خطيب جمعة طهران: محاربة ولاية الفقيه السبب الرئيسي لسقوط المنافقين

اكد خطيب جمعة طهران المؤقت آية الله سيد احمد خاتمي ان السبب الرئيسي لسقوط المنافقين كان محاربتهم لولاية الفقيه.

واشار آية الله خاتمي الى ذكرى حادثة اغتيال قائد الثورة واستشهاد 27 شخصية على رأسهم آية الله بهشتي واستشهاد آية الله صدوقي امام جمعة مدينة يزد من قبل زمرة المنافقين في عام 1981، قائلا: ان السبب الرئيسي الذي ادى الى سقوط المنافقين هو محاربتهم لولاية الفقيه حيث حاربوا الإمام الراحل، وفي الحقيقة فانهم تخلوا عن الإمام ووقعوا في فخ افراد منحرفين.

وخاطب عضو مجلس خبراء القيادة، الشباب قائلا: ان الولي الفقيه هو الحجة الشرعية اي ان الولي الفقيه هو نائب الامام صاحب الزمان (عج) وكل من لا يصغي لامر الولي الفقيه ويتجاهله، فهو بالحقيقة يعصي امر الإمام صاحب الزمان (عج)، ولذا من الافضل اخذ العبر ونرى ماذ حدث لاولئك الذين حاربوا ولاية الفقيه حتى لا تكرر وقوعها.

واشار في جانب آخر من خطبته الى انتخابات رئاسة الجمهورية العاشرة وخطبة قائد الثورة الاسلامية في الاسبوع الماضي قائلا: ان خطبة قائد الثورة الاسلامية في صلاة الجمعة الاسبوع الماضي كانت شاملة وكاملة تماما، حيث اوضح سماحته جميع ابعاد القضية، وفي الحقيقة يمكن القول ان توجيهاته كانت كلمة الفصل.

ووصف خاتمي مشاركة نحو 40 مليون ناخب في انتخابات 12 يونيو بانها ملحمة عظيمة جدا، مضيفا: ان هذه الملحمة كانت رصيد واقتدار وعظمة النظام وتمثل افضل مظهر لسيادة الشعب الدينية، بالرغم من ان الاستكبار العالمي حاول من خلال مخططاته التي اعدها سلفا وليست مرتبطة بوقت الانتخابات فقط، حاول ان يسرق هذه الحلاوة من الشعب من خلال تصرفاته الخاطئة.

ودعا خطيب جمعة طهران جميع المرشحين في انتخابات رئاسة الجمهورية الى مراعاة الاخلاق وان يتحلوا بالحلم والتسامح.

واشار الى ان الجمهورية الاسلامية الايرانية قامت باجراء انتخابات متعددة طول العقود الثلاثة الماضية مما يبين انها كانت رائدة سيادة الشعب الدينية، مشيرا الى ان الاعتراض احد وسائل سيادة الشعب الدينية وينبغي متابعتها عبر الطرق القانونية.

واضاف: ان مجلس صيانة الدستور ومن خلال اجراءاته اثبت انه يبت بالاعتراضات، لذا لا يوجد احد لديه مأخذ على حق الاعتراض.

وتطرق خاتمي الى التصريحات الاخيرة لقائد الثورة الاسلامية، مضيفا: ان سماحته اكد في هذه التصريحات على اهمية الاعتماد على سيادة القانون، ويجب ان نقبل ان البلد الذي لايسوده قانون هو غابة، لذلك يجب على الجميع اطاعة القانون.

واشار عضو مجلس خبراء القيادة الى كلام الإمام الخميني (رض) موضحا ان الامام الراحل اكد انه لايمكن عدم قبول مجلس صيانة الدستور لان الشعب صوت على الدستور من اجل تطبيق القانون، وينبغي على الجميع اتباع القانون حتى ولو كان مخالفا لوجهات نظرهم.

واستنكر خطيب جمعة طهران، اعمال الشغب والتخريب وحرق المساجد وممتلكات المواطنين وتعكير الامن والحاق الاذى بالمواطنين واعتبرها اعمالا منافية للقانون، وان من مسؤولية القائد الاسلامي التصدي لهؤلاء المشاغبين حتى القضاء عليهم.

وطالب خاتمي السلطة القضائية بمحاكمة المسؤولين عن اعمال الشغب باعتبارهم محاربين حسب الفقه الاسلامي والذين يتلقون الاوامر من امريكا واسرائيل، والتصدي الحازم لهم ليكونوا عبرة للآخرين.

وندد آية الله خاتمي بوسائل الاعلام الاوروبية والامريكية والبريطانية ووصف تغطيتها للاحداث الاخيرة بانها خبيثة وتصب الزيت على النار مضيفا: استغرب كيف يتجول هؤلاء بحرية في بلادنا، واطلب من الحكومة ان تراقبهم.

ووصف خطيب جمعة طهران، قادة امريكا وبريطانيا وفرنسا والمانيا والامين العام للامم المتحدة بانهم منافقون، قائلا: الآن يشعر الامين العام للامم المتحدة بالقلق، وانا اقول له ايها البائس لماذا لم تشعر بالقلق عندما قتل 400 طفل و100 امرأة بريئة في غزة ؟ ولكنك تشعر بالقلق هنا؟ يجب القول ان منظمة الامم المتحدة هي منظمة الدول المستكبرة، ويتعين على الشعوب ان تؤسس منظمة امم حقيقية.

واوضح ان امريكا وبريطانيا وفرنسا والمانيا انتهكت حقوق الانسان ولكنها مازالت تتحدث عن احترام حقوق الانسان، مشيرا الى التعذيب الذي مارسته امريكا في معتقلات ابو غريب وغوانتانامو والتعذيب الذي مارسته بريطانيا في سجونها، وتزويد فرنسا والمانيا لجيش صدام المقبور بالاسلحة والقنابل الكيمياوية اثناء الحرب المفروضة على الجمهورية الاسلامية الايرانية، مؤكدا ان الشعب الايراني لن ينسى هذه الممارسات العدوانية وسيرد عليها في الوقت المناسب.

http://arabic.irib.ir/pages/news/detailnews.asp?idn=43291

Obama: Bush redux

U.S. grants support Iranian “dissidents”

Caption: the product of U.S-funded “dissidents’ ” “peaceful protests”?

Caption: has this “dissident” received U.S government funding?

.

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is moving forward with plans to fund groups that support Iranian dissidents, records and interviews show, continuing a program that became controversial when it was expanded by President Bush.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which reports to the secretary of state, has for the last year been soliciting applications for $20 million in grants to “promote democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in Iran,” according to documents on the agency’s website. The final deadline for grant applications is June 30.

U.S. efforts to support Iranian opposition groups have been criticized in recent years as veiled attempts to promote “regime change,” said Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council, the largest Iranian-American advocacy group. The grants enable Iran’s rulers to paint opponents as tools of the United States, he said.

Although the Obama administration has not sought to continue the Iran-specific grants in its 2010 budget, it wants a $15 million boost for the Near Eastern Regional Democracy Initiative, which has similar aims but does not specify the nations involved. Some of that money will be targeted at Iran, said David Carle, a spokesman for the appropriations subcommittee that oversees foreign affairs.

“Part of it is to expand access to information and communications through the Internet for Iranians,” Carle said in an e-mail.

President Obama said this week the United States “is not at all interfering in Iran’s affairs,” rejecting charges of meddling that were renewed Thursday by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Asked how the democracy promotion initiatives square with the president’s statement, White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said, “Let’s be clear: The United States does not fund any movement, faction or political party in Iran. We support … universal principles of human rights, freedom of speech, and rule of law.”

State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said, “Respecting Iran’s sovereignty does not mean our silence on issues of fundamental rights and freedoms, such as the right to peacefully protest.”

The Bush program “was a horrible idea,” Parsi said. “It made human rights activists and non-governmental organizations targets.”

Not so, said David Denehy, the former Republican political consultant and State Department official who used to oversee the spending. “To say that we were the cause of repression in Iran is laughable … Our programs sent a message to the people of Iran that we supported their requests for personal freedom,” he said.

The State Department and USAID decline to name Iran-related grant recipients for security reasons.

After Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced a major expansion of the program in 2006 — Congress eventually approved $66 million — the Iranian government arrested activists and closed down their organizations. Several Iranian dissidents, including former political prisoner Akbar Ganji, denounced the U.S. funding as counterproductive.

Some in Congress are happy the program is continuing.

“As the Iranian regime cracks down on its people, I strongly believe that we should be prepared to extend our hand in help and support to any Iranian civil society group that reaches out for it,” Sen. Joseph Lieberman, wrote in an e-mail to USA TODAY.

Most of the money likely hasn’t reached Iran but went instead to Washington-based groups, said Suzanne Maloney, an Iran expert who reviewed applications for the democracy program before leaving the State Department for the Brookings Institution. The United States lacks the insight to influence Iran’s internal politics, she said.

“We have such limited penetration of Iranian politics,” she said. “We are so poorly positioned to add any value.”

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-06-25-iran-money_N.htm

Obama: USA and entire world “appalled and outraged by Iran’s violent efforts to crush dissent”

Associated Press on June 24, 2009: President Barack Obama on Tuesday declared the United States and the entire world “appalled and outraged” by Iran’s violent efforts to crush dissent and for the first time expressed significant doubt about the legitimacy of the national election at the root of the upheaval.

2 Pictures are worth all the words one can utter about the recent events in Iran

000610xCaption: A bus set ablaze by northern Tehrani hooligans on June 20, 2009

Caption: Terrorist Maryam Rajavi, head of MKO (Mujahideen e-Khalq) a terrorist organization, cheers for the disturbances in the Islamic Republic of Iran

Backgrounder on the west’s treatment of the terrorist group MKO: Active in Germany, Denmark and other countries of the EU.  Maintained offices in Washington DC until 2002.  Legalized in the UK on 24 June 2008, six months after winning a court battle over its legality.  Protected by U.S occupation forces in Iraq, which even escorted weapons supply convoys from Baghdad to Camp Ashraf where the MKO has its headquarters (CNN). Removed from the EU’s list of terrorist organizations in January 2009 (al-Jazeera) and its assets (estimated in the tens of millions of dollars) unfrozen (contrast with the UK’s freezing of Iranian government assets in the UK, worth $1.6 billion).

CIA, Iran and the Election Riots

CLICK HERE TO VIEW A MUST-SEE REPORT ON CIA INVOLVEMENT IN THE IRANIAN “RIOTS”

West rewards ‘israel’ for murdering 1000 civilians, Hezbollah responds

حزب الله يدين قرار الأمم المتحدة بترؤس الكيان الصهيوني للجنة السكان والتنمية

يدين حزب الله قرار الأمم المتحدة بترؤس الكيان الصهيوني للجنة السكان والتنمية في الأمم المتحدة, ويرى فيه تواطؤا مع كيان إجرامي خارج على القانون تأسس على قتل السكان وتدمير ممتلكاتهم وبيوتهم وخنق أية إمكانية لنموهم وازدهارهم فضلا عن أن يحيوا حياة حرة وكريمة.
إن حزب الله إذ يستنكر الدعم الأوروبي لهذا القرار فانه يعتبره محاولة للتعمية وتبرئة إسرائيل من جرائمها المستمرة ويتساءل ماذا يريد ما يسمى بالعالم الحر والمتحضر مثالا ابلغ مما تفعله آلة القتل الإسرائيلية من تدمير وقتل وتشريد وحصار في قطاع غزة. ليتوقف عن الاستهانة بحقوق الإنسان التي طالما أتحفنا بالدفاع عنها. هل هذه هي التنمية وتنظيم الإسكان التي يريدها العالم الغربي؟ انها وصمة عار في جبين الإنسانية.
يدعو حزب الله الدول العربية والإسلامية والدول الصديقة كافة إلى عدم الاكتفاء بالاحتجاج والمبادرة إلى عمل حازم لمقاطعة هذه اللجنة وإسقاط رئاسة إسرائيل لها.ا

Hezbollah condemns the UN decision to assign the zionist entity as the head of the population and development committee

Hezbollah condemns the UN decision to assign the zionist entity as the head of the population and development committee and sees in it complicity with a murderours outlaw entity established by the killing of populations and the destruction of their properties and houses and the choking off of any possibility for their growth and development as well as of a free and dignified life.

Hezbollah condemns European support for this decision and considers it an attempt at obscuring, and at acquitting ‘israel’ of its continuing crimes; and wonders, what better example does the so-called free and civilized world want in order to stop disregarding human rights which it always claimed it defended, than what the ‘israeli’ killing machine does in the Gaza Strip: destruction, murder, displacement, and siege? Is this the development and organization of housing that the western world wants? It is an affront to humanity.

Hezbollah calls on Arab and Islamic countries and all friendly states not to be satisfied merely with protesting, but to initiate decisive action to boycott this committee and shoot down ‘israel’s’ chairmanship thereof.

Pentagon studies Hezbollah after zionist defeat in July 2006

Short ’06 Lebanon War Stokes Pentagon Debate
Leaders Divided on Whether to Focus On Conventional or Irregular Combat

By Greg Jaffe
Washington Post
Monday, April 6, 2009; A01

A war that ended three years ago and involved not a single U.S. soldier has become the subject of an increasingly heated debate inside the Pentagon, one that could alter how the U.S. military fights in the future.

When Israel and Hezbollah battled for more than a month in Lebanon in the summer of 2006, the result was widely seen as a disaster for the Israeli military. Soon after the fighting ended, some military officers began to warn that the short, bloody and relatively conventional battle foreshadowed how future enemies of the United States might fight.

Since then, the Defense Department has dispatched as many as a dozen teams to interview Israeli officers who fought against Hezbollah. The Army and Marine Corps have sponsored a series of multimillion-dollar war games to test how U.S. forces might fare against a similar foe. “I’ve organized five major games in the last two years, and all of them have focused on Hezbollah,” said Frank Hoffman, a research fellow at the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory in Quantico.

A big reason that the 34-day war is drawing such fevered attention is that it highlights a rift among military leaders: Some want to change the U.S. military so that it is better prepared for wars like the ones it is fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, while others worry that such a shift would leave the United States vulnerable to a more conventional foe.

“The Lebanon war has become a bellwether,” said Stephen Biddle, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who has advised Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of the U.S. Central Command. “If you are opposed to transforming the military to fight low-intensity wars, it is your bloody sheet. It’s discussed in almost coded communication to indicate which side of the argument you are on.”

U.S. military experts were stunned by the destruction that Hezbollah forces, using sophisticated antitank guided missiles, were able to wreak on Israeli armor columns. Unlike the guerrilla forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, who employed mostly hit-and-run tactics, the Hezbollah fighters held their ground against Israeli forces in battles that stretched as long as 12 hours. They were able to eavesdrop on Israeli communications and even struck an Israeli ship with a cruise missile.

“From 2000 to 2006 Hezbollah embraced a new doctrine, transforming itself from a predominantly guerrilla force into a quasi-conventional fighting force,” a study by the Army’s Combat Studies Institute concluded last year. Another Pentagon report warned that Hezbollah forces were “extremely well trained, especially in the uses of antitank weapons and rockets” and added: “They well understood the vulnerabilities of Israeli armor.”

Many top Army officials refer to the short battle almost as a morality play that illustrates the price of focusing too much on counterinsurgency wars at the expense of conventional combat. These officers note that, before the Lebanon war, Israeli forces had been heavily involved in occupation duty in the Palestinian territories.

“The real takeaway is that you have to find the time to train for major combat operations, even if you are fighting counterinsurgency wars,” said one senior military analyst who studied the Lebanon war for the Center for Army Lessons Learned at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. Currently, the deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan have prevented Army units from conducting such training.

Army generals have also latched on to the Lebanon war to build support for multibillion-dollar weapons programs that are largely irrelevant to low-intensity wars such as those fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. A 30-page internal Army briefing, prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and senior Pentagon civilians, recently sought to highlight how the $159 billion Future Combat Systems, a network of ground vehicles and sensors, could have been used to dispatch Hezbollah’s forces quickly and with few American casualties.

“Hezbollah relies on low visibility and prepared defenses,” one slide in the briefing reads. “FCS counters with sensors and robotics to maneuver out of contact.”

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates is expected to stake out a firm position in this debate as soon as today, when he announces the 2010 defense budget. That document is expected to cut or sharply curtail weapons systems designed for conventional wars, and to bolster intelligence and surveillance programs designed to help track down shadowy insurgents.

“This budget moves the needle closer to irregular warfare and counterinsurgency,” Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said. “It is not an abandonment of the need to prepare for conventional conflicts. But even moving that needle is a revolutionary thing in this building.”

The changes reflect the growing prominence of the military’s counterinsurgency camp — the most prominent member of which is Petraeus — in the Pentagon. President Obama, whose strategy in Afghanistan is focused on protecting the local population and denying the Islamist radicals a safe haven, has largely backed this group.

The question facing defense leaders is whether they can afford to build a force that can prevail in a counterinsurgency fight, where the focus is on protecting the civilian population and building indigenous army and police forces, as well as a more conventional battle.

Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army’s top officer in the Pentagon, has said it is essential that the military be able to do both simultaneously. New Army doctrine, meanwhile, calls for a “full spectrum” service that is as good at rebuilding countries as it is at destroying opposing armies.

But other experts remain skeptical. “The idea that you can do it all is just wrong,” said Biddle of the Council on Foreign Relations. Soldiers, who are home for as little as 12 months between deployments, do not have enough time to prepare adequately for both types of wars, he said.

Biddle and other counterinsurgency advocates argue that the military should focus on winning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and only then worry about what the next war will look like.

Some in this camp say that the threat posed by Hezbollah is being inflated by officers who are determined to return the Army to a more familiar past, built around preparing for conventional warfare.

Another question is whether the U.S. military is taking the proper lessons from the Israel-Hezbollah war. Its studies have focused almost exclusively on the battle in southern Lebanon and ignored Hezbollah’s ongoing role in Lebanese society as a political party and humanitarian aid group. After the battle, Hezbollah forces moved in quickly with aid and reconstruction assistance.

“Even if the Israelis had done better operationally, I don’t think they would have been victorious in the long run,” said Andrew Exum, a former Army officer who has studied the battle from southern Lebanon. “For the Israelis, the war lasted for 34 days. We tend to forget that for Hezbollah, it is infinite.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/05/AR2009040502235_pf.html