| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
The state-run Iranian media maintains its harsh rhetoric with ire directed at opposition leader Maryam Rajavi for her condemnation of Mr. Ahmadinejad's "wipe Israel from the map" speech. From Iran Focus:
“Maryam Rajavi has written a letter to the leaders of the European Union, saying that Iran is the enemy of peace, democracy and humanity”, wrote the hard-line daily Kayhan. “Rajavi is using the recent event to curry favour with the Europeans”.The state-run Mehr News Agency, which is close to the office of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, wrote that “in the wake of President Ahmadinejad’s speech at the World Without Zionism conference, Maryam Rajavi claimed that the Monafeqin [the Iranian government’s term for the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MeK) opposition group] is the key to rid the Middle East of terrorism”.
Another news agency controlled by Iran’s ultra-Islamists, Fars News Agency, carried an equally severe attack on Rajavi, who has been nominated by the opposition National Council of Resistance of Iran as interim president for the transitional period.
Western news agencies reported on Saturday that Rajavi had lauded the United Nations Security Council for condemning the “repugnant remarks by the mullahs' President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad”. Earlier, she had condemned Ahmadinejad’s speech in its entirety, saying that his statement “clearly contradicted the United Nations’ Charter and international law” and was “an unacceptable incitement to war of religions and civilisations”.
“As long as the clerical regime is in power, it would not abandon the export of terrorism and fundamentalism as well as enmity to peace and tranquillity”, Rajavi said.
“I think this is significant coming from the Iranian opposition, because Tehran has been trying hard in the past few days to say that Ahmadinejad was speaking for all Iranians”, said Abdullah Haddad, a political analyst based in Dubai.
Could another Iranian revolution be close at hand?
Posted by at October 30, 2005 5:05 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Sure. a woman is going to win support from a people who are the followers of Islam.
Good luck.
We at least have the good sense to value our women.
Posted by: dgene![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at October 30, 2005 5:19 PM
Does this Maryam actually live in Iran?
If so then then the EVAK should be knocking on her door and she'll meet the same end as Zaraeh Kazemi in Evin Prison.
Eric asks: Could another Iranian revolution be close at hand?
Answer is no. Impossible, in a land where Islam takes hold of the mind. The only possible outcome is a power struggle between Islamic factions, Ayatollahs, but the present regime is backed up by the fanatic Revolutionary Guards.. the Muslim equivalent of black shirted SS.
Flip a few bucks Amazon.com's way and snag V.S.Naipaul's, Among the Believers. He started his voyage of Islam, this time in Iran, after the revolution, and so far I'm up to his trip to Pakistan.
It really is hopeless, because as Naipaul says. Muslims see their nation as god, and they inevitably blame all of their faults on men (bad rulers, corrupt Ayatollahs, corrupt Kings and Presidents) but never, ever on Islam as Islam is purrfect.
Interestingly in Iran, Naipauls guide was a communist, name of Bezhad, and Naipaul took note that the Communists and the Mullahs shared the same dialectic..which in fact they do, in more ways than one. Which accounts for Islamic Marxism, such as the fanatic Mujahideen e-Khalq.
Islam is so embedded in the Iranian consciousness and culture, that they would be lost without it, like a man set adrift on the sea, without a paddle, sail or boat, merely clinging to flotsam, if that.
Another reading suggestion: Sandra Mackey's, The Iranians: Persia, Islam and the Soul of a Nation, then Yitzak Nakash's "The Shi'i's of Iraq".
Posted by: Nariz at October 30, 2005 6:48 PM
Nariz,
I have read the Naipaul text of which you mention, but I haven't the time now to comment much about it.
Your paragraph...
Interestingly in Iran, Naipauls guide was a communist, name of Bezhad, and Naipaul took note that the Communists and the Mullahs shared the same dialectic..which in fact they do, in more ways than one. Which accounts for Islamic Marxism, such as the fanatic Mujahideen e-Khalq.
...intrigues me enough to ask you if you have ever read this by Lafif Lakhdar (1981)?
I apologize for the lack of a more in depth dialogue.
Hopefully more later.
Thanks for your comments,
Eric
Posted by: Eschwapp at October 30, 2005 7:21 PM
The Iranian thug-in-chief speaks the way he does because he is certain that America is simply a paper tiger. Why? He figures that if America had any balls, the hostage crisis would've resulted in uninhabited deserts replacing Tehran, Mashad, Isfahan, Tabriz, Hamadan, Qom, Kerman, Bandar Abbas, etc. etc. After all, that's how real men like Temur-e-lang behaved when insulted.
Posted by: Kepha at October 30, 2005 8:01 PM
From what I understand, Maryam Rajavi is no liberal (small "l") democrat; she runs a movement that's combination Marxist/Islamist, she sponsored bombings and raids into Iran from Iraq when Saddam was in power (he gave her group asylum). No, I don't believe she is a credible opposition leader, sadly, just another shade of Baathist.
More about Maryam Rajavi:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2980279.stm
Posted by: Suzan at October 30, 2005 8:11 PM
PS while the site Iran Focus often has interesting news items about Iran, it appears to be a mouthpiece for Maryam Rajavi, so I counsel wariness.
Posted by: Suzan at October 30, 2005 8:15 PM
Worse than Beslan?
I can't think of a word adequate to characterize this event: according to Michelle Malkin (who I think got it from Reuters), yesterday in Indonesia three school girls, Christians, were beheaded as they walked to school -- by 6 Islamists dressed in black and wielding machetes. The killers took the heads away from the site of the killing, leaving the decapitated bodies behind. The heads were later found, one of them in front of a church, if I recall the news report excerpt correctly.
The authorities as yet have no suspects. The one survivor, a fourth girl who was injured, described what happened. Not clear to me from the article excerpts Malkin cites if it's certain that the assailants were Islamists, but Malkin seems to have concluded that, maybe from the totality of the news reports.
This seems more barbaric even than Beslan, a hard standard to go below.
Posted by: eduardo odraude at October 30, 2005 9:58 PM
eduardo odraude writes of the jihadist beheading of schoolgirls:
"This seems more barbaric even than Beslan, a hard standard to go below. "
Israelis have been taking this kind of child targeting atrocity for many years before Beslan.
Did you just start noticing that Mohammadans
deliberately target children?
But yes, it is quite sickening, and my heart
grieves for the young girls and their families.
Fascintating how the media portrays it as a
Christian-Mohammadan conflict. I can't recall
the Christians doing any fighting. It's like when
they report Jewish-Mohammadan tension in France.
It's only Jews who are tense!
at October 30, 2005 11:17 PM
American:
"Fascintating how the media portrays it as a
Christian-Mohammadan conflict."
It makes me angry and frustrated every time I see MSM calling the 'conflicts' in Indonesia (both in Central Sulawesi and the Moluccas), as 'sectarian violence'. It is more like the muslims with the aid of the government butchering the Christians.
A few years ago they signed a peace agreement, but there has been no peace for the Christians. Oh, no more wholesale burning of villages -- just a shooting here, a bombing there, a beheading or two, or three, or shooting of a pastor while she was conducting Sunday service. No big deal, since the government hasn't caught any of the perpetrators.
What the jihadists are trying to do is to keep on the doing this, and hope that eventually someone from the Christian side would retaliate, so that they can bring their jihadist thugs from Java, again with the help of some jihadist in the government, like what happened last time.
By the way, for y'all's info, Robert Jensen, the very left professor at UT in Austin is a favorite of the Indonesians who consider themselves modern muslims but are anti West/Bush/US.
Posted by: jasmine at October 31, 2005 1:05 AM
'Which accounts for Islamic Marxism, such as the fanatic Mujahideen e-Khalq.'~ nariz
That line also fascinates me, since:
You have said several times that marxism is dead.
You have pointed out that islam is 'conservative.'
at October 31, 2005 5:58 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)