Gaza Flotilla Video: Netanyahu's Speech "Iran's Master Plan and the Hate Boat" (2 June)

I leave it to readers to evaluate Wednesday's statement by the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but I will put this question: what is the connection between the Freedom Flotilla --- which was inspected thoroughly by Turkish authorities before heading to sea --- and "dozens of tons of weapons destined by Hamas, destined by Iran, for Gaza" and a supposed quest by Iran for a "Mediterranean port a few dozen kilometres from Tel Aviv and from Jerusalem"?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk7ZREDSw_A&feature=player_embedded#![/youtube]

Gaza Flotilla Video: Member of Israel Parliament Accused of Supporting “Terrorists”

Iran Document: Majid Tavakoli "The Will of My Nation Led to Victory"

Negar Irani provides an English translation of a letter released on Sunday by the detained student leader Majid Tavakoli.

Tavakoli, who ended a hunger strike after he was transferred out of solitary confinement (he had been sent there for criticising a representative of Tehran Prosecutor General Abbas Jafari Doulatabadi), provides the background:

Earlier, I sent a short message through my family to all those who supported me. At the time, I was physically weak and due to the lack of communication inside the prison, I was unaware of the widespread and extensive nature of the support for my situation. It is with great gratitude and humility that I therefore decided to express my appreciation in a second letter.

The Latest from Iran (3 June): 10 Days to Shake Tehran?

I would like to begin by expressing my happiness, gratitude and deep appreciation to the great nation of Iran. I am thrilled to have been born in a country where the desire for freedom and humanity is filled with the essential qualities of nobility, strength, and power. This great spirit is a source of light, against the masters of tyranny who conspire through the night, invalidating and washing out their oppression and intimidation.


I went from hunger strike in solitary confinement to witnessing the compassion, empathy, and the victorious will of the people of my nation. It has made me look back at the difficulties and bitterness of those days with happiness and pride. The level of sympathy and support expressed by the Green people of my nation has left me at a loss for words.

It is with tears of joy that I humbly address the grand people of Iran - tears of joy that express my immense gratitude for their sympathy, kindness and solidarity. I humbly thank them for their continued desire for freedom and their humanity and for proving once again that they will never leave their friends alone.

I would like to once again thank every prisoner for solidarity and for speaking with one voice. I want them to know that we will always be in this together. I would like to thank all the leaders who proved that they are noble mothers and fathers of the Green movement. I would like to thank all mothers who have imprisoned children and all those who have lost their spouse, child, or parent to this cause. I would like to thank all those mothers who have gone beyond their role as wives and mothers to political prisoners and have become the champions of the Green ideals of our nation during a time of such intense oppression and intimidation. I would like to thank the noble young girls of my nation who were the cause of my mother's tears of joy. They have given me the greatest gift of all, to know what it feels like to have sisters of my own. I would like to thank all my brothers, the proud young boys of my nation who stood tall and proved that they are all Majid and that Majid will never be alone.

My gratitude for the students of our nation cannot be expressed too much. I would like to thank them once again and I am for ever humbled by their kindness and support. I would also like to thank the security and administrative personnel at the prison and the hospital for the support and sympathy they showed towards me. I thank them for turning their back on those who have abandoned humanity and are so determined to teach a lesson that, in the process, they neglect the rights of all prisoners.

Last, but not least, I would like to thank my family and in particular my mother whom together with my father, have been my Green role models, and taught me as a child the importance of strength, courage, and honesty and continue to do so today.

It is only befitting that the month of June be referred to as the people's month. I would like to allow myself to think of this incident as a large victory. A victory for the solidarity and sympathy shown by the people. A victory for the dynamic media and the effective spreading of the news. A victory for the people who, regardless of their pain and difficulties, remembered each other, and stood together with one voice. And finally a victory for the media that was not intimidated, shattering a hundred degrees of censorship.

I am joyful that this evil tyranny was revealed. I am joyful that the advocates of human rights made it possible for the cries of the Iranian nation for justice to be heard by the world and international institutions. I am grateful and happy to know that the slightest news, such as my transfer from the general ward to solitary confinement, my hunger strike, deteriorating physical condition, internal bleeding, transfer to Taleghani hospital and back to Evin were all reported with such speed, proving that the walls of censorship are crumbling around us. All this only further demonstrates the greatness of the independent and free media and freedom-seeking reporters and messengers of my nation.

This victory and solidarity was a lesson for our future. It taught us that if there is a will, and if we want something together, then it will happen. Tyranny cannot hide its real face for ever. It will eventually retreat under the pressure of the people's demands and desires.

I would like to once again express my gratitude and congratulate the Green people of my nation.

Khordad 9, 1389 (30 May 2010)

Majid Tavakoli
Evin Prison, Hall 3 Section 7

Gaza Flotilla Video: Member of Israel Parliament Accused of Supporting "Terrorists"

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1HEFXcRThA[/youtube]

A follow-up to EA's report on the statement of Haneen Zoabi of the Balad Party, who was on the Mavi Marmara and said that Israeli commandos fired on the Freedom Flotilla before boarding the ship....

During the Israeli Parliamentary session on Wednesday, she accused the Government of treating the Israel Navy’s bloody raid as a “pirate military operation". She asked why the soldiers had been ordered to confiscate reporters’ cameras and why the government had refused to allow the media to publish pictures of the nine people who were killed.



Zoabi called on the Government to open a national panel of inquiry and asked why it was so opposed to international calls for an impartial and external probe.

In response, Miri Regev of the LikudParty accused Zoabi of being “responsible for a double crime: joining terrorists, and a moral crime against the state of Israel”. Regev called at her in Arabic, “Go to Gaza, you traitor" and added:

She sat here over a year ago and pledged allegiance to the state of Israel and its laws. I have no intention of stifling free speech, but in the case of MK[member of Knesset] Zoabi --- it is not freedom of speech. The Gaza flotilla was a terrorist flotilla and MK Zoabi needs to be punished. We don’t need Trojan horses in the Knesset.

Regev may have been talking about this video in which the "terrorists" were using their "deadly weapons" against fully-equipped Israeli commandos.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6sAEYpHF24[/youtube]

Iran Document: Mousavi "Imam Khomeini, Revolution, and the Green Movement" (2 June)

Khordaad 88's translation of an interview with Mir Hossein Mousavi on the website linked to him, Kalemeh:

Kalemeh: We are approaching the anniversary of the death of Imam Khomeini [on, 4 June].This year the ceremonies seem different from previous years. On one side, old opponents of Imam inside and outside the country try to desecrate his image and they are supported by foreign media. On the other side, there are those in State TV and amongst the strong advocates of imprisonment who promote an image of the Imam that advocated oppression. What is your opinion on the goals that these groups seek? And what may this end with?

MOUSAVI: If the unintended collaboration of the State TV and opponents of Imam in THE desecration of his image is allowed to continue and is not met with a response, it would end with nothing but hatred towards our past.

The Latest from Iran (2 June): Where’s My Crowd?

These new images are introduced by constant meddling in the original perception of Imam and the Revolution. Those who have directly experienced those years with Imam perceive an image of him that has no proximity to what is being promoted right now.



The Revolution won its victory with the messages of independence, freedom, and the Islamic Republic. It was these messages that gained the support of people. People gave Imam a unique welcome in the days of revolution in 1978. In Imam’s funeral, people came out in numbers four times greater. I don’t think such crowds came out to just see and get some time off.

The clips from those days clearly show the waves of emotions and opinions that people had toward Imam. Let us remember that people showed that much emotion after enduring the hardships of the war, and the early days of the revolution. If Imam’s image was even slightly close to what the State TV claims it was, then we would not have had so many people pouring the streets on his funeral, or at least we would have witnessed people being more indifferent. I think there is a lot of light to be shed on this distorted image of Imam promoted by his opponents outside, and the authorities inside who are now turning into guards that constrain freedom.

Kalemeh: There are expensive programs being organized for anniversary of Imam’s funeral. Why do you think such a course of action is taken?

MOUSAVI: Please pay attention to the fact that the system still gets a significant amount of its legitimacy from Imam and the collective memory of people from that great character. In the current context, those currently in power who have violently constrained the legitimate freedom of others and filled the prisons, and those who promote superstition and advocate a stone-age Islam, need to excessively spend this great social asset.

Instead, when one brings forth this [correct] image [of Khomeini], one is also highlighting the differences between those times and now which questions the corrupt and despotic nature of policy approaches today. A right look back at the early years of the Revolution shows how far we have deviated from those goals and values that we first set.

Note that saying pay attention to those years does not mean to return to those days. The goal is to remember the roots and the directions that we set for the revolution: justice, freedom, and spirituality.

We want to use the Islamic Revolution to launch [our nation] to [a bright] future. We don’t want to create a chaotic emotional environment and lose our direction to that future. We must constantly remind our younger generations that what is happening today is different than what happened during the time of Imam.

I am confident that if...the youth of today were there yesterday, they would be amongst the martyrs like Martyr Bakeri, Bagheri, or Hemmat. Similarly, if the youth of that time were here today, they would be the leaders of the Green Movement of Hope and would probably be in prisons, held captive for their national and religious beliefs.

Kalemeh: You talked of the early years and the initial goals of the revolution. But how can one talk of those years in an environment of today that is bombarded with propaganda?

MOUSAVI: There are countless papers and books written, and that continue to be written on the Islamic Revolution in Iran for obvious reasons: the Revolution’s great impact on the region and throughout the world. After the rRvolution, not only Iran started to look very different, but also the whole region started to change.

However, what we need today in the back and forth around the media and propaganda is promotion of a clear and visible image of that time and the Imam. As I said, there is a immature attempt to highlight ostensible similarities between now and Imam’s time, and this must be stopped. For instance, you can discuss the theoretical perspective of Imam on parliament. You can break down his ideas to what was in religious scholarship and what was acceptable to people and to recognition of Parliament, whether from the religious perspective or acceptability of it lays on the people. Parliament is composed of representatives of people, and these representatives come out of the people themselves.  Accordingly, the parliament is “at the forefront of the affairs”.

But more important and more effective is to recount memories that demonstrate the means of political action at the beginning of the revolution. For example,I was talking to Mr [Mehdi] Karroubi about election process during Imam’s era. He recited a memory that helps us get a more clear understanding of Imam Khomeini’s personality and the values that were dominant in society at the time.

In the third Parliamentary election two candidates,  a poor, hardworking intellectual teacher and  a person with ties to Imam Khomeini’s family , were running in the region of Khomein. Although a person close to Imam Khomeini was supporting the second candidate, people chose the first one. The person who was a relative of Imam sent a letter to him questioning the results. Imam replied laughing ,  “What is a better indication of a fair election than that a person related to me, who also enjoys the support of yourself , runs for election but people choose a simple teacher who does not have such supporters?"

Isn't this one of the beauties of election that we should be grateful for? Compare this with the case that occured during the 6th parliamentary election in Tehran [region] when 700 ballots were cancelled to replace  an intellectual [Alireza Rajaie] who enjoyed no [state] support with an individual [Gholam Ali Haddad Adel,  father-in-law of the Supreme Leader’s son Mojtaba Khamenei] with relations [to high establishment officials]. Or the implementation of “approbation supervision”, that did not exist during Imam’s time, which is in reality a mean of dividing the election in two stages. If you pay attention carefully, you will see how this term that has no root in the Constitution or  public wisdom has been [mis]used to disqualify a large number of valuable and caring individuals. The result has been to undermine the status and role of the parliament.

I ask all the conservative members of the Parliament, who have not stained their faith with tyranny: doesn’t thinking about all these humiliations directed toward Parliament make you feel worried and empty?  Is the current situation you are in fitting to the meaning of [Imam Khomeini's] sentence “The Parliament leads all affairs”? [3] You have been incapable of scrutinizing even a small portion of the government's financial irregularities and of receiving a proper response. What answer would you give God and his servants whom you represent? Does the current situation in the Parliament have any resemblance to parliaments during the time of Imam Khomeini?...

Some people in this country are destroying everything including Imam’s image and the first 10 years of revolution.  This was a project that was started in the 10th presidential election [of 2009]. As I said, a proper introduction of Imam Khomeini and a fair introduction of the Revolution will expose and scathe the politics of oppression and superstition.

Kalemeh: You are known as the prime minister of Imam Khomeni. In your speeches, statements, and interviews you always speak about the bright era in the first decade of the revolution and Imam’s path. In general and in the political sphere of Iran , have different dimensions of Imam’s personality been exaggerated?

MOUSAVI: Dr. Shariati once said, “ Peak of the Damavand [highest mountain in Iran] does not need a proof that it is the tallest.”Imam was an extraordinary person. He brought an irreversible change in our history and ended the monarchy , a system that prided itself in humiliation of peasants in face of their kings. Some images from the epoch of Shah could mislead our youth. But [they ] should be reminded that one of the posters published repeatedly in newspapers of the time showed a poor peasant kissing Shah’s shoes.

In response to your question, I should reiterate that Imam was an extraordinary man. But he did not perceive himself as such. He despised praise and eulogy. Once he banned national TV from showing his picture and said ,“ Whenever I open TV, I see myself. It make me want to puke.” He had the same ban [on his picture] for newspapers for a period.

People who have experienced that era remember that, when the top elected member of Parliament from Tehran praised him,  he ferociously interrupted him....A similar case occurred with the head of the Expediency Council, who was also Imam Khomeini’s student. When he lauded Imam Khomeini in public, Imam rejected his words publicly.

It is not strange if we see him as a symbol of a new system that is progressive, seeks freedom, and demands justice. Without his charisma and his relationship with people, our nation would not have resisted for eight years of war [with Iraq]. Without our nation’s belief in him, we would not have survived numerous terrorist attacks during that era.

Kaleme: Some members of Green Movement raise a question as why you repeatedly speak about Imam Khomeini or use his picture?

MOUSAVI: I referred to the necessity of introducing Imam Khomeini to the youth. But I should also discuss another point, which I have no doubt  all supporters of Green Movement agree on , and that is integrity.

I cannot pretend against my attachment to and admiration for Imam Khomeini and Revolution. Since the formation of Green Path of Hope, I clearly introduced myself as a companion of the Green Movement so I can discuss my beliefs transparently. A characteristic of this movement is transparent and honest discussion of thoughts and ideas. Exchange of ideas does not harm us.

We should remember that one of the best posters regarding the movement was the one that read, “Lying is disallowed.”. What kind of expectation requires me to ignore a 10-year period full of experiences and various events? Not only me but a large number of our people have thousands of memories from Imam Khomeini. They have been influenced by that era and are not willing to keep quiet in the face of injustice and distortion toward Imam’s character. Is it correct to ignore this great political capital? Is not this what the prison guards want us to do?

Kalemeh: You introduced yourself as a member of the Green Movement, and talked about your devotion, and love for the Imam and the revolution. You talked about how it is necessary to protect the spiritual asset that is the experiences during the Imam era. But haven’t these talks stopped you from critically viewing those times? Don’t you think that there are problems with those times as well?

MOUSAVI: I have heard this issue before, especially after the speech of Tehran’s Attorney General [Abbas Jafari Dowlatabadi]. There is also a letter published on one of these websites addressing this very issue. As a Shiite Muslim, one of our beliefs is that after the 14 innocent ones, all the rest of God’s people are not innocent and the commit sins, unless God keeps the innocent. The same reasoning applies to Imam’s era.

However, I don’t see it necessary to criticize when internal and external enemies have aimed for the Imam’s image and that era. Obviously, in the context of today, even a slight allusion to a problem would be greatly magnified just like the plot of the tearing of the picture of Imam, that was abused by enemies outside and inside the country.

Today, the enemies of the Green Movement are looking everywhere for a prey or an excuse to destroy that bond that connects us together. Millions in our country like and appreciate Imam, and I am one of them. Recognition of this affinity [to Imam] and the freedom that brings about is a great asset that we cannot make a mistake about, especially in the current conditions. Let me repeat again, we do not expect a companion [of the movement] to lie, no matter how small a member that person is.

Afghanistan Analysis: Assessing the National Consultative Peace Jirga (Mull)

EA correspondent Josh Mull is the Afghanistan Blogging Fellow for The Seminal and Brave New Foundation. He also writes for Rethink Afghanistan. The views expressed below are my own.

You better bite down on something, because here comes some NATO propaganda:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFiX9WsWGew[/youtube]

That wasn't so bad, was it? Very short, and they devote a fairly large chunk of time to criticism of the whole affair. It's a little pedestrian for anyone with extensive knowledge of the region, but the explanation for the jirga is accessible.


However, since the jirga has just gotten under way, it's far too early to draw any substantive conclusions about the criticism or the praise of the jirga. Even if they aren't making decisions and only building a broad consensus, it's going to take a while.

However, it's not too early to engage in that most reptilian form of analysis, gauging the "optics" of the event. How does it look? How does it register in your gut? And if we swirl our hands over the newsprint, what secrets of the future can we mystically divine?

Not much, really. Most conclusions we come to about the optics of the meeting will be rendered meaningless soon enough when the jirga wraps up and the consequences to reality begin to take shape. But just as we can live through a little NATO propaganda to learn about the jirga, we'll lower ourselves to the level of gut reactions.

Thomas Ruttig blogs his gut reaction on AAN:

The Peace Jirga that began today in Kabul, will fail its declared main aim: to establish a real national consensus on talks with the Taleban. In order to be able to, too many relevant political forces are absent - and those who attend are massively monitored and manipulated. The jirga does not bring an end – or at least a reduction - of violence closer.

Those are tough words, but again nothing has actually happened yet. Ruttig does raise some important questions, however, about exactly who and what is represented at the jirga. He explains further:

On the surface, the jirga with its 1,600 delegates bears all insignia of Afghan tribal ‘democracy’ which, although, is male-dominated. (The women were only able to push through their 20 per cent attendance quota after Western diplomats intervened – another example of ‘foreign interference’, so often blasted by Karzai.) Bearded and turbaned men from all corners of the country provide a blaze of colour that is supposed to create the impression of plurality that does not exist in reality. The delegates are rather handpicked. The main opposition party is absent and also some women rights activists boycott the jirga which they consider part of a Karzai legitimisation machine. They fear that burning issues like ‚justice’, i.e dealing with the civil war crimes, and human rights might be sacrificed for a deal with the Taleban. This shows: if a pseudo-consensus is pushed through, only new conflicts will emerge.

The intervention of Western diplomats is very important here. It wasn't 100,000 troops that got a solid victory for women's rights, it was tough negotiations. The US didn't gain anything at the barrel of a gun, and the West didn't actually do anything for the Afghans. A tiny bit of Western engagement simply made room for the Afghan women to make positive gains on their own.

After all, the Western-backed 20 percent quota pales in comparison to the benefit of actually having those voices contribute to the jirga. It should also be pointed out that the US Congress is about 20 percent women, and I don't think anyone would say they're somehow impotent or ineffectual because of their relatively small numbers. I'm less pessimistic than Ruttig when it comes to the role women will play in the jirga.

I'm also less pessimistic about the absence of the Taliban. For all its faults, this jirga could be construed as an arguably sincere effort by Karzai to reach a peaceful settlement. With the Taliban absent, and worse, attacking the meeting with suicide bombers that Mathew Hoh calls "counter-productive as they distance the [Taliban] from the Afghan people," it appears that it is Karzai who is sincere while the Taliban is only interested in war. In years past, the Taliban have at various times come to the table for talks, only to be greeted by US and/or Pakistani air strikes and arrests. Karzai appeared duplicitous, and the Taliban got the moral high ground. Now the perception is reversed, Karzai is sincere and the Taliban look malicious.

Karzai said in his speech to the jirga, "My dear Taliban, you are welcome in your own soil. Do not hurt this country, and don't destroy or kill yourselves." The Taliban looks bad, and this is all about optics. It's possible pressure from the population over these shameless attacks can bring them to the table once again, if this perception holds sway.

But what about the opposition members and activists boycotting the jirga? That can't be good, right? Well, it's not good that they have to boycott, but a boycott is still political engagement. They want rule of law, not informal consensus-building jirgas. They want accountability for civil war atrocities, past and present, and they're not willing to sacrifice those things for a simple handshake peace with the Taliban and other murderous warlords. Even though the opposition's boycott harms the jirga's legitimacy, it does raise awareness of the issue and is far better than them remaining silent.

Activist engagement may harm this specific meeting, but it shows a political vibrancy that defies the media portrayal of Afghans as helpless and unable to stand on their own. Take a look at this description of Afghan politicians running in the upcoming parliamentary elections:

“The way into parliament this time is going to be by money, having a powerful patron or armed men to issue threats. Which of those routes are these guys taking or are they hoping their fame will win them votes?” [...] “Once catapulted into parliament, they think they’ll get lots of bribes - for example, when it’s time to approve or reject the cabinet. They’re after the money.”

Sound familiar? It's eerily similar to the US government, with its system of plutocratic lobbyists and shady, backroom dealings. It's difficult to argue that President Obama taking huge contributions from Goldman Sachs and then stacking his cabinet with its employees is any different from Karzai taking bribes from powerful drug dealers (Big Poppy?) and then filling his cabinet with his closest accomplices.

Democracy is hard. Accountability is hard. It requires fierce pressure from the citizens to achieve properly, and just as Americans seek to counter the machinations of the banking lobby, Afghans must fight for accountability to counter the forces of lawlessness and corruption in their country. I agree with Ruttig that the opposition boycott looks bad for the jirga, but I also see it as a positive sign that the grassroots democracy movement in Afghanistan is alive and well.

Most telling for US policy are the Afghan activists' demands. They want accountability for crimes committed in the civil war, a civil war in which the US is most obviously taking a side. The intense military presence only exacerbates that civil war, and empowers both the corruption of Karzai and the violent rebellion of the Taliban. If the US sees Afghanistan as important to its national interests or desires any sort of positive outcome in governance, development, or human rights, and as always that is up for domestic debate, then it can achieve those outcomes without the use of the military.

A little Western pressure opens the door to the national jirga for Afghan women. Supporting a free press and fair elections can improve governance and accountability. In contrast, Obama's policy of escalating the occupation runs completely counter to those goals, as does the US refusal to deal with the civilian government of Pakistan. The effect there is the same, with more war, more terrorism, and more despotism.

So we can learn something just from the appearances of the peace jirga, indeed we may even see signs to be optimistic about the process. But, once again, the jirga hasn't actually done anything yet, so it's not really possible to come to any firm conclusions on whether it will turn out positively or negatively. What if the Afghan women in attendance are shunned and ignored by the jirga? What if the Taliban remains defiant, and continues to attack instead of negotiate? What if those activists seeking rule of law fail miserably, and Afghanistan remains a narco-state torn by civil war? Our perception, the optics of the jirga, could change dramatically once the real consequences set in. Some optimism is not out of line, but we'll see.

In the meantime, join us on Rethink Afghanistan’s Facebook page and collaborate with the tens of thousands of others around the country working to bring this war to an end.