[lit-ideas] Re: Taheri on The Party of Allah
- From: Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 11:45:30 -0700 (PDT)
I guess that for someone like Stan this would count as
documentation and evidence, but most of the below are
quotations from Amir Taheri himself, not from
Hizbollah sources. Anyone who reads Taheri's colums
knows that he is is hardly a reliable and objective
source to cite on this. There is a quotation from
Khomeini by whom the Hisbollah was indeed influenced
ideologically at the time of its inception, but to
present this as a summary of Hizbollah's program today
is a bit far-fetched. Finally, there are quotations
from an unindentified Arabic booklet and we have to
take Taheri's words on whether the booklet exist,
whether it is really representative of the Hesbollah's
position, and whether he translated it accurately. In
any case, we are talking about ideology and rhetoric
and Lawrence can pick among various and contradictory
statements those that suit him and those that he wants
to take at face-value. (He always seems happy to
believe the Islamists when they make radical and
warlike statements, but never when they make more
moderate and peaceful statements.) Actually, Hezbollah
has made statements distancing itself itself from
September 11. attacks in the US:
http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=444
Hezbollah, like the Hamas, has condemned the murder of
Nick Berg:
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Nick_Berg
Also, as the article posted by Helen Wishart
indicates, Nasrallah criticized the attack on the
Danish Embassy in Beirut. Those more moderate
statements and stances somehow don't find their way
into Lawrence' posts. But probably a more reliable way
to go about examining whether the Hezbollah is a
terrorist organization is to track its actions rather
than rhetoric. More on this later.
O.K.
--- Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In a note on 28 Jul 2006 14:55:54 Omar wrote ?If you
> mean Hizbollah, I don?t
> consider it a terrorist organization.? Earlier,
> Omar wrote ?Khomeini did
> not attack any other country, and neither did the
> Iranian leaders after him.
> To want to spread one?s ideology abroad is
> LEGITIMATE, Lawrence. Read my
> lips on [ ] this.?
>
>
>
> References to this organization use several
> different terms Hezbollah or
> Hizbollah. It means Party of God or Party of Allah.
> Omar doesn?t think it
> is a terrorist organization, but lets see what
> Historians and Journalists
> have to say about it. I don?t know how far I?ll get
> but I?ll start with
> Amir Taheri.
>
>
>
> Amir Taheri ?was the first journalist to report on
> the recruitment and
> training of terrorists by the Islamic Republic.
> Holy Terror is the product
> of years of research.? His book, Holy Terror,
> Inside the world of Islamic
> Terrorism was published in 1987.
>
>
>
> On page 123 Taheri writes, ?The Party of Allah?s
> theoreticians see the 1980s
> basically as ?an era of sowing the seeds of
> tomorrow.? What is important is
> to take the message of the Islamic Revolution to as
> many Muslims as
> possible. This message, offered on tapes and in
> books, newspapers, and
> radio programs in many languages, is backed by the
> financial, political, and
> military might of Iran, which is emerging as ?the
> new superpower of the
> Persian Gulf,? according to some Western analysts.
> In an Arabic booklet,
> the Party of Allah states its objectives as follows:
> (1) To teach Muslims
> that Islam and impiety can never coexist. (2) To
> mobilize he forces of
> Islam for Holy War unto victory. (3) To teach every
> Muslim that his duty
> toward his Creator includes readiness to kill and to
> die. (4) To make sure
> that all the rules of Islam are obeyed in Muslim
> countries down to the
> minutest detail.
>
>
>
> ?The Party of Allah is not the party of the meek and
> faint-hearted, nor is
> it a gathering place of those who look on war as an
> abomination to be
> eliminated from human existence. In an address to
> fundamentalist militants
> from more than thirty countries gathered at his
> house in Jamaran on the
> birthday of the Prophet Muhammad, Khomeini himself
> summed up the message of
> the party of Allah:
>
>
>
> ?If one allows the infidels to continue playing
> their role of corruptors on
> Earth, their eventual moral punishment will be all
> the stronger. Thus, if
> we kill the infidels in order to put a stop to their
> [corrupting]
> activities, we have indeed done them a service. For
> their eventual
> punishment will be less. To allow the infidels to
> stay alive means to let
> them do more corrupting [activities]. [To kill
> them] is a surgical
> operation commanded by Allah the Creator . . . .
> Those who follow the rules
> of the Qur?an are aware that we have to apply the
> laws of Qissas
> [retribution] and that we have to kill . . . . War
> is a blessing for the
> world and for every nation. It is Allah himself who
> commands men to wage
> war and to kill. The Qur?an commands: ?Wage war
> until all corruption and
> all disobedience [of divine law] are wiped out!
>
>
>
> ?The wars that our Prophet ? blessed be his soul ?
> waged against the
> infidels were divine gifts to humanity. Once we
> have won the war [against
> Iraq] we shall turn to other wars. For that would
> not be enough. We have
> to wage war until all corruption, all disobedience
> of Islamic laws cease
> [throughout the world]. The Qur?an commands: ?War,
> war unto victory!? A
> religion without war is a crippled religion. Had
> Jesus ? Allah bless his
> soul ? been allowed to live a little longer, he too
> would have acted as
> Moses did and used the sword . . . . It is war that
> purifies the Earth.
> Those courtier mullahs who say [war] is contrary to
> the rules of the Holy
> Book are enemies of Islam. But Allah be praised,
> our young warriors are
> putting his command into effect and fighting. They
> know that to kill the
> infidels is one of the noblest missions Allah has
> reserved for mankind.?
>
>
>
> Earlier on page 110 Taheri wrote, ?Another important
> point concerns the
> degree of effective official control that the
> Islamic Republic exercises on
> the soldiers of Holy Terror. It can be total and
> absolute, as in the case
> of units directly attached to the Revolutionary
> Guard in Iran and Lebanon,
> but sometimes the Islamic Republic exercises
> practically no authority over
> the activities of trained terrorists once they have
> left Iran. In such
> instances Tehran can only exert a degree of
> influence on Islamic terror
> squads by using its ideological and financial powers
> as well as Khomeini?s
> prestige, which remains supreme among radical
> fundamentalists. Hojat
> al-Islam ali-akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, trying to be
> evasive when he said
> that the Islamic Republic did not have
> responsibility for the many terrorist
> organizations in Lebanon. ?Only the Party of Allah
> listens to us,? he said.
> ?Other Islamic groups in Lebanon have close ties
> with us, but take their own
> decisions.?
>
>
>
> A milestone in the history of Hezbollah occurred in
> 1985. On page 149
> Taheri wrote, ?. . . in June 1985 the Party of Allah
> succeeded in . . .
> hijacking a TWA jumbo jet on a flight from Athens to
> Rome. Throughout the
> three-week crisis that ensued Berri was on American
> television almost every
> day; but he knew, and everyone in Beirut knew, that
> he was just acting as a
> powerless spokesman for the Party of Allah, which
> had by then emerged as the
> rising star in Shi-ite politics in Lebanon. The
> fact that the U.S. chose
> not to retaliate in any way after the hostages were
> eventually freed
> enhanced the party?s prestige even further. But
> more important was the fact
> tha Israel, no doubt under pressure from Washington,
> had agreed to release
> nearly five hundred Shi?ite prisoners as part of a
> deal to set the TWA
> passengers free.
>
>
>
> ??Berri talks but we act,? said Party of Allah
> leaders in Beirut. They
> could dictate their terms to both the United States
> and Israel. The hijack
> enhanced the revolutionary careers of its authors
> and perpetrators beyond
> their wildest dreams. . . .?
>
>
>
>
>
> Would Amir Taheri agree with Omar?s views on The
> Party of God and the
> Islamic Republic? I think it safe to say that he
> would not. Here are
> highlights (selected by the IPS) of an article
> Taheri wrote on July 23, 2006
> for the Times: Iran Press Service: HYPERLINK
>
"http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2006/july-2006/hezbollah_267
>
06.shtml"http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2006/july-2006/hezbo
> llah_26706.shtml Note that Taheri writes of the
> Party of Allah, ?Terror has
> been its principal weapon.?
>
>
>
> Note also that Taheri believes the recent Bush
> administration attempt to
> offer concessions to Iran inspired Ahmadinejad to
> believe the U.S. was
> exhibiting weakness, and that is why he authorized
> Hezbollah to attack
> Israel. Taheri considers the current
> Hezbollah/Israel war a ?proxy war to
> determine who will set the agenda for the Middle
> East: Iran or America.?
>
>
>
> Lawrence
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.5/403 -
> Release Date: 7/28/2006
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
