Kamangir (Archer)

Reader's Comments

1. Esra'a | September 3rd, 2007 at 4:52 pm

   There is a growing link between Iran and Bahrain however their claims of ownership is just too dangerous especially with Iran supposedly funding some Shi’a organizations within the country. We have developed ourselves to be as independent as we can of other nations, and I think despite our leaders meeting in a diplomatic manner they still consider Iran to be one of the country’s biggest external threats. In fact some rumors claim that Bahrain feared Iran from interfering in parliamentary elections and in the country’s policies in general.

   Most of us don’t want to be part of Iran, we are very proud of who we are and the country’s progressive advancements. Especially the young people who are very scared of Iran due to its massive human rights abuses. We grew up in this country and although history might link us to Iran, current politics doesn’t.

   Thanks for posting this!

2. serendip | September 3rd, 2007 at 5:11 pm

   In Iraq,many Sunni group are saying that Ahmadinejad’s threat to move into Iraq after the US retreated causes great concern to all Iraqis. The Association of Muslim Scholars, a hardline Sunni group, blasted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for threatening to fill the gap in Iraq if US forces left prematurely.

   Iranian shelling has displaced hundreds of Kurdish villagers in the north. Iran maintains that the PEJAK Kurdish terrorist group is operating from Iraqi Kurdistan and hitting targets in Iran.

   from Juancole.com
   Here is what Nir Rosen’s article: (He is an Iranian Jew,btw).

   the Sunnis are still out of the government and they remain so and why should they be? They have been expelled from Iraq. The majority of the three million refugees that we have from the region, from Iraq are Sunni. The majority being internally displaced are Sunni. Of course, whatever agreement were to be reached, parliament would never ratify it anyway.”

   http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0709/01/tww.01.html

   Many Sunnis in Lebanon and in fact, throuought the region have developed and aversion toward shi’ite in Lebanon. The IRI has a nack in creating enemies in the world.

3. Ahwazi | September 3rd, 2007 at 7:45 pm

   I suggest someone annex Kayhan and overthrow Shariatmadari or just have a referendum to see people want to have Shariatmadri in charge of Kayhan or want his boss in charge of the country!

4. ella | September 3rd, 2007 at 9:16 pm

   Serendip

   I think that Iraq situation is very complicated. Sunni are still mourning their lost power in Iraq and in fact they are in Jordan or Syria not because of Iran but because they have started the cycle of violence in Iraq. Calling them expelled is not exactly correct, rather they expelled themselves. We should not forget that during the first bombs and suicide attacks majority of arab countries praised people who have done it and majority of sunni groups in Iraq were supporting these kinds of attacks. If, at that time, sunni condemned such attacks the situation in Iraq might have been different now. That said Iran is acerbating situation by providing money and munitions to both shia groups in Iraq (SCIRI and Mahdi Army).

   As for the Kurds Iran and Turkey do have a long-standing agreement to “help” each other with fight against kurdish separatist groups. The recent bombardment of Kurdistan is just one of the many in recent times, albeit the biggest one.

   Lebanon is a little bit different, lebanese sunni do hate Hezbullah and Iran, however many non-lebanese sunni arabs are praising Iranian policy of helping Hamas and Hezb. You should not disregard views of muslims living in Europe or in America who really like present Iranian policy. The praises of Hizb and Ahmadinejad you hear on some forums are deafening.

5. Roman Kalik | September 3rd, 2007 at 9:39 pm

   Nice. And Israel is the one that supposedly has endless territorial expansion plans?

6. serendip | September 3rd, 2007 at 10:42 pm

   Ella: You’re absolutely correct in chracterizing the Islamist who live in the West. They are almost more radical than the ones living inside. I often visit the angryarab.blog. He is a Professero at UC and Cal. state. The most virulent kinds of Islamists are often are those who are most educated and live in the West.

7. ella | September 4th, 2007 at 2:03 am

   Serendip

   I noticed.
   Once, I have read a Lebanese muslim impression of French mosques. He was horrified. He wrote that such preaching as he heard in France should be prohibited and was very surprised that French government don’t do anything about it.
   I also have noticed tendency to muslim radicalization in Eastern Europe, it is not as noticeable as it is in Western Europe, but it is there.

   Roman

   Of course Israel has endless territorial expansion plans, how can you doubt it! You can find all about it on the internet, in Informationclearinghouse.com, so it must be true ;-)

8. Roman Kalik | September 4th, 2007 at 8:25 am

   Serendip, Angry Arab is not the worst by far. He’s old-school, pan-Arabist, and extremely secular. The new Western Islamists, though… they combine revolutionariesque language (so beloved by some in the Left, and I see that as an influence) with a very radical reattachment to what they view as their roots. The US is mostly fine in this, by the way. It’s several European countries that have truly messed-up (the UK was a de-facto safe haven for Islamists until fairly recently, for example).
   Ella, you are quite correct, the Internet equivalent of A Bloke Told Me at the Pub *must* be true. ;-)

9. serendip | September 4th, 2007 at 11:47 am

   Roman Kalik:

   The professor claims he is a leftist/anarchist or whatever. I don’t buy it. His father was the shi’ite speaker of the house in Lebanon parliment and he is somehow connected with the mullahs in Iran and their minions is South Lebanon. I have been following his blog for 4 years now. He is quite good at creating confusion about himself.

10. serendip | September 4th, 2007 at 12:35 pm

    Islamic Republic is buying Lebanon:
    Iran’s banks, operating through front men and companies, are financing land purchases that could redraw Lebanon’s complex ethnic and religious map. Soon after last year’s Israel-Hezbollah war, the Islamic republic set up a “Lebanon Committee” ostensibly to rebuild Shiite areas damaged in the fighting. It started with a 250 million dollars “Islamic gift” distributed by Hezbollah among supporters.
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=AEEC22A3-A38F-48D4-8D28-202DAE2DE507

11. Roman Kalik | September 4th, 2007 at 12:43 pm

    Serendip, Angry Arab is a fanatic, but he’s not a religious fanatic. He’s a bundle of mental complexes, true, but he said once that Lebanon doesn’t have a right to exist, and that it should be annexed by Syria. He loves Syria, by the way, it’s his great ideal. His approach to other matters seems to be very shallow to me, as if he decides on an answer and then works out some kind of argument afterwards…

    And yes, Hezb is building up. Checkpoints at roads, no-entry zones, their own phone network… These guys are turning Lebanon into an Iranian forward base.

12. serendip | September 4th, 2007 at 1:00 pm

    Roman Kalik: And all along, the accuse Israel of wanting the land and the water in Lebanon…hypocrites.

13. Roman Kalik | September 4th, 2007 at 2:14 pm

    Indeed, Israel is so focused on conquering water sources, that we have all these state-of-the-art desalination plants. The Red Sea desalination plants, near Eilat, now produce fully drinkable water and not just farming-grade. The entire South Negev region now drinks former seawater, and I must say that it’s cleaner than what we get in the center of Israel.

    And yes indeedy, we want Lebanese land! The fact that the country was a PLO base since the Seventies had nothing whatsoever to do with any wars, or anything like that. We’re just greedy Zionist devils. (I will say that we’re stupid Zionist devils, though. Getting embroiled in the Civil War politics was beyond stupid)

    Hezb aren’t really hypocrites, though. They truly believe that theirs is the true path, that Israel is evil, and that a Shi’a state is the path to salvation. They’re not hypocrites, they’re *much* worse than that.

14. serendip | September 4th, 2007 at 2:34 pm

    Roman: Great observation. They are true believers and that’s what makes them more lethal.

15. serendip | September 4th, 2007 at 2:35 pm

    Roman: If you have time check out this peice and counter his disinformation:

    http://iranian.com/main/node/4629

16. Roman Kalik | September 4th, 2007 at 4:20 pm

    Interesting. Serendip, the first misinformed piece would be Israel’s nuclear program. Israel focused heavily on biological and chemical research at first (this was early 50s, and fairly common worldwide). There wasn’t anything major until, if memory serves, Egypt utilized chemical weaponry while intervening in a war with a neighboring North African country. At which point, the Israeli chemical program took a sharp upswing, both in the defensive and offensive arenas. It wasn’t until the 1970s that Israel came ahead in the regional arms race (until that time, Israel was waaay behind Egypt and Syria, for example. Even the AK47s were much better than the IDF infantry’s FN-FALs, and the USSR aircraft were a generation or two ahead of anything we were buying from France, Britian, or the US). The upswing was in the completion of the nuclear program, and the US air-train during the 1973 war.

    The nuclear program wasn’t known by the Arab states, either, though it is possible that the USSR got word of it via the Israeli Communist Party during the late 60s/early 70s. Mordechai Va’anunu apparently tried to sell them the info before going to the press, but the KGB just laughed at him.

    Furthermore, this was never about Israeli regional power, but a simple strategy of military deterrence. We’re a very small country, with a small army, and frankly we wouldn’t give a damn about the rest of the ME if it wasn’t so obsessed with us. Israel doesn’t hold any regional power, though we could easily hold it had we chosen to. We didn’t, though, and neither did we threaten Iran in any way (except for Olmert’s vague comment, maybe) before a certain president began discussing who needs to be erased.

    So, what we had in that article was a bit of historical rewriting, treating Israel as a mythical regional archenemy, etc. The usual.

    Note: the chemical program never grew beyond theoretical level, and was pushed aside as the nuclear program grew.

17. serendip | September 4th, 2007 at 9:03 pm

    Thanks, RK. Great info.

18. Roman Kalik | September 4th, 2007 at 9:44 pm

    To clarify a little, Olmert’s comment came after AJ’s sword-rattling began, and what I meant was that it was the first remotely threatning message from Israel to Iran for as long as I’m aware.

19. wally | September 5th, 2007 at 7:27 pm

    you people read a lot into a kiss ! the french do this all the time, and it can be bloody annoying.

    are you suggesting he is not just happy to see him ? does this not show dialogue at least.

    personally as a person who does camping in remote outback and deserts, i like the idea of traditional dress by muslim desert people. i think his outfit would be great for beach walking in any weather and camping in the outback.

    i have always wondered however, if they are not sexually aroused by these embraces and those hijabs dont hide little “woodys” under the garb ?

    i read recently that iran has two million registered drug users and there are ten times more. i understand that heoin is only $8 dollars a deal and crystal meth $100, thats ridiculous !! heroin is like a grocery item, no wonder they are all hitting up, and supporting islams drug trade and afganistans only economy, or is it talibans only economy.

    with a drug problem like that, no wonder they are all screwed up. i also read where there is no “aids” program in iran and islamic countries are in denial. preliminary estimates based on needle sharing, demonstrate by 2020, aids will be so out of control in islamic countries, they will have to import labor from other countries. aids people, just die in islam and are lsited as “other causes”.

    i also read recently where by 2020, thier gdp will be reduced by 33% due to aids alone. thats a massive reduction in gdp. aids is not even investigated and is not diagnosed in islam, only when western agencies have conducted investigations, has the truth been revealled. wives are getting aids from drug addict husbands and because husbands can have temporary marriages in islam, and by helping those “poor women” by having sex and giving them maintenance, they bring aids home to thier wives who were virgins before marriage.

    these women should never get aids in islam, but thier system has been perverted and something which did not exist 1400 years ago, when the rules were written, is now destroying muslims by the second, much faster than they reproduce.

    the biggest enemy to islam is not religion, it is cultural practices and aids, which were not considered when the suna and hadddiths were written. if islam recognises aids, they will have to evolve thier culture and traditions, men with many women , drugs and plenty, would rather live hard and die young. thier innocent wives are just victims of thier immoral behaviour. we ust have to have patients and islam will need our help, which we will provide and expect “peace” in return, or they will all be wiped out by needle sharing diseases and sexually transmitted diseases.

    2020 is a significant date, bin aden has a plan, and god also appears to have a plan. what will islam do ? we just have to be patient and god will deal with islam, in the meantime “guard israel”.

20. Esra'a | September 6th, 2007 at 5:59 am

    Ehm - this is about Bahrain, and not Islam or Israel. It would have been nice to see this thread within the same topic and not just people yelling irrelevancies.

21. Roman Kalik | September 6th, 2007 at 6:15 am

    Esra’a, like with every set of replies in any blog or forum, they tend to slide out of the original topic.

    I’m sure people in Bahrain aren’t exactly pleased by statements such as the one mentioned in this entry, though. This sort of thing is quite frightning to contemplate.

22. SL and Bahrain to boost trade ties. | September 12th, 2007 at 10:30 am

    [...] If the administration of Bahrain is honest in their claims, that people of Bahrain do not want it to be annexed by Iran, why don’t they carry a referendum? Especially because during the American conspiracy which led to the separation of … …more [...]

Comment