Have you ever stepped back and looked at the crumbling regimes in the Arab East? If you did, have you realized they are republics and not monarchies; not that there is much of a difference between the two but the hype in the corporate media is about freedom, rights, dignity, democracy, and the rest of this political litany that is well-known.
Thirty-three years ago this month the world was witness to the fall of a Shah and the rise of an Imam. The Shah was Persian by culture, American by loyalty. The Imam was Persian by culture, Islamic by persuasion. The Muslims of the world along with the imperialist victims of the world rejoiced at this turn of events. Ever since that time Uncle Sam and his nephew Cohen have been playing their cards against the Imam and the Revolution.1
The Islamic Republic of Iran, government and people, are gearing up for presidential elections that are scheduled for the first half of June 2009. There appear to be two prime candidates for the presidency: Mr. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and Mr. Mir HosseinMoussavi. Both fine men are qualified beyond doubt to lead the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Islamic Movement of the world during the coming four-year term, which will probably be the most challenging time in the history of the Islamic Movement and state.
If it were another government it would have caved in by now, but the heavenward Islamic government in the world has survived. The Islamic Republic of Iran, whatever one’s view of it, has weathered political pandemonium, economic earthquakes, and media twisters the likes of which we have not witnessed. This is a government and leadership with a people and population extending beyond its geographical frontiers.
The Obama administration is off to a sluggish start in foreign policy. The strategic toxins that have been lodged in the organs and tissues of the American body politic throughout the previous decades of successive administrations are pathological and substantial. When it comes to dealing with the Islamic movement and State, American politics are downright malignant and cancerous.
The Israeli Amalek just do not get it. Their military failure in the summer of 2006 against Hizbullah in Lebanon did not register. Their American supplied weapons have gone to their head. And now they are not relearning the lesson they failed to learn inLebanon; and that lesson is: you cannot defeat the up-and-coming Islamic forces of self-determination — Hizbullah in Lebanon,Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Palestine.
Never fall asleep when a “superpower” is watching you, especially if that “superpower” is a Zionist-crazed, anti-Islamic regime as is the case with the outgoing and incoming American administrations. In the past eight years the world has had to endure distress, be subjected to vicious wars, and be forced to abandon hope because of a group of politicians in the US called the neo-conservatives.
As if the worldwide zionist led media campaign about Islamic Iran’s “nuclear bomb” was not enough, we now have a Saudi-led whisper campaign about Islamic Iran’s “sectarian aggression.” The voices and spokespersons for this latter campaign may not know how and why this is so, thus it becomes necessary to shed light on this.
There has always been debate within the Islamic movement about the propriety and importance of engaging the West or subsystems of it (such as Christian churches) in discussion about issues that divide Muslims from Jews and Christians. Such low-decibel but high-profile discussion has produced numerous platforms for “inter-faith” dialogue or trialogue, countless ecumenical meetings, and now a proverbial “dialogue of civilizations”, conducted on the part of the Muslims by a bewildering range of official and non-officials institutions and “leaders”.
The United States of America, the sole superpower in the world, or the so-called “hyper-power”, the one with the most advanced armed forces, with satellites in the air and spies everywhere, is getting its nose bloodied in Afghanistan and suffering military defeat in Iraq. And who is inflicting these humiliations? Mujahideen armed with little more than iron determination to expel the occupiers from their homelands.
The self-inflicted wounds on American imperialism and Israeli zionism in Iraq and Afghanistan are easily seen. The public memory is blank to the commander-in-chief who claimed the “end of major combat operations” just a few months after initiating the war against Iraq in March 2003.
Five years and still sinking. That is what may well best describe the overall status in the world of its “sole superpower” as it careens from one war-euphemism to another. The United States of America, the inheritor of twentieth-century superpower rivalry, has been scrambling propaganda flares to distract attention from its downward movement ever since it invaded Iraq.
In the early years of Muslim history we had most of the political pulses that we have today. Not many Muslims, not even many intellectual Muslims, are willing to examine human nature, cultural influences, social trends and political priorities fourteen hundred years ago as well as today.
While the public mind waits to see what drama we will have next in the American-led (but Israeli inspired) war on Islamic self-determination, otherwise known as “the war on terror”, zionists or people working for them succeed in assassinating ImadMughniyyeh, a commander of Hizbullah, in – of all places – the diplomatic quarter of Damascus, the capital of Syria.1
This month, Muslims all over the world should be celebrating the 29th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, alongside other informed and conscientious people concerned for the oppressed and downtrodden of the world. But the harsh reality is that only a tiny fraction of these people will be commemorating the rise of Imam Khomeini and the success of the Iranian people in toppling the “king of kings”, the last Pahlavi shah of Iran. Nearly three decades ago, the Islamic Revolution that took place in Iran resonated among virtually all Muslims and many other of the world’s oppressed peoples.
What you are about to read in this article may be regarded by some as controversial. These words are put together during the season of the Hajj, which is a good time to try to counter the tons of misinformation we have about the Saudi regime, which has done so much to diminish this annual expression of the independence and power of the Ummah to little more than a ritual void of warmth, enthusiasm, and spirit.
The main factor exacerbating the situation of Pakistan and Pakistanis is the state of the local Islamic movement there. The Jama‘at-e Islami is in no position to show anyone the way out of the morass that Pakistan has become. Likewise the Ikhwan – the Jama‘at's analogue in the Arab world – are running around in circles in Egypt.
On 20 March, 2003, the government of the USA sent its full range of armed forces intoIraq, obliterating its infrastructure and smashing its civil life like a lion devouring a rabbit. Since then almost one million men, women and children have been killed, and uncounted others have been wounded. No one wants to say so, but consequently the Iraqi people are teetering on the brink.
The imperialist monster is disrupting its own international order. Even the laws of its own heartland are no longer the rules that are supposed to govern its activities. The United States has been trying to jump-start a worldwide diplomatic initiative that will result in military action against Islamic Iran by ignoring the findings of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and by forcing European and Asian governments to line up with US strategy vis a vis Islamic Iran.
The United States regime, never shy about showing its zionist colors, has come out swinging again; this time, its target is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of the Islamic State in Iran, which it plans to brand as a “terrorist organization”. Of course, the politicians in Washington are free to say whatever they want – thank God it’s a free country, with freedom of speech and all that. The thing to notice, though, is whether such “made in Tel Aviv” statements are serious policy or simply political rhetoric.