the ultimate source of the legitimacy of power. So government leaders who engage in war-the most questionable form of exercising power –wish to secure religious approval. But they run the risk of provoking prophetic protest when their use of force violates the divine commandment to rulers to safeguard justice and peace. In all religions, it is the role of prophets to provide such critical mediation between the will of God and political action. Yet the "false prophets" on both sides of this conflict sanction the actions of political leaders with religious argument and seem to see this confrontation as an inevitable clash of civilizations and religions. It is all the more significant, therefore, that Christian churches of all tradition have unanimously condemned the war on Iraq , and have protested in particular against any attempt to sanction it with religion. This has been noted with relief among those in the Muslim community who are resisting the siren call of militant Islam. Indeed, prophetic protest is the only legitimate religious response to this illegitimate war. By Konrad Raiser The Reverend Konrad Raiser is general secretary of the World Council of Churches (courtesy of International Herald Tribune08-042003)
  3. Amid Allied jubilation, a child lies in agony, clothes soaked in blood They lay in lines, the car salesman who'd just lost his eye but whose feet were still dribbling blood, the motorcyclist who was shot by American troops near the Rashid Hotel, the 50-year-old female civil servant, her long dark hair spread over the towel she was lying on, her face, breasts, thighs, arms and feet pock-marked with shrapnel from an American cluster bomb. For the civilians of Baghdad, this is the real, immoral face of war, the direct result of America's clever little "probing missions" into Baghdad. It looks very neat on television, the American marines on the banks of the Tigris, the oh-so-funny visit to the presidential palace, the videotape of Saddam Hussein's golden loo. But the innocent are bleeding and screaming with pain to bring us our exciting television pictures and to provide Messrs Bush and Blair with their boastful talk of victory. I watched two-and-a-half-year-old Ali Najour lying in agony on the bed, his clothes soaked with blood, a tube through his nose, until a relative walked up to me. "I want to talk to you," he shouted, his voice rising in fury. "Why do you British want to kill this little boy? Why do you even want to look at him? You did this – you did it!" The young man seized my arm, shaking it violently. "Are you going to make his mother and father come back? Can you bring them back to life for him? Get out! Get out!" In the yard outside, where the ambulance drivers deposit the dead, a middle-aged Shia woman in black was thumping her fists against her breasts and shrieking at me. "Help me," she cried. "Help me. My son is a martyr and all I want is a banner to cover him. I want a flag, an Iraqi flag, to put over his body. Dear God, help me!" It's becoming harder to visit these places of pain, grief and anger. The International Committee of the Red Cross yesterday reported civilian victims of America's three-day offensive against Baghdad arriving at the hospitals now by the hundred. Yesterday, the Kindi alone had taken 50 civilian wounded and three dead in the previous 24 hours. Most of the dead – the little boy's family, the family of six torn to pieces by an aerial bomb in front of Ali Abdulrazek, the car salesman, the next-door neighbours of Safa Karim – were simply buried within hours of their being torn to bits. On television, it looks so clean. On Sunday evening, the BBC showed burning civilian cars, its reporter – "embedded" with US forces – saying that he saw some of their passengers lying dead beside them. That was all. No pictures of the charred corpses, no close-ups of the shrivelled children. So perhaps I should warn those of what the BBC once called a nervous disposition to go no further. But if they want to know what America and Britain are doing to the innocent of Baghdad, they should read on. I'll leave out the description of the flies that have been clustering round the wounds in the Kindi emergency rooms, of the blood caked on the sheets, the blood still dripping from the wounds of those I talked to yesterday. All were civilians. All wanted to know why they had to suffer. All – save for the incandescent youth who ordered me to leave the little boy's bed – talked gently and quietly about their pain. No Iraqi government bus took me to the Kindi hospital. No doctor knew I was coming. Let's start with Mr Abdulrazek. He's the 40-year-old car salesman who was walking yesterday morning through a narrow street in the Shaab district of Baghdad – that's where the two American missiles killed at least 20 civilians more than a week ago – when he heard the jet engines of an aircraft. "I was going to see my family because the phone exchanges have been bombed and I wanted to make sure they were OK," he said. "There was a family, a husband and wife and kids, in front of me. "Then I heard this terrible noise and there was a light and I knew something had happened to me. I went to try to help the family in front of me but they were all gone, in pieces. Then I realised I couldn't see properly." Over Mr Abdulrazek's left eye is a wad of thick bandages, tied to his face. His doctor, Osama al-Rahimi, tells me that "we did not operate on the eye, we have taken care of his other wounds". Then he leant towards my ear and said softy: "He has lost his eye. There was nothing we could do. It was taken out of his head by the shrapnel." Mr Abdulrazek smiles – of course, he does not know that he will be forever half-blind – and suddenly breaks into near-perfect English, a language he had learnt at high school in Baghdad. "Why did this happen to me?" he asks. Yes, I know the lines. President Saddam would have killed more Iraqis than us if we hadn't invaded – not a very smart argument in the Kindi hospital – and that we're doing all this for them. Didn't Paul Wolfowitz, the US Deputy Defence Secretary, tell us all a few days ago that he was praying for the American troops and for the Iraqi people? Aren't we coming here to save them – let's not mention their oil – and isn't President Saddam a cruel and brutal man? But amid these people, such words are an obscenity. Then there was Safa Karim. She is 11 and she is dying. An American bomb fragment struck her in the stomach and she is bleeding internally, writhing on the bed with a massive bandage on her stomach and a tube down her nose and – somehow most terrible of all – a series of four dirty scarves that tie each of her wrists and ankles to the bed. She moans and thrashes on the bed, fighting pain and imprisonment at the same time. A relative said she is too ill to understand her fate. "She has been given 10 bottles of drugs and she has vomited them all up," he said. The man opens the palms of his hands, the way Arabs do when they want to express impotence. "What can we do?" they always say, but the man was silent. But I'm glad. How, after all, could I ever tell him that Safa Karim must die for 11 September, for George Bush's fantasies and Tony Blair's moral certainty and for Mr Wolfowitz's dreams of "liberation" and for the "democracy", which we are blasting our way through these people's lives to create? By Robert Fisk Source:www.indepedent.co.uk
  4. Who is Daniel Pipes? www.cair-net.org/misc/people/daniel_pipes.html *****************************************
  5. Bush Annoys U.S. Muslim Group with Pipes Nomination By Jonathan Wright WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush has named controversial Middle East commentator Daniel Pipes to the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace to the dismay of a major American Muslim organization, which described Pipes on Monday as a "Muslim-basher" with bigoted views. Institute spokesman John Brinkley said on Monday that Bush had nominated Pipes to replace Zalmay Khalilzad, who left the institute in 2001 to work in the White House. The nomination needs confirmation by the U.S. Senate because the institute, a Washington think tank set up to promote peace, relies on federal government funds. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, said it asked Bush to withdraw the nomination and the institute to reject it because Pipes was an "inappropriate choice." "The Council ... called on the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) to reject the nomination of a 'Muslim-basher' to its board of directors. ... Pipes' bigoted views have been instrumental in widening the divide between faiths and cultures," said Nihad Awad, the council's executive director. Pipes' office, asked to comment on the charges, referred callers to his Web site, which chronicles his long battle with CAIR but does not answer the specific allegation of bigotry. It describes CAIR as "a foremost sponsor of anti-Semitism." The Washington Post quoted Pipes as saying: "For reasons of its own, CAIR has been trying for years to place me in the category of those who consider Islam the enemy, which is not where I belong. My position is that militant Islam is the problem, and moderate Islam is the solution." White House officials were unavailable for comment. Last year, Pipes aroused criticism when he launched Campus Watch, an organization that collects complaints against professors and academic institutions deemed to be biased in favor of Islam, Muslims and Palestinians. In a commentary in the New York Post on March 25, Pipes wrote that a grenade attack on U.S. troops at a camp in Kuwait that killed two soldiers and for which an American Muslim has been charged, "fits into a sustained pattern of political violence by American Muslims." "There is no escaping the unfortunate fact that Muslim government employees in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps need to be watched for connections to terrorism, as do Muslim chaplains in prisons and the armed forces. Muslim visitors and immigrants must undergo additional background checks," he added. Source: www.reuters.com
  6. Shipping Iraqi civilians to Guantanamo? Washington is considering shipping some 300 Iraqi civilians detained by the Marines to its infamous detention center at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the Washington Post reported on March 30. Who is subject to imprisonment? Any man of any age who appears to have eaten recently. "Seeing young, healthy males in the middle of a firefight makes you wonder what they're doing there," said a senior officer. These detainees will be treated like POWs, but without official status, pending a hearing under Article 5 of the Geneva Conventions. "U.S. officers say they recognize that roundups of men who appear to be civilians, and who may or may not be armed, will be among the most controversial tactics they could employ, and, if applied indiscriminately, could undermine their campaign to win the 'hearts and minds' of the Iraqi people." That's a battle the Pentagon military machine appears to have already lost. Currently some 660 men captured in Afghanistan and Pakistan are imprisoned at the naval base, held without trials or other legal rights. Reports of torture there are rampant. Now military lawyers are scrambling to justify the roundup of Iraqi men lucky enough to have foraged food in the wasteland of death and destruction, hunger and thirst that the U.S.-British siege has left in its tank treads. "We're still figuring this out," concluded the arrogant official, "because we thought we'd have mass surrenders, not this [Edited Out]." By Leslie Feinberg Source: www.workers.org
  7. Israelization of the United States American tanks rumble through Iraq Israeli tank rumbles through Palestine The images of the American armada plowing through the deserts of Iraq, bombing military and civilian targets, laying siege to Iraqi cities, targeting Iraqi leaders, shooting civilians, blinded by sandstorms, stalled, ambushed, shocked by the Iraqi resistance, facing suicide attacks, suggests an eerie but inescapable comparison. Is this America's West Bank? Is this the Israelization of United States - heading to its logical conclusion? Most Americans have been taught by their captive media to interpret what happens today in the Middle East in terms of what happened yesterday. The clock of history in this region always starts with the most recent "suicide" attack mounted by Palestinians against "peaceful," "innocent" Israeli "civilians." If, somehow, these Americans could be persuaded to take the long view, they might begin to understand that the war against Iraq is perhaps the culmination of a process that had been long in the making: the Israelization of United States. The founding fathers of Zionism understood clearly that their colonial project had no chance of succeeding without the patronage of a great power. The Zionists tried but failed to persuade the Ottoman Caliph to open up Palestine to Jewish colonization; he declined their inducements. Then, the British found themselves in a tight spot in the midst of World War I. They sought Jewish help in accelerating US entry into the war. In return for their help, the Zionists got the vital support they wanted. In the infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917, the British promised "to use their best endeavor" (what charming language) to facilitate the creation of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. The British occupied Palestine in December 1917 and immediately opened it up to Jewish immigration. At the end of the war, according to the terms of a secret agreement, the British and French vivisected the Arab territories of the Ottoman Empire to splinter Arab unity. Syria was carved up four ways: Lebanon, to create a Maronite-dominated state; Jordan, to reward one of the sons of the collaborating Sharif Hussein; a French-controlled Syria; and the British mandate of Palestine, the future Israel. Soon, the Jews of Europe came pouring into British-occupied Palestine, setting up a parallel government with their own military. The die was cast for the Palestinians. They were no match for the combined Zionist and British forces; and there was no help from weak Arab "states," hamstrung by imperialist control. Still the Palestinians fought to save their homeland. When the British stopped the Jewish immigration, the Zionists mounted a terrorist campaign. The British lost nerve and passed the buck to the United Nations, or, effectively, to the United States, which now dominated that august body. Motivated in part by anti-Semitism and still strong Christian sentiments, but also swayed by a determined Jewish campaign, United States pushed a partition plan that strongly favored the Jews. The Palestinians rejected the partition plan. They and other Arabs mounted a feeble resistance, but were routed by the Zionists. Close to a million Palestinians were expelled from their homes, and never allowed to return. It should be understood that the creation of Israel did not - at least in the early years - advance America's strategic interests. At the time, United States and Britain exercised firm - and very profitable - control over the oil resources of the Gulf through a clutch of weak and pliant monarchies. The emergence of radical governments in Egypt in 1952, and, later, Syria, only deepened the dependence of the oil-rich Arab monarchies on Western powers. When the Iranian nationalists sought to nationalize their oil in 1952, the Americans and British organized a coup, and reinstated the deposed King. In other words, the British and Americans were firmly in control of the region - without any help from Israel. A "special relationship" with the Israeli interloper could only undermine this control by inflaming Arab nationalist sentiments. The record of American assistance to Israel shows that the special relationship did not develop until the late 1960s. US aid flows to Israel remained well below $100 million annually until 1965, and, more importantly, very little of this was for military hardware. The aid flows doubled in 1966, increased six fold in 1971, and five fold again in 1974 when it rose to $2.6 billion, going up to $5 billion in more recent years.[1] Further, this aid was disbursed mostly in the form of grants, and nearly all of it was spent on military hardware. Indeed, these terms indicate a very "special relationship," not available to any other country. Most commentators, especially those on the left, attribute the emergence of this special relationship to Israel's stunning 1967 victory over Egypt, Syria and Jordan. They argue that this victory convinced the US that Israel could serve as a vital ally and a counterpoise to Arab nationalism and Soviet ambitions in the region. But this explanation is both one-sided and simplistic. It completely ignores the part Israel played in initiating this relationship, deepening it, and making it irreversible. If the special relationship was the product of an Israeli victory over Arabs, US should have embraced Israel as a vital ally after its first victory over Arab armies in 1948, or after 1956 when it seized the entire Sinai in a lightning strike. Why did US have to wait until 1967, after Israel had humiliated the leading nationalist states and Soviet allies in the region. Presumably, the Arab defeat should have reduced Israel's usefulness to the US. In addition, the doubling of American aid flows to Israel in 1966 as well as the cover-up of the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty - a reconnaissance ship - off the Sinai coast, indicate that a special relationship had begun to develop well before the 1967 war. If America's special relationship with Israel was slow to develop, in large part, this was because Israel was doing quite well without it. At least in the 1950s, the British were still the paramount power in the Persian Gulf, a position it would yield only slowly to United States. In addition, Israel entered into a very fruitful military relationship with France, which supplied not only heavy arms and combat aircraft but collaborated on its nuclear weapons program. Israel was quite confident of its military superiority over its Arab adversaries even in these early years. Apparently, the British and the French too knew about this, since they persuaded Israel to invade Sinai in 1956 as part of their campaign to regain control of the Suez canal. This confidence was well-placed. Within a few days, Israel had taken the Sinai from the Egyptians. If the war of 1967 produced stunning Israeli victories, it also drove Israel to look for a new partner. First, since it had started the war against French advice, President De Gaulle suspended all arms shipments to Israel. In order to make good the loss, Israel turned to the US, which had the added advantage of being the world leader in military technology. At the same time, Egypt and Syria would seek to rebuild their decimated military by pursuing an even closer relationship with Soviet Union. Given the logic of the Cold War, this forced the US to develop Israel as a counterweight against the growing Soviet influence in the region. The conditions were now ripe for the growth of a special relationship between Israel and the US. This Israeli decision to realign itself with the US was pregnant with consequences. Israel would have to persuade Americans that their vital interests in the region - protecting their oil supplies, rolling back Arab nationalism, and containing Soviet influence - could be best served by building up Israel, militarily and economically, as the regional hegemon. This would not be an easy task since American support for Israel was certain to alienate the Arab world. And Americans knew this. The Israelis undertook this task with seriousness. In casting itself as the regional hegemon, Israel was playing a high-risk, high-stakes game that could succeed only if it was supported and financed by the US. Also, Israel could not build a new strategy on a special relationship that Americans would be free to reverse. In order to make this an enduring relationship, Israel would bolster it at two levels. At the grass-roots level, it worked to build a strong, emotional American identification with Israel. This was pursued in a variety of ways. Most importantly, American consciousness was saturated with guilt over Jewish suffering. In his book, The Holocaust Industry, Norman Finkelstein has shown that the sacralization of the holocaust began only after 1967, and how the guilt this produced has been used to silence Israel's critics. Americans now feared that criticism of Israel would be seen as anti-Semitism. As a result, few dared to criticize Israel in public. Israel was also portrayed as a democracy, constantly under attack from Palestinians and Arabs. Two explanations of Arab hatred of Israel were offered. It was a species of anti-Semitism. Like its older European cousin, Arab anti-Semitism was unprovoked; it had no causes. Alternatively, unable to modernize, the Arabs hated Israel because it was the only country in the region that was both free and prosperous. At the political level, organized American Jewry amplified its efforts to increase the pro-Israeli bias of American politics. While individual Jews continued to play a distinguished role in liberal and left causes, nearly all the major Jewish organizations now worked feverishly to put pressure on the media, the Congress and the Presidency to offer unconditional support to Israel. In several states, Jewish money, votes and media tilted elections towards the most pro-Israeli candidates. In addition, Jewish organizations worked more effectively to defeat candidates who took positions even mildly critical of Israel. This is documented in Paul Findley's book, They Dare to Speak Out. Once Israel's special relationship with the US was in place, it would acquire its own logic of success. This logic worked through several channels. First, as Jewish organizations worked to shape US policies towards Israel, they would improve their tactics, and their initial victories would bring more Jewish support and, in time, more success. This logic even worked to turn temporary reverses to Israel's advantage. People who argue that the US special relationship with Israel was prompted by its victory in 1967 should also note that its near-defeat in 1973 led, the following year, to a more than five-fold increase in the US aid package to Israel to $2.6 billion. Egypt took this message to heart, deciding that it would be futile to challenge this special relationship any further. In 1978, it signed a separate peace with Israel, after US promised to sweeten the deal with an annual aid package of $2 billion. It's chief rival eliminated, Israel's hegemony over the Middle East was now more secure. Iran's Islamist revolution in 1979 added new strength to Israel's special relationship with the US. The overthrow of the Iranian monarchy, the second pillar of American hegemony in the Middle East, increased Israel's leverage over US policies. In addition, the accession to power of Islamists raised the bogey of the Islamic threat to the West. The Israeli lobby, especially its Middle East experts, had been making the case for some time that the Islamist movements in the Middle East opposed the US per se, and not merely its policies towards Israel. The alarm caused by the Iranian Revolution gave strength to this interpretation. The end of the Cold War in 1990 stripped the special relationship of its old rationale. Israel would now have to invent a new one to continue to sell itself as a strategic asset. It would now market itself as the barrier, the break-water, against the rising tide of Islamic fundamentalism. For many years, the chief opposition to the corrupt and repressive regimes in the Arab world, whether dictatorships or monarchies, had taken Islamist forms. Pro-Israeli apologists in the media and academia - mostly Jewish neo-conservatives and Middle East experts - argued that the West now faced a new Islamic threat, global in its scope, which hated the freedoms, secular values and prosperity of the West. Bernard Lewis, the "doyen" of Middle East experts and a passionate Zionist, solemnly intoned in 1993 that this was nothing less than a "clash of civilizations." This was a clever move, but also a necessary one, to convert Israel's conflict with the Arabs into a new Crusade, the war of the West (read: United States) against Islam. It was clever move also because it had support from Christian fundamentalists, who were now a strong force in the Republican party. The new Crusaders worked in tandem with Islamic extremists in the al-Qaida camp who also wanted to provoke a war between Islam and the US. Every time Osama's men struck at American targets, it was exploited by the pro-Israeli lobby to promote the Clash thesis. When the nineteen hijackers struck on September 11, 2001, they could not have chosen a better time. The man at America's helm was a born-again Christian, an isolationist, elected by right-wing Christians, with a cabinet that took its advice on foreign policy mostly from Jewish neo-conservatives. The neo-conservative's plan for a new Crusade had been ready long before 9-11. They had the President's ears after 9-11, and the President bought into their plan. In no time, George Bush had been converted into a new Crusader. He described Ariel Sharon as a "man of peace," after embracing every one of his extremist positions on the Palestinians: reoccupation of West Bank, repudiation of Oslo, removal of Arafat, and dismantling of the Palestinian authority. He laid out his binary doctrine - you are with us or against-us - and prepared for pre-emptive wars against the "axis of evil." The new Crusade is now underway. The world's only superpower, commanding one-third of the world's output, and nearly one-half its military expenditure, has entered Iraq to effect "regime-change," to bring democracy to a people it has emasculated with bombs and sanctions for twelve years. In its new Crusade, United States stands at the head of a numerous "coalition of the willing," now including forty-five countries. But Israel is missing from this long list, even though a team of colonial administrators, handpicked by Paul Wolfowtz, has already arrived in Kuwait City to take over Baghdad. That is a trick no magician could imitate. The Israelization of United States is complete. Source:www.iviws.com By By: Shahid Alam M. Shahid Alam is an economist, essayist, poet and political satirist. He teaches economics at Northeastern University, Boston, USA. His recent book, Poverty from the Wealth of Nations, was published by Palgrave (2000). He may be reached at m.alam@neu.edu. © M. Shahid Alam
  8. (bismillah) Troops 'humiliating proud Iraqis' By Mohammed Almezel Doha, Qatar, Guld Times: Suddenly, Hamad's face turned almost red and he became visibly agitated, as Al Jazeera, the Qatari satellite news channel, showed footage of British soldiers searching a couple of Iraqis at a checkpoint somewhere Al Zubair, a small town in the south of Iraq. "Look, look at what they are doing," the 23-old-year Qatari university student said as we sat at one of the many coffee shops in the ultra modern Doha City Centre shopping mall. He didn't want his last name mentioned. It was a humiliating scene all right. The soldier, unnecessarily hostile, was grabbing an Iraqi man, appeared to be in his 40s, by his collar and pushing him hard to the ground. The man complained. "Why are doing this to me; I am not a soldier or a (Baath) party fighter," he was clearly heard as saying in Arabic. "Shut up," shouted the soldier, ordering the man to lie face down on the ground. He then started to examine the man's belongings; they were scattered on the ground. A few ID cards were there, so was a pack of Viceroy cigarettes, which was unexplainably thrown away by the aggressive soldier. The soldier began to tie the man's hands behind his back with what appeared to be a plastic cord. The same type is used by Israeli soldiers in the Palestinian occupied territories. The scene was over. But Hamad's voice was rising. "Is this the liberation the Americans have been talking about?" he asked angrily. "This is humiliation." The Anglo-American forces are not only "humiliating the Iraqis", Hamad claimed, his finger pointing at the TV screen, "They are humiliating all of us, the Arabs." The U.S. maintains it has nothing against the Iraqi people. The war is being launched, U.S. officials say, to set the people free from "the oppressive boots of the Saddam Hussain regime. The citizens of Iraq are coming to know what kind of people we have sent to liberate them. "American forces and our allies are treating innocent civilians with kindness and showing proper respect to soldiers who surrender," President George Bush said on April 3, the day U.S. army said its forces had seized Saddam International Airport. "Bush is liar; Saddam is liar; all of them lie," an angry Iraqi old man told an Al Jazeera reporter in the southern city of Al Nasiriya, in a report shown Friday night. "We don't need water; we don't need food. We need (the U.S. soldiers) to respect our dignity. They are forcing our women to take off their clothes at the checkpoint," he said. Embarrassed, the man tried to hide his tears. Others, interviewed by the reporter, said the American soldiers were humiliating them at checkpoints. "We don't want them here, we don't want Saddam. Please tell them to leave us alone," another angry man said. The U.S. military admitted its soldiers, especially those at the checkpoints, have been overzealous since a suicide attack killed four soldiers at a checkpoint in Najaf on March 30. A day later, the nervous soldiers shot to death at least seven women and children, who were riding in a jeep that approached another checkpoint in Najaf. The U.S. military claimed the vehicle had "presented a threat" to the troops, who "did the right thing." For thousands of years, the Iraqis have taught humanity how to write; how to grow corps; how to live, said Yaqoub, a 26-year-old Turkish barber, who has been living here for five years. "They are educated, intelligent and, most importantly, very very proud people," he said. "The Americans should not treat them like this." Iraq's history goes back to more than 7,000 years. Known as the cradle of civilisation, it was called in ancient times as Mesopotamia, the land between the two rivers Tigris and Euphrates. It was the birthplace of the varied civilisations that moved from prehistory to history. An advanced civilisation flourished in this region long before those of Egypt, Greece, and Rome. In the First millennium BC the Sumerians became the first inhabitants of modern Iraq. In the seventh century BC, it was conquered by the Persians and in the third century by Alexander the Great. In the 2nd century BC Partha and Rome fought over Iraq, and in 2nd century AD it became a part of the Persian Empire. In 637 AD Muslim armies defeated the Persians and Iraq became a Muslim country. The Mongol hordes almost destroyed the Caliphate in the 13th century. In the 16th century Iraq was conquered by the Ottoman Empire and remained under its rule until the end of World War I. At the beginning of the 20th century a national independence movement emerged and was encouraged by the British. In 1920 Iraq was made a British mandate. In 1932 the mandate was terminated and Iraq entered the League of Nations as an independent state. Many Iraqis don't like Saddam but they may take up arms against the U.S.-led invaders to "defend their honour," Hamad said. "If someone comes to your house, the least you expect is that he shows you and your family some respect." Apparently wary of possible reactions from the Iraqis to the harsh treatment they have been receiving at the hands of the invading forces, the British army has told its forces to preserve the dignity of the Iraqis and respect their tradition. In an interview with Gulf News in Kuwait on Thursday, British army spokesman Colonel Chris Vernon said: "We are trying to demonstrate our friendship to the Iraqi people. We understand and respect their culture and traditions, that is why our soldiers are asked to talk to men not to women. Of course they can talk to women if women talk to them. But don't worry about the British army, we have experience in this region and its various cultures." But as the scene on Al Jazeera clearly showed, the soldiers apparently don't share the same view. "Or maybe they just don't care," said Yacoub, the barber. Source:www.muslimnews.co.uk
  9. (bismillah) US ruling over Iraq unacceptable Tehran, April 9 - Expediency Council Chairman Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani Wednesday referred to US' post-Saddam plan on installation of a military government in Iraq, saying no one would agree to a retired American general ruling the Iraqi people, who have been under the yoke of Baath party's dictatorship for 30 years. Rafsanjani told a group of health ministry officials that all know pretty well that the US' goal in waging war on Iraq is to get a grip on the country's oil resources and regional wealth and to safeguard Israel's interests. He regretted that the White House continues with its crimes under the false pretext of freedom and democracy. The EC chairman said the catastrophe in Iraq is so immense that Americans are trying hard to cover it up. "History will never forgive Americans," said Rafsanjani. He said invading forces' attack on reporters in Baghdad is an outstanding example of their brutality and disrespect for international and humanitarian principles and values.
  10. (bismillah) Tehran Friday Prayers Tehran April 11- Islamic Republic Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei says just like the Iraqis, Iranians are happy with the collapse of the regime of Saddam in Iraq but that the Iranain people strongly condemn occupation, aggression, commission of crimes and installation of an American proxy ruler, and believe Iraqi right to self-determination should be preserved. The leader made the comment during Friday prayer sermons on Tehran University Campus earlier today. Referring to the exceptional situation in Iraq, Ayatollah Khamenei said there are 4 different issues associated with the Iraqi situation, namely: The collapse of Saddam's rule, crimes committed against the Iraqi people, the US-UK invasion of a sovereign state, and Iraq's future. As for each of all these,the leader said, Tehran adopted a transparent stance which drew on Islamic thoughts and national interests. Ayatollah Khamenei described as "ridiculous" claims by Bush and Blair that the Anglo-American forces are in Iraq to liberate Iraqis, asking do you rain down fire, bomb, and missiles on a nation, to liberate them? Recalling the happiness of Iranian people and officials about the collapse of the rule of a tyrant dictator in Iraq,the leader said the Baath rule in Iraq was one of the most bitter in that country in the past century, adding the interests of the US were compatible with those of Saddam before Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, particularly during the Iraqi-imposed war on Iran, but when Saddam invaded Kuwait, American interests bagan to jar with those of Iraq, beacuse the the US didn't want to let go of its control over Persian Gulf governments. The Leader further said Iraqis are elated now that Saddam is gone, but adopted a neutral line in the war between Saddam and the US, just like the stance of the Iranain people and government. The leader added Iranian officials did their best in the course of war not to let anyone help the parties to the conflict. The fact that the Iraqi people remained neutral in the war, stemmed from the arrogant and insulting attitude of the Iraqi regime, the leader said adding, anywhere there is a rift between people and officials, the case will be the same. The second question is the humanitarian catastrophe of the war, the leader said. On the claims by Washington and London that they support human rights, Ayatollah Khamenei said, the crimes committed in Iraq, are entrenched in human thoughts and conscience and will never be forgotten, just like the atrocities of former powers which will remain in memories for good. Ayatollah Khamenei stated extensive bombardment of cities, massacre of Iraqis, and insulting behavior of invading forces give lie to American and British claims that they support human rights and freedom, adding Iranians condemned such measures from the very beginning,and sympathized with the Iraqi people. Military invasion of an Islamic country under the pretext of finding weapons of mass destruction, constitues the third and ugliest aspect of the war, the leader said adding the international community as a whole condemned this military aggression, and that the widespread rallies in opposition to war showed that global conscience is still awake. The US demonstrated its opposition to humanity and global stability by invading Iraq, the leader said, adding this aggression proved that America is the substantive axis of evil or as the late Imam Khomeini put it is the Great Satan. Ayatollah Khamenei described Britain's cooperation with the US in the war on Iraq as "a grave mistake" and said the British prime minister re-exposed the ugly colonialist face of Britain in the region, which was about to be forgotten. The fourth issue, the leader said, is US efforts for future domination over Iraq, adding neither the Iraqi nation nor Iranians, nor the International Community will accept appointment of a US general to rule Iraq. The leader described the US plan to install a retired general with links to Zionists in Iraq as one which puts back the world on course to the first era of colonialism and absolute reactionary doctrine, saying the colonialists have used various methods to consolidate their domination over other nations. Ayatollah Khamenei added installation of a military ruler, which is a highly insulting act stemming from arrogance, belongs to several centuries ago, will meet with worldwide reaction. As for the future of Iraq, the leader said, the Iraqi nation which has just shaken off Saddam's dictatorship will not get a long with the dictatorship of an American, which is even worse and amounts to violation of the boundaries of Islam and Muslims. Ayatollah Khamenei underlined day to day administration of Iraq should be handled by an individual who is elected by the Iraqi people and is not affiliated to the aggressive powers.The leader further said a military victory which is shrouded in doubts and questions is not final and reliable, adding Americans suffered a strong blow when it came to slogans of freedom and democracy. Ayatollah Khamenei added the liberal democracy gives the go ahead to invade other countries and trample the rights of nations. Referring to the role Zionists played in paving the way for the war in Iraq, the Leader said Zionists reaped much benefit in the US war against Iraq. He added the new geopolitics of the Middle East which Bush presses for, will expand the political, economic and even the geographical powers of Zionists in the region. The leader went on to say that Zionists will misuse the Iraqi issue to carry on with their bloody crackdown on Palestinians. The Islamic Revolution Leader underlined, now the Iraqi political groups and activists are put to a historic test and need to avoid strategic mistakes. The leader said political groups and activists should take maximum care not to fall into anarchy and wrongful revenge and not set the stage for a longer stay in Iraq of invaders. Ayatollah Khamenei said cooperation between Iraqi political groups and activists on the one side and foreigners on the other will prove wrong, adding offering help to invaders will leave a black mark on the Iraqi history. The leader stressed that the Iraqi public call for independence,freedom and a government based on national and religious foundations. Ayatollah Khamenei concluded those who have been speaking on behalf of the Iraqi people now should remain faithful to Iraqis and their ideals and stay out of deals with foreign powers.
  11. (bismillah) (salam) Brother Mujahid is right. America is the main accomplice and partner in all Saddam's crimes against Muslims in Iraq, Iran and Kuwait. Saddam's role is not over yet, but this time his role will be different than ever. Instead of acting on the stage, now he's playing the game behind the scenes. The slave Saddam neither has resigned nor was fired by his employer (CIA). He will continue to execute the task and he will continue to strike satanic bargains with his masters. This is only one of his treacherous plots against Islam and Muslims. The Great Satan will never kill its obediant dog and puppit. They will do everything posssible to protct him and his criminal gang. I believe that he and his family were already taken to a safe haven before the war has started. He might be in Washington or Tel Aviv now! I know this might sound silly for some people, but only time will tell. Yes, we have to be very cautiuos. The Great Satan's goal is to create disunity and discord among Muslims; they want to create civil war between Shia and Sunna, between Kurds and Arabs, and between Shia themselves. That is their main goal. To devide Muslims: Devide to Conquer! We may ask this quetion: Where is their other puppit and slave, Osama bin Laden? Are they going to catch him? Are they going to kill him? I don't think so! Officer Bin Laden is playing another game on a different theater stage. However, the theme is always the same, the tune might be different but the meaning is one. Now America is planing to put another Saddam in Occupied Iraq in order to execute their treacherous plots against Islam and Muslims. We all have to be aware of these plots. Muslims in Occupied Iraq should stand firm and steadfast to fight the Anglo-American Occupation . They shouldn't give any chance to the Iraqi Traitors to be obedient dogs and slaves to the Great Satan such as Ahmed Chaleb (American Dog) and the other Pro-Western and Pro-American hypocrites. {Verily your Lord is watchful, and he encompasses the unbelievers in ways they know not}-Holy Quran 89:14. I pray to God Almighty that he remedy our affairs. And peace be upon him who follow the right guidance. I ask God Almighty that he grant dignity and independence to our country and the Islamic nation. I beseech God Almighty that he exalt Islam and the Muslims and grant unity to all Muslims in the world. Fee Aman Allah Seiful Islam
  12. 25 Quotes shows the Real Terror 1. "It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in." -General Colin Powell [When asked about the number of Iraqi people who were slaughtered by Americans in the 1991 "Desert Storm" terror campaign (200,000 people!)] 2. "I will never apologize for the United States of America - I don't care what the facts are." -President George Bush 1988 [bush was demonstrating his patriotism by excusing an act of cold-blooded mass-murder by the U.S. Navy. On July 3, 1988 the U.S. Navy warship Vincennes shot down an Iranian commercial airliner. All 290 civilian people in the aircraft were killed. The plane was on a routine flight in a commercial corridor in Iranian airspace. The targeting of it by the U.S. Navy was blatantly illegal. That it was grossly immoral is also obvious. Except to a patriot.] 3. "To maintain this position of disparity (U.S. economic-military supremacy)... we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming.... We should cease to talk about vague and... unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of the living standard and democratization. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts.... The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better." -George Kennan [Director of Policy Planning U.S. State Department 1948] 4. "If they turn on the radars we're going to blow up their @#%$ SAMs (surface-to-air missiles). They know we own their country. We own their airspace... We dictate the way they live and talk. And that's what's great about America right now. It's a good thing, especially when there's a lot of oil out there we need." -U.S. Brig. General William Looney (Interview Washington Post, August 30, 1999) [Referring, in reality, to the brutal mass-murder of hundreds of civilian Iraqi men, women and children during 10,000 sorties by American/British war criminals in the first eight months of 1999] 5. "The greatest crime since World War II has been U.S. foreign policy." -Ramsey Clark [Former U.S. Attorney General under President Lyndon Johnson] 6. "I believe that if we had and would keep our dirty, bloody, dollar soaked fingers out of the business of these [Third World] nations so full of depressed, exploited people, they will arrive at a solution of their own. And if unfortunately their revolution must be of the violent type because the "haves" refuse to share with the "have-nots" by any peaceful method, at least what they get will be their own, and not the American style, which they don't want and above all don't want crammed down their throats by Americans." -General David Sharp [Former United States Marine Commandant 1966] 7. "We have no honorable intentions in Vietnam. Our minimal expectation is to occupy it as an American colony and maintain social stability for our investments. This tells why American helicopters are being used against guerrillas in Colombia and Peru. Increasingly the role our nation has taken is the role of those who refuse to give up the privileges and pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investment." -Martin Luther King, Jr. ["A Time to Break the Silence" speech given at Riverside Church New York City April 4, 1967] 8. "Death squads have been created and used by the CIA around the world - particularly the Third World - since the late 1940s, a fact ignored by the elite-owned media." -Ralph McGehee [Former CIA analyst & Author] CIABASE; The Crisis of Democracy Deadly Deceits: My 25 years in the CIA 9. "The U.S.A. has supplied arms, security equipment and training to governments and armed groups that have committed torture, political killings and other human rights abuses in countries around the world." -Amnesty International ["United States of America - Rights for All" October 1998] 10. "We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world - no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson [u.S. President during World War I] 11. "We must become the owners, or at any rate the controllers at the source, of at least a proportion of the oil which we require." - British Royal Commission, agreeing with Winston Churchill's policy towards Iraq, 1913 12. "What we want to have in existence, what we ought to have been creating in this time is some administration with Arab institutions which we can safely leave while pulling the strings ourselves; something that won't cost very much, which the Labour government can swallow consistent with its' principles, but under which our economic and political interests will be secure. [.....] If the French remain in Syria we shall have to avoid giving them the excuse of setting up a protectorate. If they go, or if we appear to be reactionary in Mesopotamia, there is always the risk that [King] Faisal will encourage the Americans to take over both, and it should be borne in mind that the Standard Oil company is very anxious to take over Iraq." - Sir Arthur Hirtzel, Head of the British government's 'India Office Political Department.' 1919 13. "If war aims are stated which seem to be solely concerned with Anglo-American imperialism, they will offer little to people in the rest of the world. The interests of other peoples should be stressed. This would have a better propaganda effect." - Private memo from The Council of Foreign Relations to the US State Department, 1941 14. "Our strategic and security interests throughout the world will be best safeguarded by the establishment in suitable spots of 'Police Stations', fully equipped to deal with emergencies within a large radius. Kuwait is one such spot from which Iraq, South Persia, Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf could be controlled. It will be worthwhile to go to considerable trouble and expense to establish and man a 'Police Station' there." - British Foreign Office, policy memo, 1947 15. 'We have about 60% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its' population. In this situation we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world benefaction. We should cease to talk about such vague and unreal objectives as human rights, the raising of living standards and democratisation. The day is not far off when we are going to have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better." - George Kennan, former Head of the US State Department Policy Planning Staff, Document PPS23, 24th February 1948 16. "I came to America because of the great, great freedom which I heard existed in this country. I made a mistake in selecting America as a land of freedom, a mistake I cannot repair in the balance of my lifetime." -Albert Einstein, 1947 17. "The target suffered a terminal illness before a firing squad in Baghdad." - CIA officer testifying to US Senate hearing, after bloody CIA aided Ba'th Party coup overthrew Iraqi Prime Minister Abdel Kassem, 1963 18. "Strikes at population targets (per se) are likely not only to create a counterproductive wave of revulsion abroad and at home, but greatly to increase the risk of enlarging the war with China and the Soviet Union. Destruction of locks and dams, however – if handled right – might offer promise. It should be studied. Such destruction does not kill or drown people. By shallow-flooding the rice, it leads after time to widespread starvation (more than a million) unless food is provided – which we could offer to do 'at the conference table'." - John McNaughton, US State Department Vietnam policy, as quoted in 'The Mentality of the Backroom Boys.' Article by Noam Chomsky, 1973 19. "The US must carry out some act somewhere in the world which shows its' determination to continue to be a world power." - Henry Kissinger, post-Vietnam blues, as quoted in The Washington Post, April 1975 20. "It would not have been possible for a political party to be more committed to a national home for the Jews in Palestine than was Labour." - Harold Wilson, former British Labour Party Prime Minister, 1981 21. "One hundred nations in the UN have not agreed with us on just about everything that's come before them, where we're involved, and it didn't upset my breakfast at all." - Ronald Reagan, former US President, basking in the triumph that was the US invasion of Grenada, 1983 22. Q. "Mr. President, have you approved of covert activity to destablise the present government of Nicaragua?" A. "Well, no, we're supporting them, the - oh, wait a minute, wait a minute, I'm sorry, I was thinking of El Salvador, because of the previous, when you said Nicaragua. Here again, this is something upon which the national security interests, I just - I will not comment." - Ronald Reagan, former US President, Washington press conference, February 13th, 1983, as quoted by John Pilger in 'Heroes' 23. "After seeing 'RAMBO' last night, I know what to do the next time this happens." - Ronald Reagan, former US President, as reported by Daily Express, July 2nd, 1985 24. "Aerosol DU (Depleted Uranium) exposures to soldiers on the battlefield could be significant with potential radiological and toxicological effects. [...] Under combat conditions, the most exposed individuals are probably ground troops that re-enter a battlefield following the exchange of armour-piercing munitions. [...] We are simply highlighting the potential for levels of DU exposure to military personnel during combat that would be unacceptable during peacetime operations. [...DU is..]... a low level alpha radiation emitter which is linked to cancer when exposures are internal, [and] chemical toxicity causing kidney damage. [...] Short term effects of high doses can result in death, while long term effects of low doses have been linked to cancer. [...] Our conclusion regarding the health and environmental acceptability of DU penetrators assume both controlled use and the presence of excellent health physics management practices. Combat conditions will lead to the unco! ntrolled release of DU. [...] The conditions of the battlefield, and the long term health risks to natives and combat veterans may become issues in the acceptability of the continued use of DU kinetic penetrators for military applications." - Excerpts from the July 1990 Science and Applications International Corporation report: ' Kinetic Energy Penetrator Environment and Health Considerations', as included in Appenix D - US Army Armaments, Munitions and Chemical Command report: 'Kinetic Energy Penetrator Long Term Strategy Study, July 1990' These documents state clearly and equivocally that the US army was well aware of the radioactive and toxic dangers of Depleted Uranium ammunition long before the first shots of the war were fired. 25. "We do not have any defence treaties with Kuwait, and there are no special defence or security commitments to Kuwait." - Margaret Tutweiller, US State Department spokeswoman, 24th July 1990, nine days before Iraq's invasion of Kuwait.
  13. We have to work hard and toil for the long years to come, so as to move from our second innateness and find ourselves and stand on our feet and become independent, so that we may no more be in need of the East and the West. We must start from the children, and our only aim is to change a Westerner into an Islamic man. If we could carry out this task, be sure that no one and no power would be able to hurt us. If we are mentally independent, how can they hurt us? They can hurt us only from the inside. They can prepare someone among us-as you see they could-and then through him they do whatever they like. Losing Oneself Impedes Independence No nation can be independent unless it understands itself by itself. As long as the nations are loosing themselves and placing others in their own place, they cannot find their independence. It is quite regrettable that while our country has Islamic laws, Islamic jurisdiction and Islamic culture, yet these laws and culture have been neglected and it has gone after the West. This West is so showing off to a class of this nation that one thinks that other than the West there is nothing at all. This mental and intellectual affiliation to the West is the origin of most of the misfortunes of the nations, as well as our nation. It takes a long time until this Westernization can be washed out of the nations and out of their brains. When you see that the Westerners are advanced in industry, do not take it mistakenly, thinking that they are culturally advanced, too. You, dear students, you yourselves see to it to get rid of being Westernized, and look for what you have lost. The East has lost its original culture, and you who want to be independent and free, must resist, and all the classes must decide to be themselves. The farmers must decide to dig their own provision out of the earth, and the factories are to be self-sufficient so that our industries may develop and may no longer be in need of the West. Our students, scholars and professors, should not be afraid of the West. They must have their will in the face of the West. They are to rise and not to be afraid. Self-Confidence and Self-Sufficiency Are Conditions for Independence Unless we decide that we are also human beings, and that we are able to work, and that we eat the barley-bread which we bake ourselves without ordering it from abroad, things cannot be set aright. Unless we decide that the textiles which we ourselves weave are sufficient for us, our textile industry will not develop and we will remain dependent on the others and we will have to extend our hands towards the others. It is quite shameful and disgraceful for a country to extend its hand to America demanding wheat, to open its beggar's Kashku before its enemy asking him to give it provision. How humiliating it is to us! Unless this nation decides that its agriculture should be strengthened and constructed by what it gets, we cannot be independent. Unless our nation decides that all our things should be from ourselves, that we must sever our economic and educational relations with abroad, that education must be from ourselves, similarly our economic should be, unless this decision appears in our masses, unless this brain, which is parasitic and imperialistic, changes, and unless we believe that we are humans, we cannot be independent. We must do what would make ourselves, all the classes of the nation and our youths, believe that we, too, are humans. Propagation has excluded us from being humans. They made us believe that they, however, are there. If we want this country of ours to be independent, needing no one from outside, its farmer, its worker, its employee and all its classes must have the belief that we ourselves are existing, we are humans, and ours is a country which has everything and is very rich. They have arranged things in such a way that we remain hungry where our oil-wells flow, that wherever there is water it is wasted, while there are vast expanses of land in which everything can grow, but they are left wasted as the water goes wasted. This is a plan of the imperialists. That is, they want the people around the oil-wells to be beggars so as to get cheap workers who can be exploited. They have kept everything backward, according to a plan, in order to be themselves benefited Be Sure You Will Be Able to Do Everything on the Long Run I have already referred to this point that the extensive propagation of the opponents of humanity, opponents of the human reformation, tried, in every place where they wanted to have under their control, to make their people believe that "We are nothing, we have nothing, whatever we need must come from the other side of the frontiers, from America, from the USSR". One of the causes of the backwardness of these countries was the fact that they did not let them activate their own intellect, their brain. The propaganda was such that the people were afraid of starting a project. Allah, the Blessed and Most High, favoured us with this Islamic Republic and helped you, our youths, to succeed in breaking up, and getting rid of, this incorrect belief which was current in our country. What do you lack less than the other human beings? The human beings are everywhere of the same species, the same kind, the same. If here is not better than there, it is not worse, but they did not let these better ones, these thoughtful brains, be active. The thoughtful brains which flew from Iran were those whose thoughts were for the foreigners, they worked for them. To a thinking man who wants his homeland, his Islam, his country, running away is senseless. Where to? So, those brains which used to work for the foreigners, for America, for the USSR, in Iran, had better to go, and the brains which work for the country remain. Praise be to Allah; you, our youths, during the past two or three years, have proved that you yourselves are capable of working. You may rest assured that, on the long run, you will be able to do everything. I hope you will activate your brains, and do away with the fear which they had created in our country, and you will perform your jobs courageously and fearlessly. You may act according to your culture. Just as you bravely ousted the Super Powers, you can implement your work courageously, decreasing day after day your dependence on abroad, until the time will come in which we shall do whatever we want for ourselves by ourselves, insha'Allah. Self-Belief and Optimism Cause Power I do not claim that we have everything. It is obvious that along the recent history, particularly during the last few centuries, they deprived us from every progress. The treacherous statesmen, and the Pahlavi dynasty in particular, and the centers of propaganda against the country's achievements, and also self-humiliation and self-belittling, deprived us from all activities for progress. Importing all kinds of goods, entertaining men and women, especially the young class, with diverse imported commodities, such as make-up articles, cosmetics, children toys, and driving the families to competition, and bringing them up much as consumers-a fact which has a sorrowful story-, amusing and dragging to annihilation the youths-who are the active members-by making available to them centers of obscenity and epicurism and tens of similar calamities, all are from the plans to keep the countries backward. I sympathetically and servicefully advise the dear nation, who have so far been rescued from many of these traps to an eye-catching extent, and the present deprived generation, who have risen to be active and to innovate, to notice that we did see how they could run many of the factories and advanced instruments, such as aircrafts and other things which were not expected to be repairable by Iranian hands, who ran the factories, which we were extending our hands to the West or to the East, expecting their technicians to run them for us. As a result of the economic blockade and the imposed war, our dear young people could make the needed spare parts at much lower costs and meet the needs, and proved that where there is a will there is a way. You must be vigilant, wakeful and watchful lest the politicians affiliated to the West and East with their Satanic whisperings drag you towards these international plunderers. By decisive will, activity and hard work, try to remove affiliation. Do know that the Arian and the Arab races are no less than the European, American and Russian races. If they find their own identities and get rid of despair and look not at other than themselves, on the long run they will be able to do everything and to make everything. The achievements attained to by those who resemble you, will be achieved by you, too, on the condition of relying on Allah, the Exalted and Most High, and depending on yourselves and stopping depending on the others, bearing hardships for the sake of attaining to an honorable life, getting out of the control of the foreigners. It is on the governments and the responsible, both in this and the coming generations, to appreciate their own specialists and to encourage them materially and morally so that they may work hard, and to prohibit the importation of consumable goods and family-destroying articles, and to be satisfied with what they have until they make everything by themselves. Western Influence Hinders Independence As long as the West can find its way here, you will not be able to attain to your independence, and as long as these Westernized groups, who are everywhere, have not yet left this country, or have not been reformed, you will not get your independence. They would not let you. We must find ourselves in order to stand on our feet and believe that we, too, are human beings. Iran Will Humiliate America Till the End If you want your country to be an independent one such that the others would not be able to interfere in it, you must begin with your own selves. All the fears and horrors one feels from his enemies are because he sees only himself. If one remembers that Allah is also there and one is working for Him, one will feel no fear, because the fates are in His hands. Do not have the notion that you by yourselves can do anything. You are the one who would not sleep at night, nor can be comfortable in daytime, if bothered by a fly. You are the one who if attacked by a spider, would be frightened. You are the one who if a sparrow took something away from him, he would not be able to take it back from it. All are incapability, all are poverty. Everything is from Him, from Allah. Had it not been for Allah's favour, we would not have been able to get this independence of ours. How could we stand in the face of the tumult of the world and its Satanic powers? They all wanted to preserve that (past.) regime. Had it not been for Allah's favour, with what power could you do it? Had it not been for Allah's favour and help, how could you drive out of your country the Americans who are devouring the whole world? As I have heard, the American President has said: "Iran has humiliated us." This is just the beginning. Iran will humiliate you till the end. Had it not been for the favours of Allah, how could you cut short the hands of a power which is now in such a position with so many equipments, agencies and whose roots are creeping everywhere? It was by the might of Allah, it was by the grace of Allah. So, do not forget this. Had it not been for Allah's favour, how could you be an example in the whole world? In the whole world it is only you who say: "Neither Eastern nor Western," which you actually are. One may allege such a thing, but all know that it is not so. Had it not been for Allah's favour, who could have done such a thing the like of which has never been seen before? This is Allah's favour. Keep this favour of Allah, and its keeping is by means of serving this country which He has granted to you. -Imam Khomeini (ra)
  14. (bismillah) 11 civilians killed by US bombing in Afghanistan By Qasim Jalal Eleven Afghan civilians were killed, on Wednesday, when an American warplane bombed a house near Afghanistan's eastern border with Pakistan. The U.S. military said 11 Afghan civilians, seven of them women, were killed. "Eleven Afghan civilians were killed and one was wounded early this morning when a bomb dropped by coalition aircraft landed in a house on the outskirts of Shkin near the Pakistan border," said Douglas Lefforge, a spokesman at the U.S military's headquarters at Bagram air base north of Kabul. "The tragic incident occurred when enemy forces attacked an Afghan military post checkpoint that was providing security near the Shkin firebase just before midnight last night," he said, referring to a U.S. base near the village. Two Harrier attack aircrafts then targeted two groups of enemy fighters. One of the jets dropped a 1,000 pound laser-guided bomb. "The bomb missed its intended target and landed on the house. The circumstances of the bombing are being investigated," the US statement said "Coalition forces never intentionally target civilian locations," he told reporters. Sayed Tayeb Jawad, Afghan president's chief of staff, regarding the incidence, said, "Every measure should be taken to prevent such an incident,". Source:www.shianews.com
  • Create New...