More »

Source: Azarmehr Blog

September 2, 2010

As soon as you can see Norway’s magnificent forests and lakes from your aeroplane window, you get a sense of a freshness and natural beauty. You won’t be wrong either, it is a beautiful country, it is efficiently run and the only oil producing country which has not fallen victim to despotism, corruption and mass poverty. Norway is prosperous, its people are beautiful, hospitable, courteous and very civilised. This was my first visit to a Scandinavian country but I wasn’t going there as a tourist. I was going to Oslo to be alongside the famous Iranian Human Rights Lawyer, Mohammad Mostafaei, in what turned out to be a roller coaster of emotional anxiety and waiting but fortunately a very happy ending.

Mostafaei got in trouble with the regime in Iran after he helped publicise the stoning case of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. Unable to get hold of Mostafaei, the Iranian intelligence ministry had resorted to the despicable act of taking his family members as hostages. Mostafaei’s wife, his brother-in-law and even his elderly father-in-law were all taken into Evin prison. They were being held as hostages to get their hands on Mostafaei. The regime’s desperate act of taking family members as hostages however, only exposed the backwardness and illegality of Ahmadinejad’s administration. As someone once told me, Islamic Republic’s worst enemy is itself. They accuse everyone who disagrees with them as ‘threats to national security’ but the real threat to national security is none other than their own backward laws, their intolerance and their disregard for human rights and normal behaviour.
This morning however all those terrible times were put behind the Mostafaei family. Finally common sense prevailed and a loving wife and daughter joined their dear husband and father.
I am not going to write much more, I let the mass media that were there to cover this joyful event, do a better job than me. Just one note however to finish this post. There was not a single Iranian journalist there, no one from BBC Persian, VOA Persian, Radio Farda or any of those well funded organisations. An observation that once again confirms what I have said, we do not have good reporters outside Iran. We have lazy journalists who at best like to interview people.

Watch the footage of the reunion here:
http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10027091
Cry No More Parmida. No One Will Arrest Your Mum or Dad Now.

More »

Source: Reuters U.S.

September 1, 2010

LONDON -

Turkey’s gasoline exports to Iran dropped by a hefty 74 percent in July after U.S.-led sanctions against the Islamic Republic came into force, figures obtained by Reuters from Turkey’s statistics office showed on Wednesday.

Turkey sold 35,444 tonnes of the fuel to Iran in July, equivalent to roughly one standard cargo tanker or 301,272 barrels, which is down from exports of 138,673 tonnes in June.

Turkey received $24.42 million from Iran for the gasoline sales, which amounted to an average of $688 a tonne.

That is only a minimal premium above the average spot price in the Mediterranean in July of around $686 tonne PU-C-MED, according to Reuters data.

A new round of U.S. and EU sanctions has choked off many potential suppliers to Iran, whose limited refining capacity means it has to import up to 40 percent of its gasoline needs, even though it is the fifth-biggest oil exporter.

The sanctions are aimed at pressuring Iran to curb its nuclear programme, which some countries fear is aimed at making weapons, something Tehran denies.

(Reporting by Humeyra Pamuk and David Sheppard, Editing by Jane Baird)

More »

Source: Agence France Presse (AFP)/Daily Times

September 1, 2010

LONDON: Former British premier Tony Blair warned in an interview on Wednesday that the international community may have ‘no alternative’ to taking military action against Iran if it develops a nuclear weapon. “I am saying that I think it is wholly unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapons capability and I think we have got to be prepared to confront them, if necessary militarily,” he said in extracts pre-released by the BBC from an interview to publicise his memoirs. “I think there is no alternative to that if they continue to develop nuclear weapons. They need to get that message loud and clear.” Blair expanded on the point in his book, which is being published Wednesday, saying that while a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a threat to the West, the real danger would come with its ability to boost Islamic extremism. “Let us be frank: Iran is a far more immediate threat to its Arab neighbours than it is to America” or Britain, he wrote in the memoir, which recounts his experiences during his decade as prime minister from 1997 to 2007. “That’s why Iran matters. Iran with a nuclear bomb would mean others in the region acquiring the same capability; it would dramatically alter the balance of power in the region, but also within Islam.” Western powers and Israel accuse Iran of trying to build a nuclear arsenal. Iran, which on Saturday began loading fuel into its Russian-built first nuclear power plant, denies the allegations, saying its programme is for civil energy purposes only. afp

More »

By Scott Wilson

Source: The Washington Post

September 1, 2010

For video click here

As President Obama convenes the first direct Middle East peace talks in 20 months, the question many observers here and in the region are asking is what, if anything, makes this round any more hopeful than the last.

One reason for optimism may be the shared regional fear of Iran, which has only grown since talks broke off between Israelis and Palestinians in December 2008.

Obama began a series of bilateral meetings Wednesday morning with the four leaders involved in the talks. Each has his own interest in seeing them succeed, but Iran’s threat is a common concern to all of them.

To be sure, success is a long shot, thanks to a divided Palestinian national movement, a right-leaning Israeli public and the energetic extremes on both sides that are interested in seeing peace talks die before any compromises can be reached.

Iran’s ambitions, which have cast a long shadow over the greater Middle East, may serve as a common bond keeping a frail peace process intact despite threats that have arisen even before the negotiations open Thursday at the State Department.

Iran’s nuclear program and spreading political influence through a swath of Sunni Arab countries have alarmed the region’s kings and elected autocrats for years.

As the clock ticks down on predominantly Shiite Iran’s nuclear program, though, it becomes more urgent for Israel and its Arab neighbors to achieve peace and face together the shared threat to their security and political stability.

The dynamic brings an “enemy of my enemy” calculation to this round of talks, binding the Jewish state’s security interests to those of its Sunni Arab neighbors more tightly than in the past.

The negotiations’ chaperones in Jordan and Egypt are also more threatened by Iran, through its proxies and widening political influence, than they were 20 months ago, giving their leaders a greater incentive to keep Israelis and Palestinians at the table until a deal is reached.

“I can say, with respect to this conflict, [Iran] is an important issue,” George J. Mitchell, Obama’s special envoy to the Middle East, told reporters this week.

In 2001, at the start of the second Palestinian uprising, Mitchell led a commission at the request of then-President George W. Bush to examine ways of ending the violence and achieving long-term Israeli-Palestinian peace.

Mitchell said he re-read his report when he took up his new job and was struck by the fact that it did not contain a single mention of Iran.

“And yet on my first visit and subsequent visits, during which I met with leaders of, I believe, 14 or 15 countries in the region, without exception Iran was included in the conversation,” Mitchell said. “And in most of them, it was the first or second item mentioned. So clearly it is an important issue and one which has an impact on this process.”

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who met first with Obama in the Oval Office on Wednesday, may be more willing than he was to turn against his far-right coalition partners on issues such as extending a settlement freeze past its Sept. 26 deadline and their opposition to any compromise on East Jerusalem. The Palestinians claim the city as their future capital. Netanyahu will need Obama’s support if he decides to undertake a military strike against Iran, either before or after he carries it out. His willingness to stick with peace talks, which Obama has called a priority, would win him goodwill in what has so far been a stormy relationship between the two men. Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas also has reason to fear Iran, which has crossed sectarian lines to support Hamas, the armed Islamist group, with money and military training. Abbas’s secular Fatah movement fought a virtual civil war with Hamas, which now runs the Gaza Strip, over several months in 2007. Reconciliation between the two main Palestinian political movements is not near, and on the eve of new direct talks, Hamas’s armed wing killed four Israeli settlers in the West Bank in what observers there believe was a proxy strike against the peace process itself. “There are going to be extremists and rejectionists who, rather than seeking peace, are going to be seeking destruction,” Obama said Wednesday after his meeting with Netanyahu. “And the tragedy that we saw yesterday, where people were gunned down on the street by terrorists who are purposely trying to undermine these talks, is an example of what we’re up against.” Depending on the terms, a peace agreement with Israel would almost certainly strengthen the aging Abbas’s hand against Hamas, both in Gaza and the West Bank. Abbas was scheduled to meet with Obama early Wednesday afternoon. Obama is then scheduled to see two Sunni Arab leaders frightened by Iran, King Abdullah II of Jordan and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. They lead the only two Arab countries at peace with Israel, under treaties that have proved a near-constant source of tension with the nations’ pro-Palestinian publics.

Abdullah, who will follow Abbas into the Oval Office, warned of an expanding “Shiite Crescent” extending from Iran through northeastern Saudi Arabia and into southern Lebanon and Syria soon after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

His little kingdom is squeezed between the West Bank and Iraq, where he said Iran could take advantage of post-invasion chaos to ensure that a Shiite majority would eventually lead the country.

Abdullah’s fears grew following the brutal sectarian violence that flared in Iraq in 2006 and during the war between Israel and Hezbollah, an Iranian proxy in Lebanon, that same year. The region’s episodic violence inflames his country’s Palestinian majority, threatening his pro-Western stance and empowering Jordan’s own Islamist movement.

Mubarak also has reason to fear Iran’s influence with Hamas, whose leadership has acknowledged receiving assistance from the Islamic Republic.

Gaza, now run by Hamas, has been a constant source of instability on the Egyptian border. The Israeli blockade of the strip has angered Egyptians and brought public demands that Mubarak allow more Palestinians to enter the country in order to escape the siege.

But he is reluctant to do so because Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, a powerful Islamist movement in Egypt and a serious threat to Mubarak’s evolving plans to have his son succeed him in office.

A strong Hamas is a problem for Mubarak – and Iran is interested in just that. And peace between Israel and the Palestinians is perhaps the best way for Mubarak – and Jordan, Israel, the Palestinians and the United States – to counter those ambitions.

More »

By GEORGE JAHN

Source: The Associated Press (AP)

September 1, 2010

VIENNA — Tensions between Israel and Islamic nations have scuttled plans by the U.N. atomic watchdog agency to convene talks this year on a Mideast free of nuclear weapons, according to a document shared with The Associated Press.

The latest failure to bring the opposing sides to the table casts further doubt on plans to hold more substantive talks in two years on such a zone, as proposed by the U.N.’s 189-nation Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty conference four months ago.

That proposal was billed by the NPT conference as a potential breakthrough and — despite Israeli objections — was backed by the U.S. and other nuclear powers for the first time since Arab nations began pushing for such a gathering 15 years ago.

Since, then, traditional tensions have been exacerbated by a push by Arab nations to force the Jewish state to allow international inspections of its secretive nuclear program.

Islamic nations have long called for Israel — which is widely believed to have nuclear arms — to open its program. Confidential documents made available to the AP in August showed increasing pressure ahead of International Atomic Energy Agency meetings later this month, with Arab nations lobbying even Washington and other Israeli allies to drop their traditional backing of the Jewish state’s nuclear secrecy and vote for a resolution calling on it to allow IAEA inspections.

A report from IAEA chief Yukiya Amano prepared for those meetings and made available Wednesday to the AP reflects the tense situation.

The report, which is being circulated internally to the IAEA’s 35 board member nations, acknowledges the failure to carry out a meeting planned for this year on a Mideast nuclear free zone due to “a long-standing and fundamental difference of views between Israel … and the other States of the Middle East region.”

Responses from Israel and Islamic nations make it clear “that currently there is no convergence of views on convening” such talks, said the report, dated Aug. 31 and entitled “Application of IAEA Safeguards in the Middle East.”

An Israeli letter appended to the report showed it conditioning any consideration of attending such a meeting to a decision by Islamic nations at the upcoming IAEA meetings to ease pressure on the Jewish state — an unlikely development considering the push on Israel to admit to possessing nuclear arms.

The Israeli letter indirectly criticized Iran and Syria, citing “repeated cases of non-compliance by several Middle East States with their international obligations.”

Israel, the U.S. and their allies consider Iran the region’s greatest proliferation threat, fearing that Tehran is trying to achieve the capacity to make nuclear weapons despite its assertion that it is only building a civilian program to generate power.

They also say Syria — which, like Iran, is under IAEA investigation — ran a clandestine nuclear program, at least until Israeli warplanes destroyed what they describe as a nearly finished plutonium-producing reactor two years ago. Syria denies that.

But Islamic nations insist that Israel is the true danger in the Middle East, saying they fear its nuclear weapons capacity. Israel has never said it has such arms, but is widely believed to possess them.

In its letter, Iran — Israel’s most intractable foe — rejects outright the idea of a Mideast nuclear forum, “which we believe would in utter vain.” And it indirectly takes the U.S. and other western nations to task, saying the Jewish state is able to enhance “its illegitimate nuclear capabilities by the illegal contributions of certain States.”

The latest pressure puts the Jewish state in an uncomfortable position. It wants the international community to take stern action to prevent Iran from obtaining atomic weapons but at the same time brushes off calls to come clean about its own nuclear capabilities.

Passions have grown since last September when the IAEA general assembly overrode Western objections to pass a resolution directly criticizing Israel and its atomic program for the first time in 18 years.

The result was a setback not only for Israel but also for the United States and other supporters of the Jewish state.

Because the resolution passed by only a four-vote margin, lobbying by both side has intensified ahead of this month’s IAEA assembly, where the measure will likely be voted on again.

More »

Source: Reuters/ABC News

September 1, 2010

VENICE – Iranian director Jafar Panahi, who was released from jail earlier this year, said on Wednesday he was not allowed to leave his home country to attend the Venice film festival.

In a written statement to the festival, where his short film “The Accordion” is screening, Panahi said that he had been officially banned from making films in the past five years.

“Despite having been released, I am still not free to travel outside my country to attend film festivals,” the award-winning director said.

“When a filmmaker is not allowed to make films, it is as if his mind was still imprisoned. Maybe he is not locked up in a small cell, but he keeps wandering in a much bigger jail.”

Panahi, a supporter of opposition leader Mirhossein Mousavi in last year’s disputed presidential election, was released on bail in May after a week on hunger strike. He had been held for 88 days as authorities suspected him of planning to make an anti-government film.

Panahi thanked the cinema industry for its support — particularly at this year’s Cannes festival, where French actress Juliette Binoche criticized Iran for imprisoning him in her acceptance speech for the best actress award.

“In the most desperate moments of my imprisonment, during the hunger strike, I drew courage thinking of myself as a proud member of this community,” he said in the statement.

“I think all the support I received came from individual people and organizations who firmly believe in cinema and in filmmakers’ freedom of expression. Let’s hope one day all governments in the world will come to share this idea.”

Panahi won the Camera d’Or prize in Cannes for his 1995 film “White Balloon.” Five years later, he took the top Golden Lion award in Venice with “The Circle.”

“The Accordion,” which was made before Panahi’s arrest, is a nine-minute long film about two young buskers in Tehran.

(Reporting by Silvia Aloisi, editing by Paul Casciato)

More »

By Sarah Wildman, Foreign Policy Correspondent

Source: Politics Daily

September 1, 2010

As Barack Obama appeared on television Tuesday to declare the end of the U.S. combat role in Iraq, were viewers happiest in Baghdad, Washington, D.C., or Tehran?

The obvious answer would seem to be Washington or Baghdad. In fact, some analysts believe the real winner of the war in Iraq is neither the Iraqis, nor Americans, but the Iranians. It’s a sobering analysis, especially in light of the United Nations-imposed and U.S.-backed sanctions against Iran, intended to to influence the country’s intractable position on its nuclear capability.

Mohammad Bazzi, adjunct senior fellow for Middle East Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote Monday at the GlobalPost.com: “In February 2003, as he marshaled the United States for war, President George W. Bush declared: ‘A new regime in Iraq would serve as a dramatic and inspiring example of freedom for other nations in the region.’ Now, as the U.S. military concludes its combat role . . . Iraq is indeed a dramatic example for the Middle East, but not in the ways that Bush and his administration envisioned. Iraq did not become a beacon of democracy, nor did it create a domino effect that toppled other dictatorial regimes in the Arab world. Instead, the Iraq war has unleashed a new wave of sectarian hatred and upset the Persian Gulf’s strategic balance, helping Iran consolidate its role as the dominant regional power.”

Reached by phone in Beirut, Bazzi elaborated in an interview with Politics Daily. The bottom line, Bazzi explained, was that “Iran has basically leap-frogged the U.S. in the level of influence that it can exert on most Iraqi factions.” The spring’s election and its aftermath, Bazzi said, underscored how effective Iranian influence has been, especially with maneuvering between Iraq’s Shiite factions. “I’d argue that Iran started filling the political void that the U.S. has left in Iraq years ago, and now it becomes even easier with fewer U.S. troops,” he said, noting that the 50,000 U.S. troops that will remain on the ground concern the Iranians. “On a political level, Iranians have played politics in Iraq much more effectively than the U.S. Part of that is that all the Iraqi factions recognized that Iran is not going anywhere, but the U.S. was going to leave, but the Iraqis are stuck with their neighbors.” The Iranians, he said, are “getting a little concerned about the political stalemate in Iraq.” Iranians, Bazzi said, are “keen on playing this role of the political broker.” To that end, they called almost the entire Iraqi leadership to Tehran right after elections. “The Iranians view their strategic interest in Iraq on several levels. Immediate, of maintaining a friendly government in Baghdad, because they don’t want to go back to the days of Saddam where there was an extremely adversarial threat next door. The Iranians will want a friendly, Shiite-led government in Baghdad, and they see that as the new reality.”
A weak Iraq is also in Iran’s interest, Bazzi explained. “If Iraq is not as dominate as it once was, if it is friendly and compliant, then it enables Iran to maintain regional dominance in the Persian Gulf.” Finally, he said, Iraq has become a “bargaining chip and a proxy in their conflict with the United States.”

It’s in Iran’s best interest that U.S. political influence diminish in Iraq, said Bazzi. Ironically, a door has opened, partly as a result of the Obama administration’s minimal attempts to try and influence Iraqi decision making. That “hands-off approach has backfired a little bit — the Iranians are perfectly willing to get down and dirty and get heavily involved.”

Bazzi noted there there are many entry points into Iraqi society. An oppressive heat wave in June brought temperatures reaching up to 50 degrees Celsius in Iraq. The combination of blackouts, electricity failures, and general lack of electricity provoked riots; not only was there no air conditioning, it was hard to watch the World Cup.

“Seven years after the U.S. invasion, there is still no reliable electrical grid. It’s true that electrical output is higher than in the time of Saddam, and Saddam had a policy of diverting output to Baghdad and to Sunni cities and leaving other parts of country in dark. But that failure to provide electricity and drinking water and basic services are good examples of the frustration Iraqis feel at their own government and frustration they feel at the U.S. that really dampened any sense of joy . . .They don’t see basic, everyday life issues getting resolved.”

And that frustration opens the door further to outside influence, including from Tehran.

More »

Iran's Hamed Ehadadi, right, fights for the ball against USA's Tyson Chandler, left, and Derrick Rose during their World Basketball Championship preliminary round match in Istanbul, Turkey, Wednesday, Sept. 1, 2010. (AP Photo/Ibrahim Usta)

By BRIAN MAHONEY

Source: The Associate Press (AP)

September 1, 2010

ISTANBUL — In the political arena, Iran vs. the United States is a matchup that gets attention.

In a basketball arena, not so much.

“For me, it’s a normal game,” Iran captain Mahdi Kamrany said.

The United States won it easily, earning a top seed in the knockout round of the world championship with an 88-51 victory Wednesday in the first meeting between the countries with a history of contentious relations.

The U.S. team, which downplayed the political aspect of the game, methodically pulled away in the first half, wearing down the Asian champions with its depth and athleticism.

Iran head coach Veselin Matic, left, looks at USA head coach Mike Krzyzewski after signing the lineup before their preliminary round of the World Basketball Championship, Wednesday, Sept. 1, 2010, in Istanbul, Turkey. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

“We just respected their basketball team and we just played a basketball game,” U.S. coach Mike Krzyzewski said. “There’s no political aspect in my mind in the ballgame.”

Kevin Love scored 13 points and Kevin Durant 12 for the Americans (4-0), who will meet the fourth-place team from Group A in the round of 16.

After playing his starters for most of the second half of a 70-68 victory over Brazil on Monday, Krzyzewski went to the bench early in this one, with the Americans shooting 58 percent and scoring 23 points off turnovers in the easy victory.

Hamed Haddadi scored 19 points for Iran (1-3) and Arsalan Kazemi had 14.

“I’m very happy, I played against the best team in the world,” Kamrany said.

The tensions between the nations’ governments provided the backdrop off the court, with a group of fans sitting near midcourt before the game holding U.S. and Iran flags and a sign reading “PEACE” in between.

The only sparring on the floor was a playful bump between Haddadi and U.S. forward Rudy Gay, teammates with the NBA’s Memphis Grizzlies.

“We should leave politics to the politicians,” U.S. center Tyson Chandler said. “We’re here to play basketball.”

The countries have feuded for decades and their relations have deteriorated in recent years, with the United States supporting sanctions against Iran for continuing with programs it believes could be used to create nuclear weapons.

The U.S. team tried to keep the focus on the floor, with Krzyzewski saying he had played in Iran in the 1970s with an Armed Forces team and had great respect for the country.

Krzyzewski was answering a question about turnovers in the postgame news conference when he noticed Iran coach Veselin Matic to his left nodding in agreement.

“That’s the first level of diplomacy. That’s one thing we’re in agreement with,” Krzyzewski joked.

There’s no rivalry on the basketball court, where the nations had never met in Olympic or world championship play. The Iranian national team even came to Utah two years ago at the invitation of the NBA to play in a summer league as preparation for the 2008 Olympics.

And in a nod to the Iranian supporters in Istanbul — which included minister of sports Ali Saeedlou earlier in the tournament — dancers were ordered to cover up for their performances during the game. Islam prohibits women from exposing their skin in public, and Iranian officials had turned their backs when the dancers performed in earlier games.

The dancers wore long pants Wednesday.

Iranian fans, many waving flags and chanting, had plenty to cheer early. Haddadi won the opening tip, Durant fired a pass behind Andre Iguodala and out of bounds on the Americans’ first possession, and the U.S. lead was only six after one quarter.

But the Americans quickly pushed it into double digits in the second and gradually extended it to 14 at halftime. They opened the second half with another burst to push it past 20 and turn Group B’s second game of the night into a dull affair.

Krzyzewski said he thought the Americans were tired, more mentally than physically, against Brazil, in what was their third game in three days and sixth in 10 — in three different countries. They were fresher after a day off, with Krzyzewski saying they looked better in the second half.

“As the game moved along we got better in the game,” he said.

Fans hold up an Iranian flag, left, and an American flag with the word "Peace" in between before USA's preliminary round of the World Basketball Championship against Iran, Wednesday, Sept. 1, 2010, in Istanbul, Turkey. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)

Following Thursday’s game against winless Tunisia, the Americans will have three days off before playing Monday against an opponent still to be determined. But a difficult quarterfinal could follow, with Spain looming as a possible opponent after two surprising losses have dropped the defending world champions into third place in their group.

The Americans want to have their reserves playing well by then, and all 12 players scored Wednesday. Derrick Rose had 11 points and Danny Granger added 10.

More »

September 1, 2010

Editor-in-Chief of Kayhan, Hossein Shariatmadari

In recent days, Kayhan, the Iranian daily newspaper which is a media arm of the Iranian Supreme Leader,  Seyyed Ali Khamenei published an editorial by the editor-in-chief, Hossein Shariatmadari where he called Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, the first lady of France a whore for penning a letter in support of Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani, the Iranian woman who is sentenced to death by stoning. The editorial was not only diplomatically scandalous but also epitomized the pervasive misogyny of the Iranian regime’s elite.

Then in a limp and insincere attempt to walk back the slanderous remark, Ramin Mehmanparast, the spokesman for the Iranian foreign ministry said: “The Islamic Republic of Iran is not in favor of insulting officials of other countries.” But of course this fell on deaf ears because hours after this half-hearted appeal to the ‘nation’s media’, Shariatmadari followed his first rant with another, this time saying that Bruni-Sarkozy deserves to die!

So in an attempt to support the First lady of France, Planet Iran calls upon all our fellow Iranians as well as non-Iranians around the world, to contact Madame Bruni-Sarkozy’s office in Paris to thank her for her humanity in supporting Sakineh Mohammadi-Ashtiani and her grace in the face of such vulgarity.

Madame Bruni-Sarkozy’s office telephone number is: France country code 33/Paris city code 1/4292-8524. Her office is open from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Paris time.

More »

The Lebanese Christians protested the program’s airing and it was taken off the air.

Source: The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center

August 26, 2010

The Iranian series "The Christ," broadcast by Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV and the Lebanese Shi’ite channel NBN-TV, affiliated with the Amal movement (Picture from the Al-Manar TV website, August 13, 2010).

Overview

1. The series “The Christ” (Al-sayid al-masih in Arabic) was broadcast at the beginning of August 2010 in Lebanon both by Al-Manar TV, Hezbollah’s satellite channel, and the Shi’ite Lebanese channel NBN-TV, affiliated with the Amal movement and Nabih Berri. It was broadcast for the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, a time when the rate of television viewing is particularly high in the Muslim world. It was also broadcast by the Iranian Arabic-language channel Al-Kawthar TV.

2.  The Christian community in Lebanon strongly protested the program, and after broadcasting the first few episodes Al-Manar TV and NBN TV were forced to announce they were taking the series off the air. Despite the storm raised by the broadcasts in Lebanon, the Iranian channel Al-Kawthar TV continued airing it.

3. This is not the first time that Hezbollah has broadcast a blatantly anti-Semitic series for Ramadan. In November 2003 it broadcast the Syrian-produced series Al-Shatat (“Diaspora,” i.e., the exile of the Jewish people from their homeland), and from Lebanon it was distributed to many other countries. The series presented an anti-Semitic, pseudo-historical survey of the history of the Jewish people and Zionism, and included the anti-Semitic blood libel (i.e., that Jews baked the Passover matzo with the blood of Christian children).¹

4. Al-Manar TV is very popular in the Arab world. Arab satellite companies (dominated by Egypt and Saudi Arabia) and others (European and Indonesian) provide the channel with technical services, allowing it to be received by many target audiences in the Middle East and throughout the world (including Muslim communities in the West). The United States and European countries recognized the negative influence Al-Manar TV’s hate propaganda and incitement programs had on their Muslim communities (the religious incitement in “The Christ” illustrates that well) and so far imposed limitations on its broadcasts. The limitations are ineffective and both Hezbollah and Hamas circumvent them.²

The subject matter of “The Christ”

5. Produced in Iran in 2008, the series tells the story of the life of Jesus. The plot of the story shows the Muslim point of view that he was a prophet, but not the most important one (that distinction is reserved for Muhammad). In addition, according to Islam, there is no foundation for the Holy Trinity.³

6. Examples follow of offensive elements (from the first two episodes, which were uploaded to YouTube):

1. In the first episode Satan appears before Jesus and tries to keep Him from fulfilling His mission as prophet. He tells Jesus that He is the son of God, but Jesus “passes the test” and does not accept what Satan says.

The figure of Jesus in the series (From Al-Kawthar TV)

1. In the same episode Jesus says “I am far less important than [others who] serve God” [which infers that Jesus has less stature than other prophets, especially Muhammad].
2. At the end of the first episode one of His disciples asks Him, “Shall we go catch fish?” and Jesus responds, “No, we’ll go hunt men.”

7. In addition to the offensive treatment of Jesus, in the first two episodes there are clear examples of anti-Semitism. The Jews are depicted as conspirators, liars, traitors, cowards, evil, ugly greedy and Satanic. The Jewish residents of Jerusalem are represented as crooked merchants. [Note: This analysis is based on the first two episodes of the series. It is reasonable to assume that later episodes, which deal with the betrayal of Jesus to the Romans, contain similar and more blatant examples of anti-Semitism]. For example:

Jews in the series: A Jew informs on plotters againt the Roman authorities Jews in the series: Jews counterfeit coins to build the next Temple. Jesus calls the Jewish priests "sons of snakes" several times (the snake is a familiar anti-Semitic motif). A priest says the Israelites have sunk to the depths. The Jews are worried by Jesus' success, and one says, "This may destroy our profits." Jesus again calls the Jews "sons of snakes." Jesus to his disciples on the shore of the Sea of Galilee: "Among the Israelites are many devils who stir up terrible civil wars."

Broadcasts stopped in Lebanon following strong Christian protests

8. The first episodes of the series broadcast in Lebanon were perceived as insulting Christianity and led to strong protests by Christians. The Catholic Information Center said that the series contained “offensive deception.” The pastor of the Maronite Church in Byblos (Jbeil), Beshara Raii, called the series a sectarian civil war violating the National Pact⁴ and the [principle of] living in cooperation (www.dostor.org).

9. It was reported that following the protests, Lebanon’s general security apparatus, which is responsible for censorship, ordered Al-Manar TV and NBN-TV to stop broadcasting the series because if infuriated the country’s Christians (www.nowlebanon.com and Al-Nahar, August 13, 2010). In response, on the same day the two channels said in a joint announcement that they had decided to stop broadcasting the series “in respect of some sensitivities and to avoid any attempt for negative exploitation.” However, they said, the series “reflects, with full honor and glorification, [Jesus'] life, picture, role, pain and sacrifices.”

Al-Manar TV and NBN-TV announce they are stopping the broadcasts (Al-Manar TV, August 13, 2010).

10. Despite the protests in Lebanon which led to ending the broadcasts, the Iranian Arabic-language channel Al-Kawthar TV continued airing the series. It even used its website to ask viewers what their opinion of it was. The responses posted praised it.

From the Arabic-language website of the Iranian Al-Kawthar TV; the surfers considered it an excellent series

² For further information see the August 23, 2010  bulletin, “A number of satellite companies (including Western companies) continue providing communication services for Hezbollah and Hamas’ television and radio, even though restrictions have been imposed by Europe and the United States. Supported by foreign companies, Hezbollah and Hamas are able to extend their range around the world, including Muslim communities” at http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/hamas_e125.pdf

³ http://www.dostor.org/politics/middle-east/10/august/13/25320

⁴ The National Pact was an unwritten agreement forged in Lebanon in 1943 among the various ethnic sects which divided positions of political power and determined the modus vivendi for the internal Lebanese arena and the principles of the country’s foreign policy.