Search the Community

Allying against Iran: US is creating Arab NATO While the US envisages a new military alliance as a tool to counter potential threats from Iran towards the Gulf monarchies and the Middle East, there are a number of obstacles in the way of creating an Arab military bloc. According to Defense News, an Arab NATO would consist of six Gulf states, i.e. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, plus Egypt and Jordan. The commander of the Royal Bahraini Air Force, Maj. Gen. al-Khalifah, said that this is an American idea which was approved by the Arab Gulf countries, "but didn't take shape yet." He expects this alliance to be successful, although "we are still at the beginning." Back in October, the Bahraini foreign minister said that the Gulf security alliance could be formed by next year. Defense News sees at least one sign of progress there, as the Gulf countries are already involved in the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen that fights against Houthi rebels, mainly by carrying out airstrikes. "We have been sharing information between coalition fighters all along the operations [in Yemen], and we have been training alongside with the Gulf countries through joint exercises, and this enhances our capabilities," al-Khalifah said. Incompatible with Iran On the other hand, there are clear and tangible challenges on the way to creating this new military alliance, not least of them being the issues of interoperability. All the potential members operate different types of weapons and military equipment: the Egyptian Air Force operates the Russian MIG and the American F-16, while the Saudi Air Force has the American F-15SA and the European Eurofighter Typhoon, and the UAE is equipped with the F-16 and the French Mirage. But the issue of interoperability is not the only impediment for creating an Arab NATO as the relations between Qatar and other Gulf countries have not been fully restored since 2017 when Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain cut ties with Qatar. All eight potential members of the new military alliance have concerns related to Iran and Iranian-backed armed groups operating in numerous countries across the Middle East. "Iran continues to cause risks to other nations and act as a destabilizing agent across this region. They aim to disrupt the balance of power and place at risk the livelihood of citizens," Commander of the US Air Forces Central Command Lt. General Joseph Guastella said during the 2nd Manama Airpower Symposium. According to Guastella, the experience of setting up and operating NATO itself could prove useful in establishing an Arab version of the alliance: "There is value in looking at what NATO has been able to do and the successes of an alliance that has guaranteed essentially stability for the region there for decades." Adding America and Israel into the mix "People have been talking about an Arab NATO for several years now," said Vladimir Sazhin, Senior Researcher at the Middle East Department of the Institute for Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. According to him, there are plans to get Israel to participate in the alliance that would bring together six monarchies of the Persian Gulf, Egypt, and Jordan. However, instead of becoming a full-fledged member of the Arab NATO, Israel would supply intelligence to the alliance. The US is expected to participate in a similar manner, providing all the necessary resources without officially joining the organization. "The idea to call it an 'Arab NATO' is something journalists came up with. In all of the relevant areas, this potential new alliance will be very much inferior to NATO. I don't believe that it will ever reach the level of NATO," said Sazhin. According to him, even if the bloc is ever established, it is unlikely to resemble NATO at all. There may be some formal organizational structures established, but there are serious doubts regarding their effectiveness and efficiency. Ultimately, all we see is propaganda and media noise, and not much actual progress, Sazhin said. Just how capable the Gulf monarchies are in terms of setting up a united front against Iran remains to be seen. "I very much doubt they would go through with this without the support of other countries. There is a very broad range of attitudes towards Iran among the Gulf states," Sazhin stressed. On one end of the spectrum, there is Saudi Arabia, on the other – countries like Qatar and Oman. The last two are not particularly anti-Iran. As for economic relations, the United Arab Emirates have very close ties with Iran. Tehran's relationship with Abu Dhabi provides it an opportunity to evade US financial and economic sanctions, the expert stated "I think that if there were an Arab military organization then it would most likely be lacking in efficiency and decision-making, but would be very active publicity-wise," Vladimir Sazhin said. "A summit with US President Donald Trump and monarchs of the Gulf countries was expected to take place back in autumn this year in the United States. It was believed that the main topic on the agenda would be the creation of a strategic Middle East alliance that experts already call an Arab NATO for the sake of simplicity," Elena Suponina, adviser to the director of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, said. That summit was postponed until the first half of 2019. One of the reasons was the scandal around the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi political analyst. It created an atmosphere that compelled the US to refrain from any discussions regarding strategic cooperation. According to Suponina, that is not the only obstacle that stands in the way of creating such an organization. Firstly, relations between Saudi Arabia and Qatar are somewhat clouded; secondly, there is still too much turbulence in the region. The plans are in place, but it would be very difficult for the Americans to make them come true, Suponina believes. Nevertheless, there is every reason to believe that the US is not giving up on these plans since in the upcoming years the main goal of the US in the region will be to contain Iran. This is exactly why America pursues the creation of, if not a full-fledged military organization, then at least something very close to it. Even that kind of alliance would be very useful for the US, the expert thinks. "Donald Trump's idea is to form an Arab NATO that would include Arabian monarchies and – by a long stretch of the imagination – Israel. This idea may sound benevolent, but so do many other plans that are not meant to happen," Evgeny Satanovsky, president of the Institute for Middle East Studies, said. Satanovsky believes that the new military alliance is meant to zero in on Iran. There is no doubt that Saudi Arabia wants to establish that alliance. However, it is very unlikely that the US will succeed in convincing Israel to join the club. Israeli society will never accept that offer. There is zero chance that an Arab NATO will become a reality, he said, adding that Israel doesn't really need any military help from the Arab countries to fight Iran. The Arab armies do not constitute any significant military power nor they are organized enough to be a force others can rely on if it comes to that. For the Arab countries, it is absolutely out of the question to be part of the same military alliance with Israel due to the kind of narrative that permeates their societies. The State Department and the White House – unsurprisingly – do not understand this, Satanovsky claims. It is absolutely clear that Saudi Arabia seeks to create an Arab or Islamic military alliance and to be at the helm. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has already damaged relations with Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, cut relations with Qatar, and raised tensions between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan – all in pursuit of this goal. ARAB NATO

Israel Vows to create two more occupied lands Yemen and Afghanistan are the bulls eye.

I came across this “Better Middle East” map and thought it was interesting, apparently it was drawn by some US official or general, what do you guys think, will this atleast solve the major problems in the Middle East since the current middle eastern borders were drawn after the French and British backstabbed the Arabs and drew the borders according to their own interests after WWI ?

Question explains everything.

Assalamu Alaikom So, the general story is that the army of the Sufyani will start in Syria, take over until the east of Iraq, and the ground will swallow them. Sounds like ISIS. The Yamani will rise with a white banner out of Yemen and will call people to truth. Sounds like Ansar Allah. I know the Sufyani, Yamani and Khorasani rise at the same time. Does anyone know who the Khorasani could be? They rise on the same day. On August 18 2014, the Houthi takeover of Yemen began. On August 18 2014, the war between ISIS and the US escalated to a point where the Mosul Dam area was being bombed, and ISIS had spread to Libya. Who could be the Khorasani?

Salaam alaykum. (I am actually not a new member, but I haven't been on in a long time and forgot my login info). Question for you all: if you were approached for marriage by a pious mo'min who is an excellent match for you BUT wants you to leave your country (US, or any other first world country) to permanently live in his country (3rd world middle eastern country that oppresses women and minorities), would you accept? Why or why not? Curious to see what others think. (side note: obviously istikhara is a good solution if one is really torn, but I'm curious to know your initial reactions. As you know, part of istikhara is seeking the opinions and thoughts of others). JazakAllah khayr.

Saudi Arabia has paid substantial money for a secret alliance with Israel, a US journalist claims in his study. If this statement is true, it may fundamentally change our perception of Middle East politics. The region's muddled relations, political and military alliances have long been a favourite subject for researchers and journalists studying the Middle East. Those familiar with the region are all quite aware that the area is characterized by an Israeli-Palestinian conflict as well as a Sunni-Shiite and a Saudi-Iranian opposition, which root in cultural, religious and political divisions. However, noted US journalist Robert Parry has recently published an in-depth article based on intelligence information, claiming that Saudi Arabia paid around 16 billion USD to Israel in order to buy the friendship of the Jewish State. Lobbyists for sale It is common knowledge that political (and other) lobbying has considerable traditions in the United States. Lobbyists promoting the interests of countries or economic groups often influence US interior and foreign policy decision making processes in a decisive manner. Consequently, Saudi Arabia has also begun to build a lobby in Washington, only to experience bitterly that the masses of law firms and PR specialists costing top dollar or even the exploitation of connections with such powerful families as the Bushes can never outperform the Israel Lobby in the US. Therefore, the Saudis decided to take a different approach: they bought the Israelis, writes Parry. According to the article, Saudi Arabia has given Israel around $16 billion over the past two and a half years, funnelling the money through other Arab states and Israeli development funds. If it is all true, the Saudis may have indeed bought the Israelis, since Israel was starkly opposing the agreement with Iran - and found several American backers along the way. Why Iran? Readers not quite familiar with regional affairs might not know that Iran and its religious Shiite leadership is a thorn in the side of another player beside Israel - Saudi Arabia, a key power in the Sunni world also considers the Shiite state as its archrival. The Sunni-Shiite division is one of the greatest fault lines among Muslim countries, which they not have been able to overcome. As a result, Saudis consider any pro-Iran governments in the Middle East as enemies, so much so, that they are apparently willing to ignore the solidarity rooted in the same culture and all-Islam togetherness. Not to mention that they turn a blind eye to the atrocities committed against the Palestinian people (who are also Sunni, by the way). So, Saudi Arabia is not in the least interested in a strengthening Iran. However, the lifted sanctions and Tehran's return to international politics would inevitably lead to a strengthening Persian state, and in a big way too, as Iran has all the capabilities to become a key state of the Middle East, similarly to Turkey. It seems such a dreadful outcome for the Saudis, who follow Wahhabism, a rigorous school of Islam, that they appear willing to ally with Israel to prevent it. Religious rigour does not seem to apply to foreign policy... Riyadh is not concerned about the bloodshed According to Parry, Riyadh and Tel-Aviv had a similar cooperation to destabilize Iraq, Syria and Egypt. Even though Iraq's central government had already been toppled by the US invasion, a Shiite, thus pro-Iran leadership that enjoyed the support of the population's majority was obviously not so close to the Saudis' heart, just as they didn't like the Alavite (a branch of Shiitism) Assad regime in Syria, either. This put Riyadh on the same side with Israel. Interestingly enough, the Islamic State that follows a wrong and violent interpretation of Sunni Islam happened to grow strong in this region. Notably, the terrorist organization that calls itself a Caliphate was not planning to annihilate Israel, but the Shiites living in the area. This is one more reason why ISIS may have seemed more likeable for Israel than the Assad regime, which has maintained religious peace but been relentlessly opposed to Tel-Aviv, even though the Islamic State destroys everything with unheard of brutality in the occupied areas. Palestinian cause on the sideline Although the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood gave a glimmer of hope for the Palestinians struggling to survive the air-tight blockade in Gaza, the world's largest outdoor prison for years, Saudi Arabia considered Mohamed Morsi's Muslim revolutionary and not anti-Hamas government as an enemy, so it joined Israel in backing the military coup and the new Egyptian leadership, which wasn't as friendly to the Palestinians as its predecessor but fit the Saudi interests much better. Hypocrisy at its peak As it is known, Saudi Arabia is one of the most radical Muslim states in the world. Its structure is based on Wahhabism, an ideology rooted in the quasi literal interpretation of Islamic religious principles and the most puritanistic traditions. Yet this country hardly ever receives firm criticism from the West, contrary to a democratic Turkey that tolerates religions other than Islam, or the undoubtedly theocratic Iran, which ensures parliamentary representation for religious minorities. In comparison, wearing a cross in Saudi Arabia may constitute a crime and power is concentrated in the hands of one single dynasty. And this country is a reliable ally for the United States and if Parry's article is correct, it is an outstanding sponsor for Israel against other Muslim states. http://jobbik.com/saudi_israeli_cooperation_secret_alliance_bought_for_money

Asslamoalaikum, As you sow so shall you reap. It is a harsh reality that Saudi Arab has been involved in sectarian hatred and sectarian killings throughout the world. We Pakistani Shia have been a big victim of Saudi funded terrorism in Pakistan. Similarly, Saudi Arab is involved in Zaria massacre in Nigeria. Who funded Taliban? The government of Taliban in Afghanistan was recognized by Pakistan, UAE and Saudi Arab but after their fall now Saudi Arab and its media is blaming Iran of having strong ties with Al-Qaida and Taliban. Do they still think that the world is fool? I am noticing continuous struggle from Saudi Arab's side to connect Iran with terrorism in one way or the other firstly as a propaganda against Iran and secondly being puppet of American interest in middle east. I am sick of lies and deception spread by Saudi Arab against Iran in its media. They have no shame in telling and spreading lies like Zionist media. They are muslim Zionists. Wrath of Allah be upon liars. Dear Saudi Arab you have the blood of millions of Muslims throughout the world in your dirty hands since the creature of your illegitimate Saudi regime. So stop turning the blame on Iran who had never supported terrorism. Yes Iran supports Palestinian movement and Hamas. You even call it terrorism only because you have strong apparent ties with America and hidden ties with Israel.

Religious Difference in a Secular Age A Minority Report PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS 2015 December 7, 2015 SherAli Tareen It is commonly thought that violence, injustice, and discrimination against religious minorities, especially in the Middle East, are a product of religious fundamentalism and myopia. Concomitantly, it is often argued, that more of secularism and less of religion represents the solution to this problem. In her stunning new book Religious Difference in a Secular Age: A Minority Report (Princeton University Press, 2015), Saba Mahmood, Professor of Anthropology at the University of California at Berkeley, brings such a celebratory view of secularism into fatal doubt. Through a careful and brilliant analysis, Mahmood convincingly shows that far from a solution to the problem of interreligious strife, political secularism and modern secular governance are in fact intimately entwined to the exacerbation of religious tensions in the Middle East. Focusing on Egypt and the experience of Egyptian Copts and Bahais, Mahmood explores multiple conceptual and discursive registers to highlight the paradoxical qualities of political secularism, arguing that majority/minority conflict in Egypt is less a reflection of the failure of secularism and more a product of secular discourses and politics, both within and outside the country. In our conversation, we touched on the salient features of this book such as the concept of political secularism and its applicability to a context such as Egypt, the genealogy of minority rights and religious liberty in the Middle East, discourses of minority rights and citizenship in relation to the Egyptian Copts, the discourse of public order and the regulation of Bahai religious identity and difference in Egypt, secularism, family law, and sexuality and the category of secularity and particular understandings of time, history, and scripture brought into view by the controversy generated in Egypt by the novel Azazeel. This theoretically rigorous book is also wonderfully written, making it particularly suitable for graduate and undergraduate courses on Islam, the Middle East, secularism, religion and politics, gender and sexuality, and theories and methods in religion. Link/source to interview and article: http://newbooksnetwork.com/saba-mahmood-religious-difference-in-a-secular-age-a-minority-report/

Salam, I hope you're all well. I have started to look for places to do my final year medical electives in 2018, as recommended by previous medical students. It is a 8 week block, however we only need to attend a clinical placement for 6 weeks within the block. I'm currently studying in the UK. My major concerns regarding choice of elective placement is safety and discrimination (both islamophobia and anti-shia hate). Plus I'm aware some hospitals may hold a no-hijab policy, so I hope to avoid applying to those. Currently I hope to find a hospital in dearborn or (west of) sydney to apply to, mostly because they hold the largest shia populations. Malaysia and indonesia interest me also, although to a much lesser extent (due to the language barrier). My university has ties to two german universities, so I hope to fall back on those if my application to any of the locations mentioned previously does not succeed. But again, I'm not unsure about hijab policies in Munster unversity and moritz university (greifswald). I understand german completely and with a little jog of the memory I probably will remember how to speak it fluently too. I was wondering wether you could help steer me away from discriminating places/cities and direct me towards safer locations. My choices are not limited to the countries/cities I listed. For instance, I have considered zanzibar too. I have been told it's quite the rewarding experience and sets a strong contrast between medical care in MEDCs and LEDCs. My university has ties to other locations like lisbon (portugal), madrid, cordoba, paris, tokyo, rome, beijing, hong kong etc. The reason why I'm not listing these is due to the lack of interest in the culture AND the language barrier. Although, and to be fair, I do like the japanese culture. But I have been told they don't take kindly to foreigners, or at least don't enjoy seeing them. I hope you can help and thanks for reading =D jazakum Allah kheiran!

Persian Translation of Nicola Pratt's 'How the West Undermined Women’s Rights in the Arab World' Mar 07 2016by Nicola Pratt Listen [Mother of the martyr. Photo by Nicola Pratt] چگونه غرب حقوق زنان در جهان عرب را تضعیف کرد؟ این مقاله بر پایهٔ بخشی از یک پژوهش نوشته شده است که در دو سال گذشته در مورد کنش‌گری زنان در مصر، لبنان و اردن از زمان استقلال تا بهار عربی انجام داده‌ام. {برای این پژوهش} بیش از صد روایتشخصی از فعالان زنان طبقهٔ متوسط از نسل‌های مختلف جمع‌آوری کردم. این پژوهش ابتدا بر مبنای چیزی که یک «پارادوکس جنسیتی» تلقی می‌شود چارچوب‌بندی شده بود: با وجود گذشت بیش از یک قرن از کنش‌گری زنان، چرا زنان در کشورهای عرب هنوز با بعضی از گسترده‌ترین نابرابری‌های جنسیتی در دنیا مواجه هستند؟ استعمارزدایی از جنسیت در دنیای عرب هدف پژوهش من پرداختن نقادانه به دو پیش‌فرض اصلی شکل‌دهندهٔ این پارادوکس بود. پیش‌فرض اول فروکاستن کنش‌گریزنان به مقابله آن‌ها با مردسالاری است. این فرض به مقولهٔ تفکیکِ دوگانه خصوصی/عمومی مرتبط است و بحث فمینیست‌ها درباره‌اش این بوده که زنان به حوزهٔ خصوصی محدود شده‌اند و مردان بر حوزهٔ عمومی تسلط دارند.[اما] با توجه به شواهد موجود در دنیای عرب که نشان می‌دهند مشارکت زنان به عنوان وسیله‌ای برای مدرنیزاسیون و معیار آن ترویج می‌شود، چنین تفکیکی مشکل‌آفرین است. از پایان قرن نوزدهم میلادی، گفتمان ملی‌گرایانه در خاورمیانه سیمایی از به اصطلاح زن جدید ایجاد کرد که تحصیل‌کرده بود و در فضای عمومی حضور داشت. [۱] درچنین بستری، زنان طبقهٔ متوسط و نخبه کم‌کم وارد زندگی عمومی شدند؛ این روند در ابتدا عمدتاً با به وجود آوردن انجمن‌های خیریه انجام شد و در ادامه اتحادیه‌های زنان را شکل داد که به حقوق بیشتر زنان در ازدواج و دسترسی گسترده‌تر آنان به آموزش پرداختند. این زنان صرفاً مشغول «مقابله با مردسالاری» نبودند، بلکه خود را بخشی از مبارزه علیه «عقب‌ماندگی» در راستای مدرنیزه کردن مملکت می‌دیدند. دیده شدن زنان به ویژه تبدیل شد به شاخصه‌ای کلیدی برای هویت طبقات متوسط نوظهور و به ایدهٔ «مدرنیتهٔ طبقه متوسط» تجسم بخشید .[۲] فرض دوم در مورد مسئلهٔ حقوق زنان در جهان عرب در معرفت‌شناسی اورینتالیستی {شرق‌شناسانه} دیرینه‌ای ریشه دارد کهوضعیت زنان را نشانی از عقب‌ماندگی جهان عرب می‌داند. بر اساس این فرض، پاسخ محبوب مفسران غربی به این که چرا کنش‌گری زنان منجر به بهبود حقوق زنان نشده این بوده که «دلیلش مقاوم بودن/ارتجاع پدرسالاری عرب است.» مشکل چنین پاسخی تقلیل دادن دلایل فرودستی زنان به ارزش‌ها و باورهای فرهنگی عرب است و معنی ضمنی‌اش این است که «غرب» تعیین‌کننده استانداردهای تمدن‌مدارانه برای حقوق زنان است. علاوه بر این، تحلیلهایی که به ماهیت پرنقص فرهنگ عرب در مورد زنان می پردازند، ساختارهای قدرتِ دیگر و به‌ویژه ساختارهای مبتنی بر طبقه و ملیت را به‌ کل کنار گذاشته و نقش اقتصاد سیاسی و روابط ژئوپلتیک در بازتولید چنین سلسه‌مرتبه‌های متلاقی و برهم‌نهادی را نادیده می‌گیرند. بنابراین، صورت‌بندی عنوان این مقاله به شکل «چگونه غرب حقوق زنان در جهان عرب را تضعیف کرد؟» عهدی برای برملا کردن عملیات سری دولت‌های غربی نیست، بلکه تلاشی برای گوشزد کردن مشکلات ریشه‌ای طرز فکر معمول ما درباره حقوق زنان و کنش‌گری زنان در جهان عرب است. من به ویژه مایلم از طرفی ابعاد ژئوپلتیک دخیل در بوجود آوردن هنجارهای جنسیتی و مقاومت در برابر آن‌ها را نشان داده، و از آن طرف، فهم‌مان از حقوق زنان را به فراسوی قوانین و سیاست‌های {حوزه} عمومی گسترش دهم تا روش‌های مورد استفادهٔ زنان برای برانداختن هنجارهای جنسیتی و بازتعریف آن‌ها از راه مشارکت در حوزه عمومی را نیز دربربگیرد. پیدایش جنبش‌های رادیکال پس از ۱۹۶۷ تمرکز این مقاله بر دوران بین سال‌ ۱۹۶۷ تا دهه ۱۹۸۰ است؛ یعنی سال‌هایی که در طی آن دنیای عرب ظهور جنبش‌های انقلابی و رادیکالی را به خود دید که وضعیت سیاسی و ژئوپلتیک موجود را به چالش کشیده و سپس از متحدان غرب در منطقه (به ویژه رژیم‌های مصر، اردن، عربستان سعودی و اسرائیل) شکست خوردند. همزمان با گرامی‌داشت پنجمین سالگرد خیزش‌های عربی، تعمق در مورد ناآرامی سیاسی و سیاست‌های بحث‌برانگیز پس از ۱۹۶۷ که شباهت‌های جالبی با دورهٔ بین سال‌های ۲۰۱۱ تا ۲۰۱۳ دارند از اهمیت بسیاری برخوردار است. شکست سنگین ارتش‌های عرب در جنگ شش‌روزه بین اعراب و اسرائیل در سال ۱۹۶۷، مشروعیت پروژهٔ پان‌عرب را زیر سوال برد و دورهٔ جدیدی از سیاست‌های عرب را آغاز کرد. در باب ابعاد نظامی و سیاسی جنگ ۱۹۶۷ (از جمله لوییس و شلایم و دیگران)[۳] و نیز مکاشفه‌ی فکری پس از آن شکستِ سنگین بسیار نوشته‌اند.[۴] با این همه، تقریباً هیچ توجهی به دلالت‌های جنسیتی این شکست نشده است. این مسئله از آن جهت که تجربه‌های ویژهٔ زنان و البته مردان را به عنوان سوژه‌ها و شهروندان جنسیت‌زده به حاشیه می‌راند حائز اهمیت است؛ دلیل دیگر اهمیت آن اینکه شکست ۱۹۶۷ مجالی جدید برای زنان پدید آورد تا از هنجارهای جنسیتیِ {متأثر از} فمینیسم دولتی/حکومتی که بخشی مهم از دولت‌سازی پس از استقلال بود سرپیچی کنند. در مصر، شوک شدید شکست ۱۹۶۷ جنبش‌های اپوزیسیون جدیدی پدید آورد که جنبش دانشجویی در مرکز آن‌ها بود. این جنبش ابتدا از دل خشمی برآمد که ناشی از صدور محکومیت‌های خفیف زندان برای ژنرال‌های ارتشی بود که مسئول شکست مصر در جنگ بودند. اما خواسته‌های دانشجویان از این بسیار فراتر رفت، از آن جمله درخواست آزادی‌‌های سیاسی بیشتر و نیز حذف پلیس و نیروهای اطلاعاتی از محیط دانشگاه. [۵] در ژانویهٔ سال ۱۹۷۲ هزاران دانشجو در اعتراضاتی شرکت کردند که به شکل تحصن در میدان تحریر ادامه یافت. روز بعد شرکت‌کنندگان با اعمال زور متفرق و برخی نیز بازداشت شدند. با این همه، دانشجویانِ رادیکال همچنان به طرح خواسته‌های ملی و سیاسی خود و اعتراض به دستگیری همراهان‌شان ادامه دادند. در میان این جنبش‌های ملی‌گرا و چپ‌گرا، مسائل حقوق و آزادسازی زنان تابعی از اهداف ملی و سیاسیِ مقاومت در برابر امپریالیسم و استبداد، مبارزه برای عدالت اجتماعی و آزادسازی فلسطین بودند. اگرچه رهبران جنبش باور داشتند زنان باید به عنوان ابزاری در جهت مدرن‌سازی جوامع عرب برای مشارکت در حوزهٔ عمومی بسیج شوند، اما نابرابری جنسیتی در حوزهٔ خصوصی را نادیده گرفتند. [۶] با این حال، این جنبش‌ها با موفقیت و به طرزی بی‌سابقه زنان جوان را جذب کنش‌گری سیاسی کردند. ناآرامی‌های سیاسی پس از ۱۹۶۷ فرصت‌هایی برای زنان جوان جهت سرپیچی از هنجارهای جنسیتی غالب فراهم آورد. آیدا سیف‌الدوله، فعال مصری حقوق بشر، حضور خود در دانشگاه در دوران اوج جنبش دانشجویی مصر را این‌گونه به یاد می‌آورد: کنش‌گر دیگری به نام هاله شکرالله که متولد سال ۱۹۵۴ و قاهره است، به واسطه شغل پدرش (سفیر اتحادیهٔ کشورهای عرب در کانادا) بخش عمدهٔ جوانی‌اش را آن‌جا سپری کرده بود. او در سال ۱۹۷۱ به مصر بازگشت، دستگیری برادرانش که فعال دانشجویی بودند او را به کنش‌گری سوق داد و علی‌رغم سن کم، به یکی از رهبران جنبش خانواده‌های دستگیرشدگان تبدیل شد. او جلسه‌ای با سخنگوی مجلس که پدرش را خوب می‌شناخته را به یاد می‌آورد: خاطرات بسیاری از زنانی که با آن‌ها مصاحبه کردم نشان‌دهندهٔ یک محیط اجتماعی-سیاسی ناپایدار در دوران پس از شکست ۱۹۶۷ است. جنبش‌های متنوع اجتماعی و سیاسی برای ایستادگی در برابر وضعیت سیاسی، ژئوپلتیک و اجتماعیِ موجود سربرآورده بودند. اگرچه این جنبش‌ها از نظر ایدئولوژیک روش‌های مشکل‌آفرینی در مورد برابری جنسیتی داشتند، محیطیایجاد کردند که زنان جوان طبقهٔ متوسط بتوانند با استفاده از آن و از طریق مشارکت در اعتراضات خیابانی، پیوستن به گروه‌های سیاسی، مقابله با استبداد و گردن‌کشی در برابر والدین، سلسله‌مراتب‌ جنسیتی را دگرگون کرده و پا را از هنجارهای غالب فراتر بگذارند. برخی حتی دستگیر شدند. زنان، از این طریق، اجراگری خود از تعابیر جنسیتیِ رادیکالِ جدید را با مقاومت در برابر وضعیت اجتماعی-سیاسی و ژئوپلتیک موجود هم‌راستا کردند. {جریان} ضدانقلاب با این همه، موج انقلابی پس از ۱۹۶۷ در کشورهای عرب در نهایت توسط متحدان غرب در منطقه شکست خورد. حمایت‌های آمریکا از مصر، به ویژه پس از امضای معاهدهٔ صلح توسط انور سادات با اسرائیل در سال ۱۹۷۹، به میلیاردها دلار رسید. [۷] {جریان} ضدانقلاب، هم نیروهای سیاسی رادیکال و هم زنان و جنسیت را هدف قرار داد. سادات ابتدا تلاش کرد با دادن آزادیِ عمل به اسلام‌گراها در محیط دانشگاه، جنبش‌های سیاسیِ رادیکال را تضعیف کند، درست برخلاف جمال عبدالناصر که در زمانش اسلام‌گراها زندانی و حتی اعدام می‌شدند. [۸] بدن زنان و هنجارهای جنسیتی بخشی محوری در این روند ضدانقلاب بودند. آیدا سیف‌الدوله به یاد می‌آورد که اسلام‌گرایان در سال ۱۹۷۵ اتحادیهٔ دانشجویی را در اختیار گرفته و شروع به تبلیغِ پوشش اسلامی با تخفیف کردند: «و در همان دوره [...] با دو زن جوان آشنا شدم که هر دو حجاب داشتند و با همدیگر هم کنار می‌آمدیم، بعد [...] شروع کردند به گفتن این‌ که 'چرا تو حجاب نمی‌گذاری؟'» آیدا همچنین تنش‌های بین اسلام‌گرایان و دانشجویان دیگر را به یاد می‌آورد: حمایت سادات از دانشجویان اسلام‌گرا و آشتی‌ کلی‌ترش با اسلام‌گرایان سیاسی، صرفاً راهی برای مقابله با تأثیر گروه‌های سیاسی چپ‌گرا و ناصریست نبود، بلکه نشانهٔ جدایی کامل از رژیم سکولار و متمایل به مدرنیزاسیونِ عبدالناصر هم بود که فمینیسم دولتی/حکومتی از بخش‌های اساسی آن محسوب می‌شد. سادات برخی از مزایای زنان طبقهٔ متوسط را از طریق برنامهٔ «انتفاح» یا اصلاحات اقتصادی به کام بخش خصوصی تضعیف کرد. کاهش نسبی درآمدها در بخش دولتی در نتیجهٔ برنامهٔ انتفاح بیش از همه روی زنان تأثیر گذاشت، چرا که بخش دولتی اولین انتخاب آن‌ها برای استخدام شدن بود. برای اولین بار و در تغییر مسیری مشهود نسبت به دوران ناصریسم، بحث‌هایی در فضای عمومی در مورد پسندیده نبودن کار زنان مطرح شد و دولت «مشوق‌های بسیاری پیش روی زنان گذاشت تا مرخصی بدون حقوق گرفته و فرزندانشان را بزرگ کنند و/یا به صورت پاره‌وقت کار کنند.» [۹] چنین نگرشی نشان‌دهندهٔ محافظه‌کاری اجتماعی روبه‌رشدی بود که از سوی اسلام‌گرایان ترویج می‌شد. مقاومت مردمی در برابر «انتفاح» به اعتراضات ۱۹۷۷ انجامید که رسانه‌های غربی آن را «شورش‌های نان» خوانده و مصری‌ها به آن «قیام نان» می‌گفتند. منشاء این اعتراضات اعلامیه دولت بود که بر مبنای آن یارانه‌های چندین کالای پایه‌ای مانند شکر، نان و برنج حذف شد، حقوق مشاغل دولتی کاهش یافت، و منجر به دوبرابر شدن یک‌شبه قیمت‌ها شد. کارگران در ۱۷ ژانویه اعتصاب کردند و در پی آن هزاران دانشجو، کارمندان دولتی بخش خدمات و مصری‌های دیگر برای راهپیمایی در مرکز شهر قاهره به آنها پیوستند. این اعتراضات در سرتاسر کشور گسترش یافت. در کل، ۱۶۰ معترض توسط نیروهای امنیتی کشته و هشتصد نفر زخمی شدند. [۱۰] هزاران چپ‌گرا به بهانهٔ تلاش برای سرنگونی رژیم به زندان انداخته شدند. [۱۱] بسیاری از آن‌ها بدون محکومیت، اگرچه تنها پس از گذران ۶ ماه در بازداشتگاه اداری، آزاد شدند. [۱۲] ماجده عدلی، فعال حقوق بشر که آن زمان در دانشگاه الازهر دانشجوی پزشکی بود، یکی از آن بیست نفری است که به دلیل مشارکت در اعتراضات دستگیر و بیش از یک سال زندانی شد: سرکوب گستردهٔ فعالان پس از ۱۹۷۷ به پایان جنبش دانشجویی چپ‌گرا به عنوان یکی از نیروهای سیاسی مصر انجامید. بسیاری از سازمان‌های مارکسیستی مخفی منحل شدند. مانند آن‌چه در مصر پس از تابستان ۲۰۱۳ دیدیم، بسیاری از فعالان دلسرد شده و دست از فعالیت در فضای عمومی کشیدند. بسیاری به کنش خاتمه دادند تا مطالعه کنند، به دنبال کار بروند یا تحصیلات دکترا را در خارج از کشور دنبال کنند، در عین حال که به بازنگری و تأمل دربارهٔ عقاید سیاسی-ایدئولوژیک پیشین خود نشستند. زنانی که در دههٔ ۸۰ میلادی به دانشگاه می‌رفتند به من گفتند که به جز در میان گروه‌های دانشجویی اسلام‌گرا تقریباً هیچ خبری از کنش‌گری سیاسی در دانشگاه‌های مصر نبود. منفک شدن برنامه‌های هدفمند و کنش‌گری حقوق زنان از مبارزات مردمی یک روند عمده در جریان ضدانقلاب، بازگشت به وضعیت جنسیتی پیشین بود که انتظار داشت زنان از سلسله‌مرتبه‌های جنسیت‌زده و مفاهیم منوط به زنانگی احترام‌برانگیز پیروی کنند. با این همه، حضور زنان در عرصه عمومی پایان نیافت. شاید به شکلی متناقض، سازمان‌ها و تلاش‌های مستقل زنان پس از {دوره} ضدانقلاب شروع به شکوفایی کردند. گروه مطالعاتی «زن نو» که بعدها تبدیل به «موسسهٔ زن نو» شد، توسط اعضای سابق جنبش دانشجویی و برای فهم فرودستی خاص زنان تأسیس شد. نوال السعداوی «انجمن همبستگی زنان عرب» را برای پرداختن به مسئلهٔ خشونت علیه زنان به راه انداخت. گروهی از فعالان و وکلای حقوق زنان در سال ۱۹۸۵ ائتلافی علیه لغو لایحه‌های نسبتاً پیشروی ۱۹۷۹ مربوط به قوانین احوال شخصیه به راه انداختند. این‌ها همه بخشی از تلاش‌های مربوط در دههٔ ۸۰ میلادی بودند (برای جزییات بیشتر رجوع کنید به العلی)[۱۳]. بازپیدایی انجمن‌های مستقل زنان برای اولین بار پس از دههٔ ۵۰ در مصر فضای طرح گفتمان جنسیتی جدیدی در اختیار زنان قرار داد که از تابعیت مشکل‌آفرین مسائل زنان از ایدئولوژی‌های انقلابی و رادیکال رها شد. با این حال، در بستر شکست نیروهای مردمی و تضعیف گروه‌های اپوزیسیون سیاسی به جز اسلام‌گرایان، این منجر به ایزوله شدن اهداف حقوق زنان از سیاست‌های منطقه‌ای و داخلی نیز شد. پس از دههٔ ۹۰ و با افزایش «ان‌جی‌اوسازی» جنبش‌های زنان، [۱۴] که حامی بسیج/جذب اقشار ذی‌نفع گسترده‌تر نبودند، این جدافتادگی تشدید شد. علاوه بر این، چون حکومت مصر به شکل گزینشی از حقوق زنان استفادهٔ ابزاری کرده و تلاش می‌کرد سازمان های زنان را - برای مثال از طریق «شورای ملی زنان» - به انحصار خود درآورد، خواسته‌های حقوقی زنان مشروعیت خود را از دست دادند. این‌ها بخشی از روند ایجاد تصویری «مدرن» برای استفاده در خارج از کشور و سوءاستفاده از حقوق زنان در ائتلاف علیه «تروریسم» به رهبری آمریکا بود.[۱۵] در نتیجه، این واقعیت که با ظهور جنبش‌های مردمیِ پس از سال ۲۰۰۰ و برخاسته از انتفاضهٔ الاقصی، مسائل منوط به حقوق زنان در فهرست برنامه‌ها و اهداف نبودند تعجب‌آور نیست. زنان در این جنبش‌ها حضور پررنگی داشتند، اما برخلاف جنبش‌های انقلابی پس از ۱۹۶۷، تقریباً هیچ تلاشی برای گنجاندن «مسئلهٔ زن» در مخالفت این جنبش‌ها با امپریالیسم آمریکا، نئولیبرالیسم و استبداد انجام نشد. محبوبیت دوباره و از بین رفتن محبوبیت حقوق زنان پس از ۲۰۱۱ تنها بین سال‌های ۲۰۱۱ و ۲۰۱۳ بود که زنان توانستند «مسئلهٔ زن» را دوباره در جنبش‌های مردمی بگنجانند. تحت حکومت «شورای عالی نیروهای مسلح مصر» و اخوان‌المسلمین، سازمان‌های مردمی زنان، خارج از قلمروی ان‌جی‌اوهای رسمی آن‌ها و در واکنش به تهدیدهای پیش روی حقوق زنان و خشونت روزافزون علیه فعالان زن به وجود آمدند. در مصرِ پس از مبارک، نه تنها فعالان زنان مصری در صف مقدم مبارزات راه عدالت اجتماعی و دموکراسی بودند، بلکه خواسته‌های خاص جنسیتی در رابطه با مشارکت و تمامیت جسمانی زنان را نیز مطرح می‌کردند. آن‌ها به راستی توانستند دگرگونی‌ هنجارهای جنسیتی را با خواسته‌ کلان‌تر دگرگونی‌های سیاسی-اجتماعی ادغام کنند (رجوع کنید به فصل‌های مختلف کتاب ال‌سعید، میری و پرات)[۱۶]. با وجود این، به واسطهٔ قطبی‌شدگی سیاسی و استبداد روزافزون پس از خلع ید محمد مرسی (رییس‌جمهور عضو اخوان‌المسلمین) در جولای ۲۰۱۳، دستاوردهای فعالیت گسترده و مستقل زنان تضعیف شده‌اند. اگرچه حکومتی که پس از جولای ۲۰۱۳ روی کار آمده، از طریق قانون اساسی و وضع قانون ضد آزار جنسی در سال ۲۰۱۴ تلاش‌هایی برای پیشبرد حقوق زنان کرده، اما آزادی اجتماعات و بیان را به شدت محدود کرده است. از این رو، یک بخش کلیدی جریان ضدانقلاب بده‌بستان مردسالارانهٔ جدیدی است که در آن رژیم از حقوق زنان حمایت می‌کند ولی در عوض زنان باید از آزادی لازم برای سازماندهی یا تعیین اهداف به‌دست خودشان چشم بپوشند. همان‌طور که سال گذشته نوشتم، فعالان در تلاش‌های هم‌زمان خود برای حفظ پارادایم {الگوواره} پویای عدالت جنسیتی، مقاومت در برابر انتصابات/انحصارطلبی‌ها و تحمیل‌های از بالا به پایینِ دولتی و نیز جا انداختن نظم جنسیتی انقلابی، مردمی و از پایین به بالا چالش بزرگی پیش روی خود دارند. جمع‌بندی هدفم در این مقاله نشان دادن ایرادهای دو پیش‌فرض در مورد کنش‌گری زنان و حقوق زنان در جهان عرب بود. نخست، تلاش کردم درک ما از عاملیت زنان را از مقاومت در برابر مردسالاری فراتر برده و نشان دهم چطور برانداختن هنجارهای جنسیتی و معنی‌بخشی دوباره به آن‌ها نیز بخشی از جنبش ضدهژمونیک علیه نظم اجتماعی-سیاسی و ژئوپلتیکِ پس از ۱۹۶۷ بود. به عبارت دیگر، مشارکت زنان در جنبش‌های رادیکال تجسم دگرگونی اجتماعی-سیاسی از جمله دگرگونی هنجارهای جنسیتی بود. از همین روست که شباهت‌هایی بین دورهٔ مذکور و ظهور کنش‌گریِ مردمی زنان به عنوان بخشی از مبارزات انقلابی پس از ۲۰۱۱ می‌بینیم. دوم این که، تلاش کردم ایرادهای این باور که غرب عامل پیشرفت و حقوق زنان در دنیای عرب است را گوشزد کنم. غرب در واقع در پی منافع ژئوپلتیک خود از حکومت‌هایی پشتیبانی کرده که نه تنها جنبش‌های مردمی انقلابی و رادیکال، بلکه زنانی که تجسم زنانگی‌های رادیکال‌اند را سرکوب کرده‌اند. در بلندمدت، نابودی جنبش‌های رادیکال سکولار منجر به جدا شدن اهدافسکولار حقوق زنان از پروژه‌های مردمیِ بومی شده و راه را برای استفادهٔ ابزاری و به انحصار گرفته شدن از سوی حکومت‌های استبدادی و بازیگران بین‌المللی باز کرده است؛ امری که باعث شده فعالان سکولار حقوق زنان در برابر اتهام نمایندگی اهداف بیگانه/وارداتی آسیب‌پذیر شوند. فعالان زنان در بستر روند ضدانقلاب کنونی در جهان عرب با تهدیدهای مشابهی مواجهند. این مقاله نسخه‌ای خلاصه‌شده از یک سخنرانی با همین عنوان است که در ۲۰ ژانویهٔ ۲۰۱۶ در «مرکز خاورمیانه دانشگاه ال‌اس‌ای» ارائه شده بود. سخنرانی اصلی به لبنان واردن نیز پرداخته است. پادکست این سخنرانی{به انگلیسی} را می‌تواناین‌جا شنید. این سخنرانی حاوی بخشی از محتویات کتابی در مورد کنش‌گری زنان در مصر، لبنان و اردن است که به زودی منتشر خواهد شد. آرشیو دیجیتال تمام مصاحبه‌های این پژوهش همراه با انتشار کتاب در دسترس عموم قرار خواهد گرفت [اصل این مقاله به انگلیسی و در تاریخ ۲۵ ژانویه ۲۰۱۶ منتشر شده است. این مقاله به‌دست لیلی بهبهانی به فارسی ترجمه شده است.] Link to article: http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/24010/persian-translation-of-nicola-pratts-how-the-west-

(salam) In spite of the fact that Nawaz Sharief is considered puppet of Saudi Arab and Saudi Arab helped him a lot in his personal capacity, Pakistan is only providing assurance for support for Saudi Arab if its integrity is endangered. What Saudi Arab was/is/will be expecting is that Pakistan send its troops in Saudi Arab for fight against Yemen Houthi group and other enemies of Saudi regime. It is good that in spite of so much international pressure Pakistan has chosen its way intelligently and refused to be part of any international game. The drama of Islamic coalition forces was made to trap countries like Pakistan to force them to work for Saudi regime but amazingly a wise decision from Pakistan came that Pakistan is with the integrity of Saudi Arab but not with the Saudi Arab regime.

UNITED NATIONS, United States: (AFP) - UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned Friday that the use of cluster bombs in Yemen by the Saudi-led coalition may amount to war crimes. Ban said he had received "troubling reports" of cluster bomb attacks on January 6 on the rebel-held capital Sanaa. "The use of cluster munitions in populated areas may amount to a war crime due to their indiscriminate nature," the UN chief said in a statement. Cluster bombs are banned under a 2008 international convention, although Saudi Arabia and the United States are not signatories. The office of the UN high commissioner for human rights said Tuesday that its staff in Yemen had found remnants of 29 cluster bombs during a field visit in Haradh district in the northwest. The warning over possible war crimes was a clear sign of mounting frustration at the UN with Saudi Arabia s 10-month military campaign in Yemen. It came in response to the decision by Yemen s Saudi-backed government to expel the leading UN rights official, George Abu al-Zulof. Ban is urging the Yemeni government to reverse its decision to expel Zulof, who was declared persona non grata for an alleged lack of impartiality in his reporting. The UN chief said he was "deeply concerned about the intensification of coalition airstrikes and ground fighting and shelling in Yemen, despite repeated calls for a renewed cessation of hostilities." He is "particularly concerned about reports of intense airstrikes in residential areas and on civilian buildings in Sanaa, including the Chamber of Commerce, a wedding hall and a centre for the blind," said the statement. UN envoy Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed was in Riyadh on Friday for talks on renewing a ceasefire in Yemen, which faces the threat of famine amid the dire humanitarian crisis. Yemen descended into chaos when the coalition began airstrikes in March to push back Iran-backed Huthi rebels who had seized Sanaa. More than 5,800 people have been killed and 27,000 wounded since then, according to UN figures. Yemen s government sat down with the rebels and their allies in Switzerland last month for six days of talks that ended with no major breakthrough. The UN envoy has called for a new round of talks on January 14 but the sides have yet to confirm that they will attend. http://dunyanews.tv/en/World/316821-UN-warns-cluster-bomb-use-in-Yemen-may-amount-to-w

To all interested applicants for Doctor of Pharmacy (Pharm.D.), Doctor of Dental Surgery (D.D.S) and Doctor of Medicine (M.D) programs, 2016 academic year, Tehran University of Medical Sciences will accept the most qualified and interested applicants for the February 2016. Admission is open all year round, and you can apply right now. For students who wish to attend the February 2016 program, complete applications should be submitted to us not later than October 31, 2015.

مشرقِ وسطیٰ کی جغرافیائی اہمیت کے بارے میں معلومات اور کیوں عالمی حالات کی خرابی مشرقِ وسطی میں ہے، اس خطّےمیں ایسی کیا خاص بات ہے کہ امریکہ اس پر قبضہ کرنے کی منصوبہ بندی کئی سال پہلے کر چکا ہے اور اپنے ناپاک منصوبوں کے مطابق عمل کررہا ہے۔ ان تمام حقیقتوں کو جاتئے۔ Watch 17 mins video clip of Ustad Syed Jawad Naqvi http://www.shiatv.net/video/240956162

As-salamu alaykum brothers. I am new here and need help: what do you guys think about this article?? i need to refute it for a misgiuded Christian. I know we are not all this way. Some Sunni can be but are we? I like what he says about tradition at least Blessings to you. from here: http://catholicanalysis.org/2014/09/29/jihad-and-heresy/

Any scoop on why is Russia supporting Bashar and is opposed to Wahabi terrorism? What is that they have to gain?

Parents and Expatriate/Local Hire Teachers: Stay away from Al-Ghanim Bilingual School in Salwa, Kuwait! It’s my opinion that you should stay away from Al-Ghanim Bilingual School in Salwa, Kuwait. These are some of the things that I disliked about the school: 1. The turn-over rate is very high for new “Westerners.” I think the reason for this is the administration does not provide the appropriate classroom support. Instead, the climate at the school is one in which some administrators are critical of teachers. In fact, the Director, Dr. Afaf El-Gemayel said in a meeting with new staff members, “If you look hard enough, all student problems are the teacher’s fault.” As a result of this attitude, the probability of surviving for very long at this school is low. Given the low probability of surviving at this school, it is not worth the financial, emotional, and time investment to go here. 2. The administration is constantly popping into classrooms to observe teachers. In some cases, they will go into a teacher’s classroom five or more days straight . . . And, then they will still come back to do more observations at-will. It is very uncomfortable and nerve-racking for the teachers who are being watched. The administration says that they are doing it to “help” the teachers, but it feels more like they are doing it to “push” them out of the school. It seems barbaric. 3. On a regular basis, the school “docks” people’s pay. As a Westerner, this was abhorrent to me—the idea that you could work a day and then lose that day’s pay based on the judgment call of an administrator. (My belief is that if someone has done something egregious enough, suspend them without pay. But to have people work and not pay them seems too self serving.) 4. The school does not live up to financial commitments. You may or may not receive money owed you. Just because an administrator says in an e-mail that she will reimburse you for expenses, does not mean that she will. Also, I heard stories about how this school refused to pay summer salaries and “indemnity” pay owed to some teachers. 5. The housing the school provided smelled. I think it was a combination of cigarette smoke and feces (no joke) from poor plumbing. When I returned to the “West,” I had to wash all of my clothes because they smelled. 6. During the interview process, Dr. El-Gemayel said that the school had all the necessary classroom resources. The classroom decorations that were supplied to a colleague of mine were old and dirty, and several important resources were not available for the start of school. 7. Even though the school is not licensed to teach special education students, the school has numerous low-level classes called “Special English.” Guess what the “Special” stands for? These classes have many students that should be evaluated for special education services. It appears to me that the administration does not want these students evaluated because if the results determined that these students needed special education services, then the students would have to leave the school, and the school would stand to lose a lot of tuition money. So, when teachers have trouble managing and teaching these students, the administration acts like the problem is with the teacher rather than acknowledging these students need services beyond the scope of a regular educational classroom. Although I recommend staying away from this school, if you are even considering working there, make sure that you get the following before making a final decision: 1. A copy of the contract. 2. A copy of the staff manual. If it’s the same staff manual that I received, you’ll find a list of things teachers should not do and the consequences—including the number of days pay that will be lost. 3. Your assignment and schedule in writing. (There were teachers who were told that they would be doing one thing, and when they arrived they were told that they would be doing something else.) When you request these reasonable things, consider how the administration responds. Do they freely offer them to you with a smile, or do they come up with excuses not to provide them? If they don’t provide them, beware! If you make the mistake of accepting an offer from this school, then make sure you receive copies of your Initial and Final Approval Letters. (These approvals are sent to the school from the Kuwait Ministry of Education.) Also, once you receive copies of these items, contact that Kuwait Ministry of Education to make sure an original copy of your contract, as well as Initial and Final Approval Letters are on file. PLEASE DO THIS BEFORE YOU EVEN BOARD THE PLANE TO KUWAIT! I sought the assistance of the Ministry of Education when I was experiencing difficulty with the school administration. A ministry representative informed me that she couldn’t help me unless she had my original contract and approval letters on file (which she didn’t). Fortunately, the ministry representative was kind enough to refer me to the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor. (This ministry was a big help.) Unfortunately, I think the school administration purposely delays giving teachers these items so they won’t be able to seek assistance from the Ministry of Education when they’re being mistreated. _______________________________________________________________________ Here are more reasons to avoid Al-Ghanim Bilingual School in Salwa, Kuwait: 1. Teachers/staff members are required to work on approximately TEN Saturdays during the school year, without being compensated for this extra time. (The Saturday work is usually related to professional development or the accreditation application process.) 2. Al-Ghanim Bilingual School is currently undergoing the accreditation application process with the Council of International Schools (CIS). This school shouldn’t be accredited by any organization—ever! As part of the accreditation application process, staff members and teachers had to complete self-study reports grading and evaluating various aspects of the school and its administration—policies, infrastructure, transparency, ethical treatment of employees. Originally, the school and its administration were given many poor ratings in the self-study reports. The director, Afaf El-Gemayel, threatened staff members and teachers with the loss of summer pay unless the ratings were changed to reflect the school in a more positive light. As a result, the self-study reports were falsified and are now tainted by Afaf El-Gemayel’s need to lie about the state of Al-Ghanim Bilingual School.

The Rise of New Bloody War in the Middle East The advent of democracy and equality of citizens in the Middle East is not only a bad news for the current dictators of the Arab world, Al Qaeda and its Wahhabi affiliates are equally worried. Also in Pakistan and Afghanistan, Wahhabi share one common characteristic with the current Wahhabi rulers of Saudi Arabia, i.e., acute hatred for Shia who they consider infidels. The events of the Arab Spring have heightened long-standing tensions in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province. Just three days after large-scale protests started in Bahrain on 2011, protests began in the Eastern Province, which is a 30-minute drive across the causeway from Bahrain. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the Saudi interior ministry vowed to crush the protests with an "Iron Fist" and has unleashed a media-smear campaign against protests and the Shiites in general. While protests subsided over the summer, they started again in October and have become larger ever since, leading to an ever more heavy-handed response from the security forces. The Eastern Province is home to virtually all of Saudi Arabia's oil and to a sizeable Shiite majority, or around 30 percent of Saudi Arabia's citizen population. The Wahhabi creed of Salafi Islam that the state sponsors in Saudi Arabia has developed a special hostility toward the Shiites. Saudi Shiite citizens in turn have long complained of discrimination in religious practice, government employment, and business, and overall marginalization. For decades, opposition groups formed by Saudi Shiites, both leftist and Islamists, as well as hundreds of petitions by Shiite notables, have had the same demands: an end to sectarian discrimination in government employment and representation in main state sectors including at the ministerial level; more development in Shiite areas; the strengthening of the Shiite judiciary; and an end to arbitrary arrests of Shiite for religious or political reasons. None of these demands would significantly undermine the position of the royal family, or otherwise threaten the integrity of Saudi Arabia. They would rather cement the current political system and buy the allegiance of two million people living on top of the kingdom's oil. The perception of systematic discrimination has led some Saudi Shiites to embrace revolutionary ideologies over the decades. While pro-Iranian groups still exist amongst Gulf Shiites, they are not the most powerful amongst Saudi Shiites and had largely renounced violence as a political tool since at least the mid-1990s. But Saudi Arabia's repressive response to the protests and the zero-concessions policy are providing fertile breeding ground for future opposition groups. A repetition of post-1979 Shiite politics, when hundreds of young Shiites left Bahrain and Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province to become active in regional revolutionary movements, seems possible. As the protests in Bahrain and particularly in Qatif receive only limited attention on Gulf-owned channels like Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, local Shiites are forced to watch the Iranian-sponsored Arabic-language Al Alam channel, Lebanese Hezbollah's Al Manar, Iraq's Ahlul Bait TV, or increasingly other pro-Assad channels to receive updates on the situation in their areas. The new cold war in the Middle East has turned into a fully-fledged media war, in which media outlets are either with the protests in Bahrain and Qatif and for Assad's regime, or with the protests in Syria and against the allegedly sectarian protests in Bahrain and Qatif. The situation for Saudi Shiites in the Eastern Province is no secret. The U.S. State Department's Annual Report to Congress on International Religious Freedom for the second half of 2010, the period immediately predating the Arab Spring, records arbitrary detentions, mosque closures, and the arrest of Shiite worshippers. U.S. diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks revealed that U.S. diplomats, and particularly the staff at its consulate in Dhahran, have an incredible amount of information on the local Shiite communities and seem almost obsessed with grievances they deem legitimate. But the specific problems of the Saudi Shiites almost never come up at high-level meetings with Saudi officials. This is not only due to the close Saudi and U.S. alliance. Americans sometimes share the suspicion of the Gulf Shiites, which permeates some of its allied regimes. This suspicion is partly to do with Iran, but also has its roots in the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers, which killed 19 U.S. servicemen. Nine Shiite prisoners have been incarcerated since 1996 for their alleged membership in Hezbollah al-Hijaz and their involvement in the bombings. They were indicted in the United States in 2001, but as U.S. foreign policy priorities changed after September 11 they became "forgotten," the name they are known by amongst Saudi Shiites. The indictment hints at the involvement of Lebanese Hezbollah and Iran but no evidence has ever been made public. At the time some Americans called for retaliation against Iran as a response to this bombing. But after September 11, fingers began to point toward al Qaeda as involved in the attack, raising questions about the guilt of these prisoners. The Shiite prisoners cannot hope ever to be "rehabilitated" in one of the government's much advertised de-radicalization programs. It seems to be justified to at least ask for a public trial, a move repeatedly endorsed by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. But such a trial does not appear to be on the foreign-policy agenda of the United States. The behavior of the Saudi leadership only allows the conclusion that repression of the Shiites is a fundamental part of Saudi political legitimacy. The state does not want to change the position of the Shiites and Shiite protests are used by the state to frighten the Sunni population of an Iranian takeover of the oilfields with the help of local Shiites. Similar narratives have been propagated in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) media for months, at the cost of further deepening the sectarian divide in the Gulf States. The GCC intervention in Bahrain has severely worsened sectarian relations in the Gulf and beyond to levels not seen since the Iranian Revolution. But this open Saudi sectarianism has already had negative repercussions in Iraq, as well as in Syria, Lebanon, and Kuwait. Bahrain looks set for years of sectarian conflict, community relations have broken down completely, and the state is conducting a campaign of what Shiite activists call "ethnic cleansing." Rather than completely alienating the Shiites, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain should negotiate a social contract with them. Failing to do so will lead to years of instability with uncertain outcomes. And it is far from certain that other Saudis will not be encouraged by the Shiite protests, as a recent statement by liberal Saudis from all over the kingdom denouncing the crackdown in Qatif has shown. The West should press its allies, above all Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, to stop simply shooting and arresting their Shiite citizens and brandishing them as Iranian agents and traitors. The alienation of Shiite youth foments a perfect breeding ground for a new Gulf Shiite opposition movement. Even without external help for the local Shiite protesters, the area looks ripe for a return to the tense sectarian politics of the 1980s. The United States should in its own, and in the Gulf States', interest push for a real reconciliation between the Shiites of Bahrain and Saudi Arabia and their governments. Otherwise, sectarianism will come to dominate the Gulf, to the detriment of all.

From the beginning the United States has been directly behind the unrest in Syria. In fact, America's involvement in destabilizing Syria began years before the admittedly US-engineered Arab Spring (2) even unfolded in a premeditated plot to upturn the entire Arab World and reorder it according to their own corporate-financier and hegemonic geopolitical interests. In a 2007 speech given to the Commonwealth Club of California (3), US Army General Wesley Clark would state that in 1991, then Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz said the US had 5-10 years to clean up the old Soviet "client regimes" before the next super power rose up and challenged western hegemony. Clark claimed that this, along with the aftermath of 9/11 constituted a policy coup where Richard Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and the other members of the of Project for a New American Century had hijacked US foreign policy to destabilize and turn the nations of the Middle East upside down - much the way they are now. Clark would go on to say that shortly after September 11, 2001, while at the Pentagon, a document handed down from the Office of the Secretary of Defense indicated plans to attack and destroy the governments of 7 countries; Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Iran, Lebanon and Libya. Clearly the United States has already "attacked and destroyed" Iraq, which in 2003 was invaded and subsequently occupied for nearly a decade at the cost of nearly a million lives including over 4,400 US soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines, and trillions of dollars of taxpayer money. Likewise Libya was destabilized and invaded by proxy through a combination of US-led NATO forces and US State Department listed terrorist organizations including the (Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (listed #27) lead by Abdul Hakim Belhaj.

Scary claims about Iran’s military might have been issuing for years. Back in 2006, Gen. John Abizaid, chief of the U.S. Central Command, announced that Iran has the most powerful military in the Middle East, even though Israel has a large stockpile of nuclear weapons, as many as 200, while Saudi Arabia annually spends almost $60 billion on its military (more than 5 times Iran’s current spending) or “10% of GDP on defence, more than double the proportion spent by America.” Both of those Iranian rivals (Israel and Saudi Arabia), and many others in that region, are recipients of vast amounts of sophisticated military weaponry from the U.S. Here is a list of 11 extremely sophisticated weapons that the U.S. — and it alone in the world — possesses. And then there’s the fact that the U.S. basically has Iran completely encircled, as demonstrated by this graph from Juan Cole’s blog, showing U.S. military bases near Iran: As Cole put it: “Each star is a US base. But just to be clear, Iran is the one that is threatening us.” Indeed: imagine if the blue in that map were the U.S. (rather than Iran), and the large red areas were Mexico and Canada (rather than Iran’s neighbors), and the stars represented Iranian military bases. Then further imagine that Iranian political leaders and media figures routinely told their population that it was the U.S. that was an aggressive, threatening power that had to be stopped: the mocking condemnations of that level of propaganda would be endless. Yet American political officials and commentators feel free to insist, with a straight face, that Iran is an aggressor nation posing a serious threat to the U.S.: such a serious threat, in fact, that war may be necessary to stop it. And there is, tragically, little doubt that if there is an attack on Iran by Israel — with direct U.S. involvement or, more likely, U.S. support and approval — there will be little opposition in either American political party, and even less challenge to the ludicrous claims about the Grave Iranian Threat that will be invoked to justify it. Every voice must be raised at this urgent hour against sanctions and war.

Our nation is the strongest military force in the history of the known universe. For the past century, we have been waging wars all over our tiny planet. The Great War, WWI was followed by WWII a war that many believe was even greater. Both world wars catapulted our nation into the leading role of all the nations on earth. We are the richest, the most respected, the most reviled, the most envied, the most powerful nation among nations. We are the most warlike nation. We must, therefore, be the most warlike people ever to have populated this planet. Over the past decade, our nation has prosecuted wars in the Middle East. A war of vengeance against Afghanistan. A war of cupidity against Iraq. Both wars have gone badly for America. While the final combat forces departed Iraq last week, more than 100,000 of our troops are still waging a twilight war in Afghanistan. But it is really worse than that, for our press, television and mainstream media do not reveal the truth to our people. We are already engaged in a third major land war in the Middle East, a war against Iran. Throughout it all, we are being assured by our government that Iran is culpable of violations of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but we are given no conclusive evidence that this casus belli is any more credible than the risible case Colin Powell presented to the United Nations in February 2002 stating that Saddam Hussein posed a threat because of his vast and powerful arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. With the pace of war against Iran now thundering in all its fury, it is time to mobilize once again to demand peace. Raza Mehkeri Houston, Texas. AMERICAN SHIA (Shiite) MUSLIMS

Iran inaugurated Saturday the first conference on the Islamic Awakening, which over 700 intellects and scholars from 80 countries took part in. The conference that was held in Tehran will continue for two days and will include the discussion of five main topics that are, the basics and concepts of the Islamic awakening, the roles that influential people played in it, an introduction to the movements that had roles in this awakening, a study on the threats that face the Islamic awakening, and closing its ranks. Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei was the first to deliver a speech in the conference, in which he assured that this Islamic development cannot be separated from its historical roots, and that it was not a wave that suddenly erupted. Imam Khamenei said that “what united us is the Islamic awakening… the uprising and awareness that is spreading in the Islamic nation, which led to revolts in the region.” His Eminence talked about three main points that are the revolutions themselves, the dangers standing in their way, and steps to deal with them, and indicated that all the attempts by the West to make the revolutions just temporal movements are useless, reassuring that the acts against Iraq and Afghanistan where an introduction to the Islamic uprising against arrogance. Imam Khamenei further assured that the major element in these revolutions was its popularity and the permanent effective presence in the field of work and jihad, indicating that determination that was present in the Egyptian, Tunisian and Yemeni people will follow the same track in Bahrain, and that the legitimacy of these revolutions was the major element in forming their identity. Imam Khamenei reminded that what Iran witnessed in the 70s was a great revolution that was similar to the victory of the blood over the sword, and formed a firm establishment of the Islamic system, and pointed out that "we have always expected that Egypt will be the first to revolt, due to our knowledge about Egypt's wide jihadi and cultural history, and the great and historic characters that it had produced." In parallel, his Eminence said that the Eastern camp has collapsed, the Western one was trying stay firm, and the Islamic awakening is the one that will triumph. He considered that any fear from the United States and the West is a danger that must be treated and confronted , and should not be present in the hearts of the youth in the Islamic world… “This generation in the Islamic countries has the capability to rise and confront, something that we should be proud of.” “It is possible to overpower all these obstacles, by relying on Allah and having determination and courage,” Imam Khamenei added, emphasizing that “the slogans of the Islamic revolutions should stress on independence, dignity, and rejection to the Zionist entity… the goals of the Islamic awakening do not suit the Western, and the Zionist entity’s interests.” As for the situation in Libya, Imam Khamenei said that the American and Western intervention in Libya had caused the death of many and the destruction of infrastructures. He stressed that the Libyan people are the only ones who have the right to draw victory for themselves, and that those who supported Mouammar Gaddafi in the past sould not interfere in the future of Libya. Various speakers also delivered speeches during the first day of the conference including head of the Sudanese Popular Conference Party Hasan Turabi, Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem, Leader of the Islamic Jihad movement in Palestine Ramadan Abdullah Shallah, and Former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani.

Obama’s Administration has been trying so hard for regime change in Iran and investing a lot of money in Persian channels which speak lies against Iranian government all the time. But it doesn’t end in there, Obama also has started sending Iranians Nowruz message in the last 3 years, which is usually ignored by most of Iranians because of Obama’s lack of manners and the fact that most Iranians go for tours inside Iran or outside of Iran in Nowruz, and the ones who stay at home stick to religious leader and president’s Nowruz messages and other exciting programs and movies. 2009 2010 2011 Obama talks about anything that he wants in a Nowruz message, but is that also how he wishes everybody a merry Christmas? he continues it with talking about bad stuff? nobody wants to ruin his Nowruz times with listening to this man’s message. I never responded to Obama’s nowruz messages before, but right now, here as an Iranian, I want to make a response to Obama’s all 3 Nowruz messages. Hi, Mr. president, as you have mentioned in your Nowruz messages, in the last three decades Iran US relations have been strained, but wasn’t it the US government the one who completely broke its relations with Iran? Iran showed that it is ready to recover its relations with the US with asking for airlines between two countries. Why did you reject to talk directly to Ahmadinejad when you were first elected and when he sent you a message and congratulated you? I’m sorry but Iranians don’t trust you and believe that you’re being completely influenced by the Zionist lobby AIPAC, how do you expect Iranians to believe you when it was the US government who overthrown democratically-elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh back in 1953 before Islamic Revolution? how do you expect Iranians to believe your words when you just earlier threatened Iran with nukes? Mr president, weren’t you the one who repudiated the use of nukes against non-nuclear states with the exception of Iran which you termed an “outlier” along with North Korea, isn’t Iran a member of NPT unlike North Korea? Mr. president, your nukes don’t harm Iranian nation? to date, no concrete evidence has been presented about the existence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran,each and every inspect report by the IAEA and the National Intelligence Estimate has confirmed that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program, while you invest millions of dollars on the next generation of nuclear weapons, and my question is that why do you insist that Iran’s pursuing nuclear weapons? as you know that most Iranians want Iranian government to continue its peaceful nuclear activities, so please drop it. Iranians want the United States to drop its support for dictators all over the Middle East and North Africa and join nations, all the people in the world are aware of the US’s big support for Mubarak former dictator of Egypt, just like how they were aware of the US’s support for Saddam before he invades Iran, we are tired of hearing your concern over human rights in Iran, as the US army is bombing hundreds of civilians in different countries every month, and you easily allow Saudis to invade Bahrain and oppress people who are protesting kingdom and asking for their rights such as free elections. We are tired of American news media spreading hate on Muslim nations, we want Americans to be free and have the right to speak freely about anything that they want, without having the fear of going to jail, so many people were jailed or lost their job in universities only because of questioning holocaust, the states police waged a war on cameras trying to cover the truth about how brutally police treats with people in the states, and we also want you to keep your promise and seize Guantanamo and Abu Ghorib disgusting prisons where a lot of people get abused and tortured without being tried or anything. Mr. president, are you listening to yourself? your Nowruz message is full of hate, with all due respect, how pathetic you’ve become since you had to mention names in your latest Nowruz message, but you see, no one needs to make a list of names of people who were sentenced to death, jailed and tortured in the US without being tried or the civilians who were murdered by American illegal weapons in Afghanistan, Iraq and Gaza. Iran’s a free society, 85% of Iranians joined last Iran presidency election, and practically every pre-election poll showed President Ahmedinjad with a significant lead over his opponents. Iran is a country with transparent elections and a fully functional parliament, we have laws and rules here, no one under legal age gets executed, no one gets to be put in jail for no reason, we have courts in which people can defend themselves against charges, ninety percent of execution cases belongs to drug-smuggling cases, thanks to the insecurity, the only thing that the US army so far have caused in Afghanistan and the growth of producing drugs, punishment for drug smugglers in here is death and if it wasn’t because of that, God knows what Iran was turned into. Iranian nation feels a threat from the US, and that is not only because flight 655 tragedy, or your baseless sanctions or operation eagle, but because of the US’s support for Saddam to invade Iran and death of 300,000 Iranian soldiers in that war and the fact US was never sorry for it, because of Iranophobia and the fact the US never apologized for its bully and aggressive acts toward Iran, and you still as the current president of the United States, consider military options against Iran, you cannot gain trust with beautiful words, but with action, Mr president. Can this Iranian woman who has been kept in the US jail over something that her husband did and is being tortured hear your Nowruz message too? mr president I am amazed by the way you compared the people in Tahrir square in Cairo with the people in Freedom square in Tehran, as you know those people in Tahrir square were protesting against former dictator Mubarak, the US’s strategic ally, and the people in Freedom square were celebrating the anniversary of Islamic Revolution. Mr president, I want you to know that Iranians know what does the term “dictator” means and the fact no one in Iran is in power without being elected by people directly or indirectly, unless you want to name people again lol. Mr president, I do want to know how is your government working for global justice with causing tensions in Korea, arming Saudi kingdom, bombing defenseless people in Libya and Afghanistan and torturing people in secret prisons all over the world? Iran is a great civilization with a very rich history, and that is not gained with wars and invasions, but with loving other nations, respecting other cultures and mutual respect, and the measure of that greatness is demonstrated ability to build and create and when necessary to deter and destroy outsider aggressive enemy. Iranians are not eagerly awaiting the arrival of “US Democracy”, just ask the Iraqis and Afghans how happy they are post-American liberation of their countries. Only operation Iraqi Freedom has only cost 1.3 million Iraqi lives to date, and death toll in Afghanistan keeps going up. Mr president, the beauty of a civilization is not to wage wars, but to prevent them. Right now as you sit in your office and make a hateful Nowruz message for Iranians , people are dying in their own countries by their own kingdoms and three-decades presidents inside their own country, and your government is doing nothing but killing people in Libya and Afghanistan, let me remind of you of some words written by Saadi centuries ago… “Tokaz mehnate digaran bi ghami – nashayad ke namat dahand adami” “You who are so uncaring toward others’ suffering is not qualified to be called human being” Thank you and Eide shoma Mobarak too as well http://shervinandpol...obamas-failure/

Israel, which has robbed its Palestinian victims blind since 1947, has another demand to make. It wants them to recognise it as a “Jewish state”. Palestinians should mock this entity’s leaders all the way back to Vienna, where Theodore Herzl’s Zionist delusions were born. Israel Not A Jewish State Judaism teaches that the right for the Jewish people to have self rule in the Holy Land is not unconditional. Since the destruction of Holy Temple over two thousand years ago, the Jewish people have been exiled from this land by Divine decree. The Talmud tells that God obligated us not to rebel against the ruling bodies, and not to take the land of Israel by force (see Babylonian Talmud tractate Kesubos 111A). You see, the secret is out: It now appears that those people who call themselves Israeli Jews are not Jews after all, but the descendants of Eastern European converts to Judaism, who had no genealogical connection to the ancient Israelites. The aggression that Zionism presents in originally taking the Holy Land by force from its indigenous inhabitants is the first flag that exposes this movement for what it is — a real deviation from Judaism. Judaism forbids Jews from taking the land away from those who currently have jurisdiction over it. That such things should be done not only in opposition to Judaism, but in the name of the very Judaism it defies is simply large-scale fraud. Zionism, once exposed, proves to be the greatest enemy, the worst nightmare, to the Jewish religion and it’s practitioners, that exists to date. Zionism, strikes out regularly at Jews who remain true to Torah and its precepts. There are many Jews who protest against the very existence of the State of Israel, and who are quite vocal, albeit peaceful, about their opposition. Whenever Zionist policies or activities run counter to the Torah stance, Torah-true Jews come forward to unmask the Zionism. Many believe that the second worst thing that ever happened to Jews was the establishment of state of Israel. Liberation of Palestine The population in Palestine was 600,000 people of which 10% were Jewish, 90% were Palestinian Muslims and Christians and 99% of the land was owned by Palestinians. Most Palestinians believe that: * The only real road to Peace is the full and unconditional Liberation of the whole of Palestine, liberation from the supremacist ideology and liberation from the perpetrators. That will inevitably mean a return to the original, peaceful society Palestine was before the Zionist invasion. The true and sincere aspirations of Palestinians are long lasting Peace, Justice and Freedom. We believe that this will restore the true foundations of the Palestinian society. * Palestinians are always grateful and appreciative of the hard work and dedication of all their supporters whomever they are, however, Palestinians have NO obligation to hold back their march for freedom, to curtail their aims or to smother their rights for the sake of accommodating and not offending their Jewish supporters or to adopt the aims and objectives of the anti-zionist Jewish supporters instead of their own. * Palestinians have the ultimate right to aim for the full Liberation of their occupied Homeland, and to that effect select strategy and tactics of Resistance most suitable to achieve the reinstatement of their inalienable rights. * Palestinians have the ultimate right to choose their vision for their future, of FREE Palestine including the type of government, the writing of constitution, the construction and implementation of their legal and judicial system, which stems from and corresponds to their ethics and reflects and protects their culture. * It is the privilege of Palestinian to decide who should stay in liberated Palestine and who is not, using the legal procedure of their own choice. * All refugee and their descendents have the unconditional right to come back home, they, the rightful indigenous owners are also entitled to the reinstatement of ALL confiscated (stolen) land and property, compensation for all their losses over the many years of exile and they are also entitled to Palestinian citizenship wherever they are. * The aims and dreams of most Palestinians are not confined to the change of zionist regime or the vacuous declaration of abandonment of zionism by the Jewish-zionist occupiers, but rather to the FULL Liberation of Palestine and the restoration of all their rights. More than 100 countries have so far officially recognized Palestine as a state based on the 1967 borders, the boundaries that existed before the Israeli regime captured East al-Quds (Jerusalem), the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. ============================================================= “Lebanon has been a member state of the United Nations since 1945 and yet this did not prevent Israel from occupying southern Lebanon from 1978 until 2000. Israel’s occupation of Lebanon ended not because of any international pressure, but only because the Lebanese resistance drove Israel and its collaborating militias out“ ============================================================= http://www.israelversusjudaism.org/ http://shervinandpolitics.wordpress.com/2011/04/14/israel-not-a-jewish-state/