Yeah, David, what's Hebrew for 'Caliphate' ?

Supporters of Eretz Israel, and either a Sunni or Shi'ite Caliphate, share a defect with some fundamentalist Christian groups, that their Book is the word of a god, immaculate, unmodified by human hand or mind: they are therefore permitted, even ordered, to conquer a large section of the world, that which 'our eyes have seen', etc., [i.e. Canaan = Israel's] and ultimately the entire world in some cases [thereby the Sunni Caliphate], in order to impose God's will on earth. A pox on all of them. Including the 44 million Hindu gods.

I wonder if all such religions can be defined as attempts by late-Neolithic societies to find closure in a rapidly-changing world, a way of pulling up the drawbridge on a threatening world, of denying the realities of social, economic and political change in societies around them ? They do seem to share backward-looking and reactionary features.

So can we talk about a reactionary Left, one which defends one or other or these reactionary ideologies ?

Interesting times indeed !

Dear Mr Ziabari

While you find plenty to criticise about America and Israel, you seem to view your own country through rose coloured glasses. Many of your fellow countrymen have left Iran. One suspects that they have experienced some unpleasant aspects of the country which you never seem to mention........ perhaps because you are so focussed on the evils of America and Israel.

I have interviewed people who have migrated from Iran. They are very sad to have left their homeland but all said that the repressive policies of the government were the main reason that they left.Below are some of the policies which convinced them that it was time to leave:

You want to convert from Islam.

We’ll kill you.

You want to have a same sex partner.

We’ll kill you.

You want to protest against corruption in the election process.

We’ll beat, imprison or kill you.

You want to criticise the government.

We’ll imprison you.

You want to practise your Ba’hai faith.

We’ll severely discriminate against you.

You want freedom of the press.

Only if you say nice things about the government. The Press
Freedom Index for 2007 ranked Iran 166th out of 169 nations.

You want all citizens to be treated equally.

Sorry ..not in Iran. Muslim and non-Muslims have different
punishments for the same crime. A Muslim man who is convicted
of committing adultery with a Muslim woman receives 100 lashes;
the sentence for a non-Muslim man convicted of adultery with a
Muslim woman is death.

You are Ahwazi Arabs who want to remain in your ancestral homes.

The Iranian government has already ethnically cleansed 1.2
million of you from your homes.

You are an Iranian Baluchi who wants to be treated fairly.

Unfortunately you are Sunni and we are Shia so the Iranian
government severely discriminates against you.

PS I saw that you received an award form President Ahmadinejad. I realise that this must make it very difficult for you to be critical of the government in any way.

What a wonderful piece of writing! I now have something to show my Year 9 students when we're talking about the media next term. Such great use of emotive language, such careful selection of information. "Mass murder" of 9 people, for example. The unfortunate thing is that such blatant use of tricky media tactics undermines the credibility of the article in itself. Realistically, if you wanted to condemn Israel, you could have done so without such tactics. There's plenty to condemn them for.

Out of interest, though, which "stalwart allies of Tel Aviv in the EU zone" recalled their ambassadors? I did a bit of online searching, focusing in particular on news sites, and could only find this article and identical articles at http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_6270.shtml and http://dailymailnews.com/0810/27/Editorial_Column/DMColumn.php. Their recalls must have been very quiet.

Diss Kourosh Ziabari seem one hottie short of a harem.

Blatant Iranian propaganda. Yes Isreal falls down in many ways - everyone knows that.

Ziabari is a salesman for a country, rich in oil and gas, that is spending $billions and worrying millions of people with the best advertised "secret" nuclear bomb effort since Israel's, India's or Pakistan's.

Hanging gays, opium users while stoning women to death in the name of "honour" killing is definitely not a good Iranian look to put down the non-Muslim Middle Eastern country.

If Iran were tolerant and peaceful it could occupy some moral high ground. Iran is indeed a better performer than Saudi Arabia, America's second best buddy in the Middle East. But all are in a region where the intolerance of the Middle Ages, on religious lines, still rules - no good guys (Muslim, Jewish or Christian).

Kourish Ziabari is right.Israel is the most dangerous country on the planet.They want to invade Iran under the ruse of it gaining 1 nuke when we all know Israel has at least 200 nukes which is against the nuclear non proliferation treaty.

Just recently 300 of 435 Congressmen signed a letter promising not to critise Israel no matter what they do.This is the real power they have over the USA.

If Israel attack Iran,Iran has the capacity to stop much of the oil coming out o the Middle East which will kill millions around the planet due to spiralling cost of oil.Food will bcome too expensive for many to exist.Then we will be looking at a world war,possibly nuclear.

It is not Iran who is the aggressor but USA/Israel.Iraq was a lie.There were no weapons of mass destruction .Afghanistan has trillions $ in resources and the route for an oil pipeline from Turkmenistan.Vietnam was a lie and now they are stirring up North Korea.Pakistan is far more unstable than Iran and has est. 80-100 nukes.So why is not the Pakistan Govt not being attacked?

It is pleasing to see Arjay again and his informed comments. As well, the level of understanding about that part of the world is certainly increasing some of it due to the great writers on MyCatbirdSeat.com, well read in this part of the world.

An earlier comment stated....
'If Iran were tolerant and peaceful it could occupy some moral high ground.'
This comment is correct in stating that all is not well in perhaps the most advanced state in the middle east, certainly the country with the most potential. Iran.
However, no less well-balanced than any other country controlled by a dictatorial religious hierarchy.

The one item that hinders progress throughout the developing world and in many cases the developed world as well, is the sublimation of the masses by religions. In some cases, such as Iran, unless the government can be separated from overpowering religious control, then democracy, as we know it, will never occur.
In such cases, as in the recent Iranian riots, how do the younger generations who want a better life, enjoy the vote when that vote is still under the control of a military regime which itself is under the control of the mullahs, Sharia law and all that means. It is hardly progress.

If Iran cannot separate one from the other, that is democracy from the adherence to religious law as well, one controlling the other, then there will never be any progress towards a better life. Such a parallel exists in the current Israeli climate where once upon a time, an Israeli was predominantly a peaceful Jew with a social conscience just as Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and others see themselves.

However, now the great majority of these Jewish people have become Zionists, far worse than a religion, instead a hated philosophy which knows no end in the pursuit of their objectives known to most as "Greater Israel", the ownership of lands which according to their Talmud teachings, (no more or less fictional that the Koran or the Chrisitian bible) belong to them.

Such religious beliefs are the real impediment to peace.