Year 2012 and 2013 in summary

Notable articles in

2012
January: Batriya sect, Khawarij and Ibn Arabi the Sufi
February: Zaydi sects and a propaganda documentary
March - June: Mutazila sect
July: Syrian sects
August: Safavid

2013
March: Islamic politics or the Iranian Wilayah al-Faqih system
April - May: Islamic terrorism
June: Iranian Presidential election and the Shia of Iraqi vs Iranian
November: Criticism of Iranian leadership

Restructuring work

The bad news is I've not done any restructuring on my blog since 2012. Probably missed this one due to the blog shutoff between august 2012 - Feb 2013.

Good news is thanks to the shutdown, I didn't get to write a lot of articles so the restructuring work should be easy.

So far, I've update the index under the Zaydi and Battriya sects here
'
Couple of articles have been added under the index Batinis especially about the Qaramite sect

Couple of update under the Kharajites and Waqifa sects

As far as what's not being updated are articles about Shia, Sunni, Mutazila or Salafi. Articles on these sects tend to grow the most on my blog because I've most interest in writing them. You should be able to get to everything about these sects via the header on the top of my blog.

References
http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/p/index-to-shia-pages.html
http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/p/other-sects.html
http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/p/kharajite-sufi.html

Unpleasant tasks ahead

End of the year is generally when I restructure my blog.

The process takes a long time and sometimes that's not very pleasant for me.

Afterward, I create a summary of written articles, what I've accomplished this year and what my visitors like to see on my blog.

While I can see the value of going back through each of my posts and linking them to indexing pages for easy retrieval but this work can also be a waste of my time; my time could be better spent writing new articles rather than revisiting old work. Besides, my earlier research about Islamic sects has almost nothing to do with most of my recent posts which are generally about politics, social, current events and sometimes completely random stuffs.

I definitely will continue my work in researching other sects but I don't plan to delve too deep into any single sect. I do feel the need to keep my sects related materials only at introductory level.

I also believe that some ideas (religious or non) are very interesting and I pursue them because doesn't matter what is the origin of it, if it's worthwhile then we should learn and know it.

References
http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/2011/12/restructuring-blog.html
http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/2011/12/this-is-taking-longer-than-i-originally.html
http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/2012/01/finally-done.html
http://researchintoothersects.blogspot.com/2012/01/end-of-year-report.html

Just like everything else in Christianity

Christmas also has nothing to do with Jesus or Christianity. It was supposedly a pagan holiday related to the winter festival related to a bunch of superstition. I’ve seen efforts by some apologetic Christians to de-link Christmas from the stigma of being a ‘pagan’ holiday by quoting a bunch of vague and obscure narratives/snippets about early Christian’s festivity and passages from the bible to give a ‘Christian’ spin on the holiday. Unfortunately or maybe fortunately, really depend on how you choose to look at it, Christmas is soo commercialized nowadays that no one really cares about the religious or the pagan significance of the day.

While the western world has standardized Christmas to fall exactly on Dec 25th, other Christians like the Orthodox Church prefer to celebrate Christmas on January 7.

Noteworthy comments

I sometimes get very interesting and thoughtful comments from my readers. I, of course, don't get to respond them in a timely manner because I sometimes disappear from my blogs for days or weeks, I'm busy working on other interesting topics, due to a diversity of topics on my blog I may not be in the mood or ready for that comment or I may ignore it for a while...only because I know I'll respond better when I'm not tired, hungry, sad or lazy.

A recent noteworthy comment that you may want to check out is in this topic

I do appreciate my readers who take the time to read and respond to my articles. Don't get upset if we don't see eye to eye on most issues.

Ancient religions apparent contempt and hatred against homosexuals

Ancient religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism...etc) have zero tolerance against homosexuals or the act of homosexuality. These religions view homosexuality as a grave sin because it's an unnatural act because god created male and female for marriage and procreation because doing it any other way will cause a huge destruction in the world.

If you are living in a place where everyone thinks alike, and if everyone is completely opposed to the idea itself, then you probably wont think twice before agreeing/siding with the majority. That's why, whenever you sees these surveys done on population living in Muslim countries, the result from every single one of them seems to indicate that the majority of Muslims have a very homogeneous views/opinions/perspectives about life in regards to the teaching of Islam.

However, when people are living in a society that doesn't emphasize too much on living according to the ancient scriptures but places a greater emphasize on equality, respect and protection under the law for everyone then people generally tend to adopt a more moderate philosophy/approach to life. It's like, hey! he's living his life and I'm living my life. He doesn't bother me so I shouldn't bother him.

The main dilemma for religious people living in a non-traditional setting/ environment (secular nations) is the question of whether to accept/reject homosexuals/homosexuality.

I've observed that deeply religious people, no matter where they live, can never be convinced to accept homosexuality because religious people are always very susceptible to bias that are already built into their belief system.

I've been following this topic with interest.

Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), joined a broad interfaith coalition, calling ENDA a measured, common sense solution that will ensure workers are judged on their merits, not on their personal characteristics like sexual orientation or gender identity.[1]

As expected, a lot of Muslims see this action as a betrayal of Muslim's trust and the Islamic faith; How dare they claim to represent Islam and Muslims but go for the very act that has been strongly condemned and forbidden in Islam. That, seems to be the general consensus by people who are completely and totally opposed to the very idea of homosexuality.

However we see differing views/opinions by Muslims who think that there needs to be a greater tolerance and understanding and that we shouldn't really be very judgemental or promote self-righteousness.

I'd say that homosexuality is undoubtably a test - it is still experienced as a test by non-religious people in cultures where there is no longer punishment for gay sex and there is a level of accommodation for it. I would also say that it is not just a test for people who find themselves in that reality, but a test for all people. That more witnesses are required for sexual trangressions than murder has always been striking to me, and i think this is a reflection of the fact that when it comes to sexuality we are hugely compromised by our emotionality regarding it - the ego very much gets involved. We are disposed to use it as a vehicle to attack people, whether its a spurned suitor, a jealous wife or husband, a vindictive divorcee or the fear of rape or abuse or 'abnormality' that influences how we perceive and treat others. So when we are faced with issues around homosexuality it is a test - we can either let fear, ignorance and digust lead the discussion or we can attempt to manifest in ourselves virtuous qualities as we attempt to understand what it is we're actually talking about and what the sources actually say on the matter and how they can reasonably be understood and reconciled with other evidence that can be witnessed and measured. See ShiaChat user Ruq in post #151:

I'm not able to do a detail analysis of the topic or the posts. Please read the original discussion to form an informed opinion, whenever possible.

Reference
[1] http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235018864-isna-supporting-sodomite-agenda/

Egyptian Military PR Embarrassment

Egypt is still under the military dictatorship. The military has done everything it could to suppress the people and silenced the opposition especially from the Islamic brotherhood who were formally voted in the power by a very narrow margin. Now, to legitimize their rule, the military and their backers have written a new constitution for Egypt and has publicize this “achievement” as a great victory for all. It didn’t turn out as well as they expected.

A campaign to win support for a draft of Egypt’s new constitution got off to a rocky start on Sunday, one month ahead of a referendum, when observers noticed that a banner promoting the document misspelled the word for “Egyptians” in Arabic and used stock images of foreigners to stand in for representative citizens.

Within hours of the campaign’s launch, journalists and bloggers discovered that three of the five Egyptians pictured on the banner were apparently not Egyptians at all, and suspicions grew that the makers of the poster had simply searched Google to find stock images of “a doctor,” “a businesswoman,” “a farmer,” “a man with Down syndrome” and “an Egyptian soldier.”

Image of the doctor had previously been used on the American site ehowtogetridofstretchmarks.com; the stock image of the businesswoman already graced the home page of an Irish professional networking site; and the image of the man with Down syndrome illustrated an article in an Arizona business magazine last year.

Here's a poster mocking the original banner -made up of aliens.

Reference
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/16/egyptians-mock-ads-promoting-new-constitution-with-typos-and-stock-images/?_r=1

Junior dictator from North Korea kills his uncle

Apparently the Jnr dictator from North Korea is cleaning up his circle of friends and family. After sending his old girlfriend under the firing squad; he has now sent a member of his own family, his uncle, under the same firing squad for being a ‘traitor’ (that’s the code word for I don’t like you anymore, so it’s time for you to get out of my life permanently).

It's not every day that the Kim dynasty kills one of its own, as Kim Jong Un apparently did his uncle and de facto No. 2, Jang Song Thaek. Rarer still is the fact that the official North Korean media publicized the execution and explained some the rationale behind it.[1]

"The tribunal examined Jang's crimes. All the crimes committed by the accused were proved in the course of hearing and were admitted by him," it added.[1]

Of course. Kim always gets his way.

Pyongyang issued an extraordinary announcement describing Jang as a "despicable human being" who was "worse than a dog" and saying he had been shot dead immediately after a military tribunal found him guilty of plotting to overthrow his 29-year-old nephew. [2]

Wow, this sounds very personal.

I was reading this news source. We could be expecting more interesting and exciting news from North Korea in the future.

“If Kim Jong-un was sure of his control of power, he would not have needed to execute his uncle,” said Lee Byong-chul, a senior fellow at the Institute for Peace and Cooperation in Seoul. “There will be big and small bloody purges, and at a time like this, desperate extremists may lash out. Pyongyang is no longer safe.” [3]

“Although high-ranking leaders, including members of the Kim family, have been deposed before, we haven’t seen anything this public or dramatic since Kim Jong-un’s grandfather Kim Il-sung purged his last major rivals in the late 1950s,” said Prof. Charles K. Armstrong, a North Korea expert at Columbia University and the author of “Tyranny of the Weak: North Korea and the World, 1950-1992.” [3]

“This seems to indicate the divisions within the Kim regime were more serious than previously thought,” Professor Armstrong said. [3]

reference

[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/10517024/Empire-of-horror-North-Korea-faces-worldwide-condemnation-for-execution.html

[2] http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2013/12/116_147904.html


[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/14/world/asia/execution-raises-doubts-about-kims-grip-on-north-korea.html?hpw&rref=world&_r=0

New convert to Islam turning to violence

I was reading news about the trial of a British officer (Lee Rigby) killed by a recent convert of Islam (Michael Adebolajo). The answers in the trial from this convert are very shocking and chilling. I’m not even able to fathom how someone would start killing in the name of a new religion he just professed a few years ago. Is there a deficiency in his understanding of the Islamic faith or is violence so deeply rooted (ingrained) in the Islamic religion that it’s almost inseparable?

Here’s the court room exchange.

When he was later asked what his defence to the charge of murder was, he said: "I am a soldier. I'm a soldier of Allah".

He also told the Old Bailey he loved extremist network al-Qaeda.

Adebolajo said: "Al-Qaeda I consider to be Mujahideen. I love them, they're my brothers. I have never met them. I consider them my brothers in Islam."

He said he had been brought up as a Christian by his family and his parents had taken him to church every Sunday.

"The memory that sticks in my mind... is probably every New Year's Eve in the evening around 11 o'clock we would gather around in candlelight and read passages from the Bible," he said.

He converted to Islam in his first year as a student at Greenwich University.

Last week, CCTV footage of him running towards the police car with a meat cleaver raised was shown to the court. He said he should be ransomed back to other jihadi fighters, set free or killed if he was found guilty.

North Korea Unspeakable Horrors

I've always been fascinated with North Korea, especially in the recent time, especially after the Junior Kim took over the dictatorship from his daddy.

A lot of people don’t know much about North Korea. Mainly because North Korea is completely cut off from international community – nothing gets in the country, and nothing gets out. Most of the narrative about the country is built from testimonials of the survivors and the work done by the spy agencies (satellites, espionage..etc). Based on the narrative, there’s absolutely no doubt that North Korea is perhaps the most repressive country in the world.

If time permits, I’ll try to write more articles about North Korea. I hope you guys are as interested in this as I am. I have to warn you that most of my coverage will be extremely negative and maybe a bit graphic. So, you’re probably not going to hear about their great gymnastic program or their hardworking students.

I was recently reading news about North Korean Auschwitz-style prison camps. Lots of unspeakable horror is going on there.

Amnesty commissioned the images from DigitalGlobe, a commercial satellite imagery vendor. In their release, Amnesty claims that up to 200,000 prisoners, including children, are being held "in horrific conditions in six sprawling political prison camps."

Amnesty said the camp covered an area of around 216 square miles (560 square km), or three times the size of America's capital, Washington DC.

Pyongyang denies their existence, despite satellite images and testimony from witnesses. Amnesty claims many prisoners are allegedly being held for nothing more than watching foreign soap operas or holding a particular religious belief, while others are incarcerated simply for having a family member deemed politically undesirable.

According to Mr. Lee, women were "disappeared" after being raped: "After a night of 'servicing' the officials, the women had to die because the secret could not get out. This happens at most of the political prison camps."

Kim Young-soon, a former detainee in Camp 15 in the 1980s, described a public execution she witnessed of two detainees caught attempting to escape: "They were brought to a stage after they were badly beaten. The prisoners were tied to wooden stakes and shot three times in their head, chest and feet," she recalled.

In September this year, a United Nations inquiry into human rights abuses in North Korea highlighted the "unspeakable" and "widespread" atrocities being carried out in camps that required an international response, including a mother forced to drown her own baby and a prison camp inmate compelled to eat rodents and lizards just to survive.

Most Corrupt Countries in the World

Transparency International has just released its report of the least corrupt countries to the most corrupt countries in the world.

The total score is 100. Least corrupt countries have score closer to 100. Here's how countries are ranked (this is not a complete list. Please go to Transparency International to view the complete result and download the brochure).

Least Corrupt Countries
Denmark
New Zeland
Finland
Sweden
Norway
Singapore
Switzerland
Netherlands
Australia
Canada
Luxembourg
Germany
Iceland
United Kingdom
Barbados
Belgium
Hong Kong
Japan
United States of America
Uruguay
Ireland
The Bahamas
Chile
France
Saint Lucia
Austria


Most Corrupt Countries
Somalia
North Korea
Afghanistan
Sudan
South Sudan
Libya
Iraq
Uzbekistan
Turkmenistan
Syria
Yemen
Haiti
Guinea Bissau
EQuatorial Guinea
Chad
Venezuela
Eritrea
Cambodia
Zimbabwe
Myanmar
Burundi
Tajikistan
Congo
Angola
Paraquay
Kyrgyzstan
Guinea
Ukraine
Papua New Guinea
Nigeria
Iran

References
http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/
http://www.voanews.com/content/perceived-corruption-high-in-subsaharan-africa/1802447.html

ShiaChat is Online now!

Go ahead, type this URL on your address bar http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?act=home and you should be directed to the website.

Welcome back.

We have a Deal Now

Iran has reached a new deal with world's six super powers to temporarily curb its nuclear program in exchange for relief from the sanctions. You can see the detail of the agreement here.

The crucial part of the agreement is this:

Iran will stop enriching uranium beyond 5%, and will stop development of their Arak nuclear power plant. The UN will be granted greater access for inspections. In exchange, Iran will receive relief from sanctions of approximately US$7 billion (£4.3 billion) and no additional sanctions will be imposed.

Sanction has been very bad for Iran.

GJELTEN: Celeste, these are the most severe sanctions ever put in place against any country in history. And you're right, they are not just from the United States. There are United Nations sanctions. There are sanctions from the European Union. The really important ones are the ones that have made it just about impossible for Iran to sell oil. And oil sales are really important to the Iranian economy. Last summer, the European Union stopped buying oil from Iran. The United States stopped, a long time ago, buying oil from Iran, but also has introduced sanctions where we punish other countries that are buying oil from Iran. So the effect of all that has really been to cut back hard on Iran's oil sales and, therefore, its oil revenues.

Eighty percent of its foreign exchange comes from oil sales, so that has really hurt. And then another big element - I mean, there's a long list of sanctions, but another big element is Iran has basically been kicked out of the, what's called the, SWIFT system, which is how you transfer money electronically. Literally now, Celeste, if Iran earns money overseas, it almost has to bring the cash back in suitcases. That's what it's come to. So it's really hurting Iran.

I'm reading this article about how the sanction eventually worked in bringing Iran back to the negotiation table.

There's widespread agreement that sanctions have worked, squeezing Iran financially and bringing its leaders to the negotiating table. Iran's economy is, by any measure, in terrible shape.

"The cost of living has gone up so fast for Iranians that they are absolutely stunned, and people are simply not able to maintain the middle-class lifestyles that they used to," Slavin says.

Iran's official inflation rate is about 40 percent. By comparison, inflation in the U.S. is less than 2 percent, and many outsiders believe prices are rising even faster in Iran than the government says, especially for food.

the massive plunge in the value of Iran's currency — the rial — over the past two years, has made inflation more pernicious. Because the rial is so weak, Iranians have to pay a lot more for imported goods. And oil, Iran's main export and the heart of its economy, is being sidelined by sanctions.

Folks in America would probably become crazy if the price of everything increased by 40% and the value of dollars became almost worthless.


As expected, not all the Iranians are happy with this new deal.

First, let’s read the views from the reactionary, non-thinking, no-vision, still sore losers faction from Iran hard-liners whose candidates didn't win the recent election (Iran election coverage on my blog link 1, link 2, link 3, link 4)

The news site Alef, affiliated with prominent conservatives, ran pieces questioning the agreement’s technical details (one piece noted discrepancies with what had been published in a White House briefing paper) and lamenting the position of weakness from which Iran had been forced to negotiate. “Why Was Zarif Empty Handed?” the site asked, arguing that “there is no doubt the agreement is oppressive” but that Zarif’s failures must be viewed in the context of the bargaining position he inherited from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government.

The question of enrichment emerged on Monday as a point of contention, with some hardline sites like the newspaper Kayhan arguing that nowhere in the agreement had the West conceded Iran’s right to enrich. Much of the criticism raised a day after the agreement centered around its technical and economic aspects, as some conservatives and hardliners sought to present their objections in a substantive rather than partisan light. The website Fars News said it had done the math, and found that “the points gained and the points conceded didn’t add up,” arguing that by failing to secure lasting relief from oil and banking sanctions, Iran would still lose in a month what it had gained in the unleashing of some $4.2 billion of its foreign exchange reserves, previously frozen as a result of international sanctions.

The reformist faction, whose candidate is the current President of Iran had this to say:

The country’s reformist papers ran special editions on Sunday highlighting the agreement’s success in securing sanctions relief, and kept up the bright coverage on Monday. Photos of Zarif dominated the front pages, with the newspaper Arman-e Emrooz declaring that “We Must Give Zarif a Gold Medal,” the daily Aftab headlining “Smiling Diplomat: We Thank You,” and in the newspaper Ebtekar, “A Historic Dawn in Geneva.”

But not everyone is happy it seems.

Saudi Arabia with the support of Qatar and other despotic Sunni Arab regimes, currently fighting a proxy war against Iran-via-Syria, is very unhappy that a deal was reached between Iran and the West (namely the USA) especially after their petition to obliterate Hafiz al-Assad and most of Syria was rejected by the White House (remember Obama's infamous red line incident).

Saudi Arabia resented the fact that the US-Iranian talks had been kept secret from Saudi Arabia, and felt that it had been double-crossed by a major ally. "We will be there to stop them, wherever they are," he said. "we can't tolerate the blaring of Persian music in the middle of Homs"

Saudi Arabia, to put bluntly, sounds like a whinny little poodle.

Some members of the US Congress are very disappointed that the US under the leadership of Barack Obama made a deal with one of the countries in the axis-of-evil. (link)

Iran has a history of obfuscation that demands verification of its activities and places the burden on the regime to prove it is upholding its obligations in good faith while a final deal is pursued. – John Boehner (Republican)

The U.S. should not weaken existing United Nations Security Council demands that Iran fully suspend its nuclear activities, including enrichment. Loosening sanctions and recognizing Iran's enrichment program is a mistake, and will not stop Iran's march toward nuclear capability." - Eric Cantor (Republican)

“The disproportionality of this agreement makes it more likely that Democrats and Republicans will join together and pass additional sanctions when we return in December. It was strong sanctions, not the goodness of the hearts of the Iranian leaders, that brought Iran to the table. And any reduction relieves the pressure of sanctions and gives them the hope that they will be able to obtain a nuclear weapon - Sen. Chuck Schumer (Democratic)

“We need to be very, very careful with the Iranians. I don’t trust them. I don’t think we should trust them,” - Rep. Eliot Engel (Democratic)

Israel is also very critical of the deal. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu labeled the deal an "historic mistake".

The crux of the growing US-Israel divide is the fact that the two countries simply don't see eye-to-eye on Iran's nuclear program. The Israelis want a complete dismantling of Iran's capabilities – a position that is unrealistic and short of using military force is never going to happen. Iran has progressed so far along the road to developing a nuclear capability that the issue today is what is the best way to slow the program and prevent Iran from going nuclear rather than reversing it.

Indeed, if Netanyahu stepped back from his red line, he might actually realize that the deal signed in Geneva goes a long way towards meeting that goal. In fact, it is rather shocking the number of concessions the US and its western allies were able to secure in Geneva without giving up that much in return. Under the agreement, Iran must stop all uranium enrichment above 5% and neutralize its stockpile of uranium that has been enriched to 20%. In addition, Iran must halt construction at the Arak nuclear reactor (which was potentially capable of producing plutonium for a bomb) and end the production, installation and maintenance of centrifuges used for enrichment purposes.

Most opinions seem to be that this was a fair deal for Iran (in regards to their bargaining position) and a very very good deal for the world super powers (considering their wealth and position).

Iran's diplomat that made this deal possible is Mohammad Javad Zarif. After 8 years of embarrassment, international failure and diplomatic mishaps under Ahmadinejad, I guess Iran finally found someone that actually understand how to fix Iran's problem with the west. He sounds like an interesting guy.

Before leaving the hotel that morning, Zarif took a few moments to go up to his room on the 14th floor to update his Twitter and Facebook accounts. "We have reached an agreement," he tweeted at 3.03am local time.

With that simple message, the 53-year-old showed that President Hassan Rouhani's best decision upon assuming office was to appoint him as the man in charge of reviving Tehran's diplomacy, which had been badly damaged under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

According to Kamal Kharazi, a former Iranian foreign minister, it was Khamenei who personally gave Zarif permission to talk directly to the US at that time.

At the UN the ambassador was praised for his diplomatic manner even by the Islamic republic's sworn enemies. The former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger reportedly gave him a copy of his 1994 book Diplomacy, signing it "To Zarif, my respectful enemy".

Although it was Rouhani who chose Zarif as foreign minister, his appointment would have been impossible without the blessing of Khamenei, now Iran's supreme leader. It is widely believed that Zarif secured Khamenei's trust during his time at the UN by being an obedient servant, even though at times he held different views.

With more than 700,000 likes on Facebook and 87,000 followers on Twitter, Zarif is perhaps the Islamic republic's most popular diplomat since 1979.

Jewish Atheism

Definition: Jewish atheism refers to atheism as practised by people who are ethnically, and to some extent culturally, Jewish.


Based on some numbers from Wikipedia: 50% of the American Jews doubts the existence of God. Not shocking at all. I've always expected this. The Jews, at least the American Jews, are very liberal and secular.

The mainstream Jews mostly subscribe to the idea of Judaism that emphasis practice more over belief (e.g belief in God is not a necessary prerequisite to Jewish observance).

But not everyone agrees with this ideology.

However, Orthodox Judaism regards the acceptance of the "Yoke of Heaven" (the sovereignty of the God of Israel in the world and the divine origin of the Torah) as a fundamental obligation for Jews.

What works in their favor:

Much recent Jewish theology makes few if any metaphysical claims and is thus compatible with atheism on an ontological level.

Now, if you are a secular Jew and don't believe in all the religious mumbo-jumbo, then where do you stand or what actually defines you as a Jew?

The article on Wikipedia stated that an atheist Jew would probably identify with

- Jewish history and peoplehood, immersion in Jewish literature
- The consumption of Jewish food and an attachment to Jewish languages, festivals etc

Notable personalities: Albert Einstein, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, Golda Meir, Woody Allen

Jewish Atheism is interesting. I think their moto should be "You don't have to be embarrassed about your lack of belief or disbelief".

ShiaChat is down!

Yes. ShiaChat is still down. Don't really know what has happened. I've not been on the site for about a week now. Hopefully they can get the site fix soon.

Iran's response to Reuter's article

Reuters has published Iran's response to their three part article series about Khamenei's wealth and asset. Not surprisingly, Iran completely rejects the analysis and further accuses the authors of indulging in misinformation.

Reuters, however is standing by their claim.

Barb Burg, a Reuters spokesperson, said the news agency stands by the accuracy and fairness of its articles. Its estimate of Setad's net worth was based on an analysis of statements by Setad officials, data from the Tehran Stock Exchange and company websites, and information from the U.S. Treasury Department.

They didn't get back to the investigators/authors

A spokesman for Setad did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.

While critical of Reuters investigation, the IRNA text did not address Reuters key findings, namely the confiscation of property or Setad's stakes in nearly every sector of the Iranian economy, including finance, oil, telecommunications and pharmaceutical companies.

Iran didn't like the article very much, yet is not ready to reveal more information about all these organizations that are well connected to Khamenei.

Khamenei's Wealth and Power - Part 3

The third part of the article is out at the Reuters Investigates site. Part 1 and Part 2 is also available.

Many of you will find this article interesting because it attempt to uncover/unravel Khamenei's grip of power and influence on Iran for the past 24 years by inspecting organizations that are directly under his patronage.

The first organization is Setad.

The organization's total worth is difficult to pinpoint because of the secrecy of its accounts. But Setad's holdings of real estate, corporate stakes and other assets total about $95 billion, Reuters has calculated. That estimate is based on an analysis of statements by Setad officials, data from the Tehran Stock Exchange and company websites, and information from the U.S. Treasury Department. Just one person controls that economic empire – Khamenei. Reuters found no evidence that Khamenei is tapping Setad to enrich himself. But Setad has empowered him. Through Setad, Khamenei has at his disposal financial resources whose value rivals the holdings of the shah, the Western-backed monarch who was overthrown in 1979.

With those revenues, the organization also helps to fund the ultimate seat of power in Iran, the Beite Rahbar, or Leader's House, according to a former Setad employee and other people familiar with the matter. The first supreme leader, Khomeini, had a small staff. To run the country today, Khamenei employs about 500 people in his administrative offices, many recruited from the military and security services.

Setad, however, is a much broader operation than these foundations. It's unclear how much of its revenue goes to philanthropy. Iranians whose properties have been seized by Setad, as well as lawyers who have handled such cases, dispute the argument that the organization is acting in the public interest. They described to Reuters what amounts to a methodical moneymaking scheme in which Setad obtains court orders under false pretenses to seize properties, and later pressures owners to buy them back or pay huge fees to recover them.

According to one of its co-founders, Setad was meant to last two years. But under Khamenei's control, it remained in business, amassing a giant portfolio of real estate by claiming in Iranian courts, sometimes falsely, that the properties were abandoned. In
fact, many were seized from members of religious minorities, and business people and other Iranians living abroad.

Khamenei appoints Setad's board of directors but delegates management of the organization to others, according to one former employee. This person said the supreme leader is primarily concerned about one thing: its annual profits, which he uses to fund his bureaucracy.

As expected, the authors of this article couldn't get any comments or feedbacks from the people in charge of the organization. Even the Iranians that are currently serving in the governmental sectors are refusing to cooperate.

The second organization is the powerful Guards

"The Revolutionary Guards, the powerful military unit tasked with protecting Iran from both domestic and foreign threats, has long held a pivotal role in the country's economy, with extensive holdings in defense, construction and oil industries, according to the U.S. State Department.

According to Mohsen Sazegara, a co-founder of the Revolutionary Guards who is now in exile in the United States, Khamenei allowed the Guards to enter the construction business. That opening eventually enabled an engineering division of the Guards to evolve into a major conglomerate. In time the Guards became a pillar of Khamenei's power. So too did Setad.

"

The Guardian Council http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_Council

Even before then, Setad had been drawing attention from the reformist wing of the establishment. During Khatami's second term, moderate members of parliament sought to investigate Setad, according to Nayyeri. The Guardian Council, a body of conservative clerics and jurists who are directly or indirectly appointed by Khamenei, issued a declaration that Setad was beyond parliament's authority, Nayyeri said.

Elections in 2008 brought a strongly conservative parliament deeply loyal to Khamenei. In one of its first steps, parliament amended its bylaws to limit its own power to audit institutions under the supreme leader's supervision, except with his permission.

"This is the reason why no one knows what is going on inside these organizations," says Sazegara, the Guards co-founder.

Today, Khamenei's power in some respects exceeds that of his predecessor. He lacks the religious authority of Khomeini but has far greater resources at his disposal.

Khomeini operated from a modest house in northern Tehran with a small staff. Khamenei lives in a large compound in Tehran. The grounds contain a variety of buildings, including a large hall where Khamenei gives speeches. Setad helps to finance his administrative offices, which are known as Beite Rahbar, the Leader's House, according to a former senior Setad employee and other people familiar with its operations. It employs about 500 people, many recruited from the Guards and security services.

This is what I concluded from the article:
The authors stated that Khamenei never fails to portray himself as a highly religious and pious/modest scholar. Everyone agrees to that at least. The authors wanted us to disregard that for a moment, and examine the way he has consolidated his powers and wealth via private organizations (Setad, Revolutionary Guard,) that are not very transparent and are ridiculously faithful only to him. By giving these examples, one can compare the current supreme leader with the previous one; and unlike Khomeini, Khamenei is running a huge beuracray (thousands of time larger).

Authors attempted to highlight that Khameini is sitting comfortably on billions of dollars supposedly invested by his "companies" that supposedly work for the good of people. But since these organizations are only accountable to Khamenei and Khamenei is not accountable to anyone, so there's a disconnect between Khameini's public personality with what is going on privately in the background.

I think what is lacking in this article is maybe some more details or discussion on why the Leader of Iran needs his own private personal army and why he is operating these secretive and private organizations away from the other branches of the government or seperate from the office of the Presidency. Based on my observation, most of the supporters of the Wilayah al-Faqih system (Supreme Leader) claim that he is entitled to all these because of his position as the Supreme Leader. This doesn't really sit well with me because Shias generally don't believe in a temporal power on earth, at least not in the curent Era. I don't think Shias should make an exception for Iran due to a political system. Because everyone knows that this style of thinking has created many dictatorship with lifetime tenures. Look around you, they are everywhere.

Khamenei's Wealth and Power

I'm reading an article (published yesterday Nov, 11, 2013) about Iranian Supreme Leader's (Khamenei) Wealth and Assets. This is a three-part article. Part three will be out tomorrow.

A little bit of background first:

Khomenei, the founder of the Islamic republic of Iran, passed away in 1989. It was hard to find a successor that embodies Khomeini's qualification, leadership quality and charisma. The one person who knew the political system well and was a big supporter of it was sacked by Khomeini himself. The sacking of Khomeini's deputy, Montazeri, for irrecoverable differences became a huge scandal over the period of time among political Shias, especially since it was found later on that Montazeri was probably framed and had least blood on his hands than the rest of the political Ayatullahs. After participating in Khomeini's strict Islamic regime, the ever devious Hashemi Rafsanjani thought the least evil candidate was the humble junior Ayatullah with the least religious qualification and not overtly obvious political aspiration by the name of Ali Khamenei. Rafsanjani, playing on the emotions of Khomeini's supporters who by then were still distraught over the death of their leader, managed to swiftly pass Khamenei's candidacy across the now almost worthless majlis (assembly of experts) which then was responsible for evaluating Supreme Leader qualification and personality(?). Much has been written on this; look it up if you are interested. Over the years, Khamenei, knowingly or unknowingly, had assembled mass powers and also wealth for his supporters much to the disgust of the ordinary Iranians.


The article that I'm reading goes behind the secretive world of Iran's supreme leader; people and organization associated with him. Like always, everything that comes out of Iran are not 100% truth or false. So treat everything as if it's half-truth.

http://www.reuters.com/investigates/iran/#article/part1

http://www.reuters.com/investigates/iran/#article/part2

Woman can't drive her sick father to the hospital

Yesterday's news

A Kuwaiti woman was arrested in Saudi Arabia for driving a car while taking her diabetic father to the hospital.
The woman was driving a Chevrolet Epica with her father in the passenger seat when she was pulled over in an area located near the border with Kuwait, Saudi police told Kuwait Times newspaper.
She explained that she was taking her sick father to the hospital, but officers were unsympathetic. The woman was detained and is now being held in custody pending an investigation, police said.

About a week ago, sixty women in Saudi Arabia protested the no-driving-by-female rule by going out on roads in their cars. Sixteen of the female drivers were prosecuted and charge under this outdated regulation supported mostly by the religious zealots in the Kingdom. You can hardly find any other country in the world (Muslim or otherwise, civilized or uncivilized), apart from Saudi Arabia, that is more repressive (officially) towards the female gender. So, you can imagine that we are really dealing with a misogynist society where discrimination and hatred against the female are not only tolerated but actively promoted (officially).

The Mullahs, after not finding any justification from Islam to bar women from driving, came out with an even more creative reason, this year.

On October 23rd a group of 200-odd clerics gathered outside the royal court to denounce what they described as a “conspiracy” to put women behind the wheel. Last month Sheikh Salah al-Luhaydan, a well-known cleric who also practises psychology, claimed on a popular Saudi website that it has been scientifically proved that driving “affects the ovaries” and leads to clinical disorders in the children of women who are foolish enough to drive.

A few years ago, the Saudi Arabian Mullahs, to justify the kingdom's driving ban against the women, ratiocinate that driving may leave women susceptible to harm (eg. kidnapping). Even if kidnapping became a problem in the Kingdom, which is not at the moment, the safest place you can actually be is in your car. You are able to secure yourself by locking the car doors; you can also run down the potential kidnappers.

Mullahs are not logical thinkers. They are also not scientist or psychologist. You cannot even depend on them for enlightening you about Islamic teaching.

I'm not following the middle eastern news very closely nowadays or this event particularly but I'm quite happy that I didn't see a PR lady on TV defending the kingdom of Saudi Arabia discriminatory practices. Almost every year, you can see a dumb hijabi (covered fully from head to toe even the face) coming on TV defending the kingdom practices against what she sees as the attack by the feminists. Every discussion with her typically ends with "Women don't need to learn how to drive or drive anywhere by herself because they have chauffeurs to take them everywhere."

References
http://rt.com/news/woman-arrest-driving-saudi-164/
http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21588438-will-saudi-women-ever-be-allowed-behind-wheel-car-ovarian-issue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia

Arab Shia

In June (can't really believe that that was five months ago), I was reading a book about the Iraqi Shias[1]. I managed to finish reading it in record time (24 or 48 hours). Unfortunately, I didn't get to create many blog posts based off the book. I'm thinking of going through it again, and summarizing key details.

I'm particularly interested in the Iraqi Shias in the context of them being Arab first and Shia second. Prior to this, I've examine a few articles about the forgotten Shias of Saudi Arabia. What? You didn't know there are/were Shias in Saudi Arabia?

The official interpretation of Islam in Saudi Arabia is Wahabism (also sometimes referred to as Salafism). This sect only gain prominence in the holy cities in the last two hundred years via tribal warfare. Prior to it being the state religion, after being adopted by the reigning tribe (the Sauds) and being forced upon the inhabitant of that geographical area (now known as Saudi Arabia), most of the people were followers of the orthodox schools of Islam (Sunnism and Shiasm).

People who are very ignorant of Shiasm frequently confuse Shiism as an Iranian sect or religion. The history of Shiism in Iran is very brief/short. Iranians started converting to the Islamic faith within the first 25 years after the death of the Holy Prophet when its territory was conquered by the Arabs. For the next thousand or so years, Iranians were officially followers of Sunnism until the Safavid came to power in the 15th century.

Also, many of the Sunnis living in the middle eastern or African countries (Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Sudan etc) didn't really become Muslim or Arab until they were converted to Islam by their Arab or non-Arab conqueror and adopted the Arabic language.

On the other hand, the Iraqi Shias have a very long and unique history due in part because of the strong tradition of being very close and faithful to the family of the Holy Prophet.

The author of the book [1] introduce Shias of Iraq as

"Shia Islam was closely associated with Iraq as several of the formative events of Shia history took place there. In AD 661, Ali ibn Abi Talib, the fourth caliph and the first Shia Imam, was assassinated in a mosque in Kufa. Ali's son, Husayn, who laid claim to the caliphate, was killed in a battle which took place on the plain of Karbala in 680 A.D. Many of the twelve Shia Imams spent at least part of their lives in Iraq."

to be continued...


Reference
[1] Yitzhak Nakash, The Shia of Iraq, 1994, Princeton University Press, ISBN: 13579108642

Need to be motivated

to work on my blog.

I haven't been blogging as often as I could/should. I think I wasn't motivated enough. Blogging requires dedication. I'm lacking that too. 2013 seems to be the shortest year I've had experience. While I'm pleasantly satisfied with the many tangible milestones I've accomplished this year (in my life); I'm not very happy with the state of my blog.

In the past, I used to be able to write three articles per week at the minimum. Three complete articles. I was also reading a lot. Nowadays, I'm not able to get even a single article written. Often time, after finishing writing a post, I don't feel like posting it. Articles get queued up in the blogger interface; I lose interest and do not revisit them again.

The first step in getting this blog on track is de-cluttering the queue. I need to look over the drafts and salvage what I can. This may take a few weeks at most.

Then, I need to make a list of articles and books that I have been reading especially for my blog. I'm thinking that rather than starting with something new, it's better if I can revisit and expand on some of my old discussions.

Reading. I'm going to start slow. A few pages per day. Set small goals. Don't make reading, a joyful experience, into a burden.

Writing. Don't be lazy. Force yourself to write a paragraph or two of your ideas and thoughts.

Thinking. Don't be scarred to be controversial. If you are not controversial then you are probably not thinking much.

More..coming soon.

How to get rid of your ex-girlfriend - North Korean Style

The surprisingly obese dictator from North Korea recently sent one of his old lovers to face the firing squad.

That's her. The ex.


Dictators rarely need reasons or to justify their actions. Most of the victims don't get a trial or proper legal representation.

But what's chilling is the way the execution was carried out. See the description.

All 12 were machine-gunned three days later, with other members of North Korea's most famous pop groups and their immediate families forced to watch. The onlookers were then sent to prison camps, victims of the regime's assumption of guilt by association, the reports stated.

“They were executed with machine guns while the key members of the Unhasu Orchestra, Wangjaesan Light Band and Moranbong Band as well as the families of the victims looked on,” said a Chinese source reported in the newspaper.

Using Technology to Spread God's Message

Don't like this news one bit.

Mormon missionaries will soon spend less time knocking on doors and more time chatting online with potential converts. Church apostles said the change reflects the growing importance of social media and people's preference to connect over sites such as Facebook rather than opening their homes to strangers.

Under the new rules, missionaries must get permission from their mission president before sending emails to converts or people of the opposite gender. They are still required to send emails from public computers where a fellow missionary can see the screen.

Martinich says giving 18- and 19-year-olds more access to the Internet on missions is a delicate balance, and could lead some to waste time surfing the web or on Facebook. But, he said it's simply unrealistic to do mission work in today's world without embracing technology.

Shia Iranians and Iraqis Religious Background

A little bit history of the Iranian Shia:

Iran’s population became Shia following the establishment of the Safavid state in 1501. Shiism has been the state religion until now except for a brief period when the Sunni Afghan occupied Isfahan in 1722.

Religion held the Iranian society together and the pressures and sanctions to behave in proper Shia Islam fashioned stemmed largely from Iranian public opinion.

On the other hand, Shiism in Iraq was wrapped around the strong Arab tribal value system. Unlike Iran, the Iraqi society was formed with the rise of Najaf and Karbala as the two strongholds of Shiism in the country which was original under the occupation of the Sunni Uthmani.

The majority of Shia Iranians are of Persian ethnic origin. The Iraqi Shias are Arabs (with tribal attributes and moral values). The merchant class in Iran (Bazaris) had close relationship with the Shia Ulamas and was willing to spend their wealth on religious causes. The Iraqi merchant class as a whole was unwilling to channel funds to support religious causes and institution.

The rise of Iranian monarchy in the 19th century (Reza Shah and Muhammad Reza Shah) lessens the power of clergy in Iran but didn’t completely eradicate cleric’s influence.

In Iraq however, the Sunni Iraqi rulers (Iraq was a Sunni state for the most of 19th and 20th century) dealt a severe blow to Shia Islam and eradicated the power of clerics completely.

Reference
Yitzhak Nakash, The Shia of Iraq, 1994, Princeton University Press, ISBN: 13579108642

Occupy Brazil

Brazilians are out in streets demanding end to all corruptions, more transparency and better social services from their government. Brazil, among the fastest developing nations in South America, is set to host the world cup 2014.

This article is a good overview of what’s going on in Brazil.

Wouldn’t you be angry if you are paying 40% of your salary to your government and getting almost nothing in return?


I’ve been noticing for quite a while now, politicians, especially in those developing countries, are always building mega-projects using public money and then awarding contracts (related to the project) to their families, friends and cronies. Same thing is happening in Brazil.

suspicions that the construction companies – a main source of kickbacks for politicians – will be the main beneficiaries of the tournament have grown, particularly in Rio, where the Maracanã stadium has been refurbished for the second time in a decade at a cost of more than 1bn reals (£295m). It was rebuilt with public money, but the concession to run it has been offered to a private firm, covering barely a fifth of the costs

As one banner, held aloft by a football-loving protester – Leandro Ferreir – said on Thursday: "We don't want a country that is beautiful only for gringos (foreigner)."

Reference
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/21/brazil-protests-football-world-cup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_protests_in_Brazil

Not a good news for women worldwide

Yesterday, WHO (World Health Organization) released a shocking statistic about violence against women.

Imagine that a third of all women in the world have been abused.

Thirty-five percent of women around the world have been raped or physically abused, according to statistics the World Health Organization Thursday. About 80 percent of the time this violence occurs in the home, at the hands of a partner or spouse.

The data is from many countries around the world.

Devries and a team at the WHO analyzed data from 141 studies in 81 countries. Their findings offer the first comprehensive look at domestic violence globally and give insights into how abuse hurts women's overall health.

When women are murdered, a partner or spouse is the killer 38 percent of the time, the study finds. By comparison, men die at the hands of a wife or partner only 6 percent of the time.

It's not healthy for women to be abused.

Abused women are twice as likely to report being depressed and having their own problems with alcohol. They are also 1.5 times more likely than women who haven't been abused to have a sexually transmitted disease including, sometimes, an HIV infection.

The whole cycle of violence just continues

A woman who has experienced violence has a greater chance of having a low-birth-weight baby. And children who were abused, or who witnessed abuse, are more likely to end up in violent relationships themselves,

The only possible way to stop the abuse

What else can be done to stop this global trend? Educate women and give them a chance economically, Garcia-Moreno says.

Reference
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/06/20/193475321/who-finds-violence-against-women-is-shockingly-common

Iraqi Shias vs Iranian Shias

A general misconception people have about Shiism is that it is a byproduct of Iranian culture and social values. The author of the book believes that there’s a tendency for most people to overlook the unique identity and feature of Arab Shia (especially the Iraqi Shias). One of the reasons is because Shia literatures are heavily based (tilted towards) on the Iranian side.

Only after the Iran-Iraq war, has there been more concerted effort at understanding the distinct culture and social values of the Iraqi Shias and the different patterns of ritual and organizational taken in Iraq. The book sets out to correct the widely held assumption that the Iraqi Shias are patterned after the Iranian Shias.

Author mentioned his objectives in the following set of questions:

• How was the modern Iraqi Shia society formed and during which period?
• What was the impact of the rise of the modern state on the status of the Iraqi Shia leadership and classes, and on the socioeconomic and political position of the shrine cities?
• What are the basic political aspirations of the Iraqi Shias?
• What are the fundamental differences between the subjective cultural beliefs and social values of Iraqi and Iranian Shias as evident in their rituals and religious practices?
• In what ways did Iraqi and Iranian Shia Islam differ in their organizational forms?
• What were the consequences of the weakening financial power of the Shia religious establishment, and of the decline of its major source of intellectual strength, the madrasa, on the position of the Shia ulama and their ability to mobilize people for political action in modern Iraq?

Reference
Yitzhak Nakash, The Shia of Iraq, 1994, Princeton University Press, ISBN: 13579108642

The Shia of Iraq

I’ve just finished reading an interesting book about the history of the Iraqi Shia/Shiite. Please see the detail of the book at the end of the post (reference). This book is divided into four sections. Each section contains two or three chapters.

The first section is about the making of the Iraqi Shiite Society. How /when the Iraqi society began to convert or settled in the area and what’s the nature of this conversion. This is followed by events before and after 1920 revolution.

Section two is about social, religion and politics of Iraq including the management of the mujtahids, tribal shaykhs, the foreigners, the shrine cities and 1935 revolution.

Section three is about the commemoration of Ashura, the pilgrimage and the burial.

Section four is about Shia money in the Shrine cities, Shia madressa and also the rise of Baath political party.

I hope I’m able to summarize interesting part from the book here.


Reference
Yitzhak Nakash, The Shia of Iraq, 1994, Princeton University Press, ISBN: 13579108642

Immortality

Here’s an interesting story about a Russian Millionaire Dmitry Itskov who plans to live forever (immortal). In this interview, he said

“when people come up with new ideas they’re called ‘nuts.’ Then everybody starts believing in the idea and nobody can remember a time when it seemed strange.”

“We need to show that we’re actually here to save lives,” he said. “To help the disabled, to cure diseases, to create technology that will allow us in the future to answer some existential questions. Like what is the brain, what is life, what is consciousness and, finally, what is the universe?”

He’s working on this project

His project, called the 2045 Initiative, for the year he hopes it is completed, envisions the mass production of lifelike, low-cost avatars that can be uploaded with the contents of a human brain, complete with all the particulars of consciousness and personality. This would be a digital copy of your mind in a nonbiological carrier, a version of a fully sentient person that could live for hundreds or thousands of years.

Read more and here

My Experience Watching Iran Election News Coverage and Celebration

I’ve been reading and following Iranian’s election news for more than a week now. The pre-election coverage was not very good. There are a number of contributing factors to this; namely

• Uncertainty about the candidates
• short campaign time (this was intentional)
• faulty polls (most of the polls were putting Qalibaf as the front-runner, Rowhani was not even in the list of the top three candidates)
• uncertainty about the voters (Iranians were very much undecided about their candidates.
• Also, many voters said they would be staying at home and not participating in the election) and
• western journalists/news media claiming they were not getting proper authorization to travel to Iran or bared from reporting in some cases (through threats and intimidation).

The Election Day started with Iran’s most famous VIP, the supreme leader (Rahbar) himself, casting his vote early morning. He said that not even his kids know whom he is voting for. This is so unlike four years ago where he specifically endorsed Ahmadinejad for the second term. The plan backfired and Ahmadinejad turned out to be the biggest thorn on his side. So, maybe this time he’s wise to keep quiet about his favorite choice. He urged all Iranians to vote even those who are not very supportive of the system/government (I rephrased what he said). And of course, no interview with Khamenei would ever be perfect without the obligatory condemnation of the west; Khamenei said ‘To Hell With you’ to the western powers who dared question the selection of their candidates and for saying how undemocratic their political system really is.

I was watching interviews with Iranians who were already in lines at the voting centers. A number of Iranians who initially said they were not planning to vote showed up anyway because they were persuaded by their family and friends. Many Iranians who voted for Rowhani said they want to see someone moderate for a change. Others who voted for Rowhani believe while he may not be the best candidate but they are still voting for him because he’s using a slightly different tone from other candidates. A lot of Rowhani’s supporters were among those who were worried about the economy, western backed sanction and personal freedom. Overall, no matter who the Iranians were voting for, they all said that coming out to vote is a social event or showing of the solidary for their country.

Guess who showed up in the late afternoon. The infamous ex-President of Iran, Ahmadinejad. I was expecting him to act like a punk but apparently he was somewhat subdued this time. I guess he’s no more than a toothless tiger now that he’s tenure is almost over and his plan to cling to power via his successor’s failed after it was foiled by the hardliners who saw him as a threat to their way of life. Though I still wonder what’s the future going to hold for him. The political outlook doesn’t look good for him since the reformists are now in the office of Presidency. And he had already burned all the bridges with the conservatives/hardliners.


The voting hours were extended at least four times right up to 11 pm. The result that was supposed to be announced at 3am was postponed until 8am Saturday. A lot of people were surprised at the hold-up. The result from 2009 Presidential election was announced within the two/three hours after the closure of voting centers. I’ve seen some people again expressing doubt and suspicious about the 2009 Presidential election and comparing with the clear victory for the reformists.

I woke up early on Saturday morning and tuned to Press TV (English) hoping to catch some live Iranian election reporting. I was very disappointed after awhile. PressTV was not covering the most important event in Iran! Their own election. They had news about a protest in Jordan. I initially thought the protest was about something very important because well..it had to be important to pre-empt their own election coverage. Nope, it was just a regular protest about Jordanians being unhappy with their economy. Okay, so I waited.

The next news item was a sandcastle competition in a European country. Then the news turned to hot air balloons. I was getting very impatient by then. Come on, where’s the election news. All they had was news ticker showing candidate’s vote count. But no real live TV coverage. I hardly watch Press TV. My last attempt to watch it was a year and half ago. I don’t think it covered anything I was interested in back then. I was hoping that at least this time as the official Iranian news channel, PressTV should have a monopoly on election coverage. But no such thing. For some reason, they were not interested in broadcasting their own election live and I guess I was in no mood to watch anything other than Iranian Presidential Election. The news section ended. A documentary about pig farming (Pig Business) was then aired. Argghh…this was getting hopeless. I turned off the TV and went online.

When the counting began to show a clear lead favoring Rowhani, people were ecstatic and very much in celebratory mode. Soon enough, the announcement came in that Rowhani had a clear victory and a mandate to form the next government. The online newspapers began showing Rowhani’s picture. I was reading news from a popular internet website. As soon as Rowhani’s picture emerged as the next President of Iran, the comments section was flaming with disappointing posts from users who didn’t know much about Iran’s politics. To them it was just a case of “Oh No! The Iranian Mullah won a victory for their regime”. Much later, some folks clarified that although Hassan Rowhani is dressed very much like a Mullah but his ideology is not aligned at all with the hardliners of Iran’s whose candidates are all dressed in western style suits (minus the tie because tie is a symbol of western imperialism :rolleyes: )

The Internet began to buzz with pictures and videos of celebration in Iran. Iranians were singing and dancing in the streets celebrating their victory. Congratulatory messages started coming in from the reformists. I’ve seen some people chanting support for Musavi and displaying sarcastic remarks about the 63% of the population who supposedly voted for Ahmadinejad's second term. Where are those people now? I’ve also seen remarks from people who hope Rowhani’s victory would guarantee a release of their political dissidents. Most of all people were hoping for a better life for the Iranians.

The conservatives/hardliners who had all of their candidates defeated, didn’t focus much on their defeat or say much about Rowhani’s victory or their gloomy outlook/future. Their newspapers on Saturday (and I didn’t read enough of them to form an objective opinion) painted the high voter turnout in the election as a victory against the west.

It’s too early to say how Rowhani’s presidency will look like. People are hopeful. We still have to wait and see.

Just browsing ShiaChat and it went offline.

Based on the message, this is a scheduled maintenance. I hope it doesn't take too long.

ShiaChat.com is currently unavailable - Undergoing maintenance.

Iran's new President is a Reformist

Hassan Rohani is Iran's new President. He defeated five conservatives (hardliners)/semi conservatives-independent convincingly with 51% of the votes. His closest rival, Qalibaf, managed to only get 16% of the votes. Jalili and Mohsen Rezaee are almost tied in the third place with 10-11%. Since one of the candidate have the majority of the votes, he won.

This is a stunning victory for the Reformists of Iran. I'm glad that they came together under a single candidate no matter how imperfect he was. Rohani is probably not the most ideal Reformists leader, but the body that selects Iran's Presidential candidate disqualified a lot of their candidates. After seeing today's result, I bet some members of the Guardian Council would be regretting their decision to eliminate Rafsanjani from the race. If they had only allowed Rafsanjani to run, he would've probably split the reformists vote between them. I don't think people like Rafsanjani can be persuaded to drop from a race or is win-able on a reformist ticket at least not in the current era. Most of his political life seems to be dedicated serving the establishment and he's also very wealthy. So, he has quite a bit of baggage.

Rezaee also did very well in this election. The supposedly front runner, Qalibaf, didn't deliver. The other establishment candidates were rejected by the Iranians.

Hassan Rohani will definitely face challenges from the unelected branch of government like the rest of other Presidents. But I hope he can improve the life of average Iranians and rein in the other side who think they represent the will of God. Hopefully, he can get many of the political prisoners out.

Interesting piece about Ahmadinejad’s Legacy

From Reza Aslan. Author of a couple of Islamic books.

According to him, the outgoing President of Iran will be best remembered not only for his cringe worthy statements but also for cracking the glass ceiling (of not questioning the rule of the Mullahs). I’m quoting him here

The mullahs' conflict with Ahmadinejad goes to the very heart of what constitutes political legitimacy in the Islamic Republic. In Iran's byzantine government, the elected president is supposed to represent the sovereignty of the people while the unelected supreme leader represents the sovereignty of God. In practice, however, nearly all levers of political power rest in the hands of the supreme leader, leaving the president with very little control over policy decisions.

That is just how the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, wanted it. Khomeini's religio-political concept of velayat-e faqih, or "guardianship of the jurist" argued that in the absence of the Muslim messiah (known as the Mahdi), the powers of government should rest with the messiah's representatives on Earth -- that is, the ayatollahs

In his second term, Ahmadinejad steadily chipped away at the clergy's religious, economic, and political control. First, he started questioning the mullahs' self-proclaimed status as the arbiters of Islamic morality -- and especially its obsession with proper Islamic dress.

The president then began repeatedly criticizing the clergy for their enormous wealth, which stood in stark contrast to most Iranians' economic suffering under international sanctions. In a surprise move, Ahmadinejad curtailed the amount of money that the government pays to religious institutions, which have ballooned over the past three decades into a source of tremendous personal enrichment for many in the clerical elite.

But Ahmadinejad's challenge to the clerical regime goes beyond any single skirmish with the supreme leader. Perhaps more important is his very public questioning of the foundation of the Islamic Republic's political and religious authority. "Administering the country should not be left to the [supreme] leader, the religious scholars, and other [clerics]," the president said in 2011.

Consider, for example, Ahmadinejad's much-maligned claims of being in direct communication with the Mahdi. Such statements are not the mad ravings of a religious fanatic -- they are a public repudiation of the entire system upon which the Islamic Republic was built. After all, if a layperson like Ahmadinejad can directly consult with the Mahdi, then what use are the ayatollahs? And if the clerics are not the only ones with a direct line to the Mahdi, why have they been given political powers over the Mahdi's government? As Mashaei put it, "Running a country is like a horse race, but the problem is that [the clerics] are not horse racers."

You should check out the whole piece here.

Iranians are either voting or not tomorrow

We haven’t been having good news coverage about the election in Iran. Most of the sources seem to be repeating the same thing over and over again. Based on an informal poll (don’t really know how reliable it is), the Mayor of Tehran is leading the race followed closely by Khamenei’s puppet Saeed Jalili. Reformists may or may not come together under Rowhani especially since the other Reformists guy who had more support has dropped out from the race. I think he did well, since splitting the vote between the two of them wouldn’t be good for either. Iran’s ex-Presidents, Rafsanjani and Khatami, have both endorsed the only Reformist candidate in the race.

I’ve been reading people’s opinions, inside and outside of Iran. I’m sensing that there’s a strong group of people who are pretty happy with the selection of the candidates. These people who are most likely to vote for Qalibaf or Jalili believe that in this tough time, Iran’s problems can only be resolved if they stick together under the leadership, support the best interests of Iran via strong revolutionary methods, being faithful to Islam and sticking up to western powers.

Mohsen Rezaee, another candidate, is Iran’s Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich. He seems to be running in every race and not getting more than 2% of the vote. This time around, he may get more supporters (voters) since the biggest problem facing the Iranians is the economy and he seems to have some credibility in this area. It’s hard to say for sure if he’s going to become the lead contender since the odds are heavily stacked against him.

We haven’t seen much of the Reformists in politics, at least not since 2001. In the last election (2009), which was a complete disaster, their candidate Mir Hussain Mossavi, was defeated by the incumbent President, Ahmadinejad. Remembering the past, I think even in the time of Khatami when the reformists won both consequent elections with the highest votes ever; they faced much obstructions and oppositions from the unelected conservatives. And if you can’t change anything when you already have 70% of the country behind you then there’s really something wrong with the political system.

There’s a large group of Iranians who will not be voting in the election. Why bother to vote when the authority has already hand-picked the candidates and there’s no telling if your votes would even be counted. Are any of the candidates even remotely anti-establishment? I was reading an opinion of an Iranian who expressed deep hatred and contempt for Khamenei. To him, Khamenei is nothing but a dictator. When he heard Khamenei’s urging every Iranians to vote in Friday’s election, he adamantly refused to follow the order. He won’t be voting. :)

Since Iran is still situated in the region overrun with dictators, I think voting is a novel experience and so the Iranians should vote, even if to cast a blank vote or vote for everyone in the list. Ideally you should vote for the guy who you think is the best that will represent your interest. And if this is not possible then perhaps look for someone who is less against your interest. If you can’t find anyone to vote, then perhaps next time considering running in the election so you can vote for the most desirable candidate.

Ahmadinejad disappearing soon and for the good of everyone

Iranian Presidential Election is this Friday. In a country where the political system is not fully transparent or seems to be working for most, this election is going to be one of those rare events where the Iranians may feel some hope and excitement at the thought of having their voices/frustrations heard and possibly having their votes counted.

Ahmadinejad has not only been a complete disaster for Iran, but also a huge embarrassment. I’m constantly amazed at all the idiotic statements made by him and his overall immaturity. I didn’t really see much good in him. Seems to me whatever he achieved in his two terms as President of Iran was wiped away at the end of his second term.

Moving on.

Eight candidates were originally competing in this election. Two had dropped out so far. Eventually, we will have the top two candidates squaring off. Most of the candidates are either conservatives or ultra-conservatives (hardliners/very pro Khamenei). Not surprising to see all the conservative candidates lined up as presidential candidates since the body that cleared the pathway for them is also very much conservative. The only reformist candidate in this election is Hassan Rowhani.

It’s too early to say how the election will shape up despite the fact that the election is merely three days away. A possibility is to have the hardliner’s votes split among all the candidates assuming no one candidate is going to drop off from the race. Right now, the Mayor of Tehran, Mohammed Baqir Qalibaf has a slight edge among all the candidates.

Even though the election outlook for Iranians is not looking very good, but I hope that the reformists would come out in drove and vote for Rowhani. It’s a shame that they have abandoned their reform movement/agenda for sometimes now. Iranians have to find a way out of their crippling political system/process, be less discouraged and more persistent.

References

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-10/rohani-picks-purple-to-lure-iran-s-disillusioned-voters.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_presidential_election,_2013

http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21579041-eight-carefully-vetted-candidates-jockey-presidency-under-severe

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2013-06/11/c_132448462.htm