Media Ignores Iran's Other Senior Leaders Threats: A Sampling

Hossein Bastani, Rooz Online:

The take of Iran’s conservative media on an article published last week in the German magazine Spiegel once again highlighted their disconnection with the real world, especially on issues relating to Palestine. Spiegel published a satirical article on Iranian president Ahmadinejad’s suggestion of moving Israel and the Jews to Europe, which in itself was received with chuckles and cynicism in Europe. But the conservative press in Iran and even the influential newspaper Resalat devoted its main headline (issue no 23) to the Spiegel’s article, referencing it as a “document attesting the righteousness of president Ahmadinejad’s suggestion.”

In this article, I would like to present some of the views of the conservatists in Iran about the Palestine and Israel issues. They all have one thing in common, and that is their naivety which borders satire. The sad aspect of all of this is that those who hold these views also hold the destiny of a country with 70 million people in their hands.

I will begin with Ahmadinejad’s “solution”. His proposal was that the Jewish population of Israel be moved to Germany or Austria, and promised that Iranian government would “support this solution.” While his “solution” was bizarre, it was less so than the other solutions that conservatists have proposed in the past. For example Ansare Hezbollah, which is the harshest of the hardliners and conservative groups in Iran had proposed the following: “If the current situation in Palestine continues, there would be no solution left but for the Jews to revolt against Zionists to liberate themselves, in which case there would be no need for missiles or bombs and they themselves would destroy the Zionist regime, after which these very Jews would be protected by the Islamic leaders.”

While these are the “diplomatic solutions” that conservatists present, they also have a bag of non-diplomatic solutions which they normally advocate. For example, Kayhan newspaper which is the principal bastion of the conservative hardliners, advocated “attacking Zionists and their supporters all over the world” [see issue of November 28, 2002], adding that the “principal supporters are in the US, Europe and other parts of the world who can be accessed very easily with little cost.” Kayhan even proposes the “chemical and biological bombardment of American and Israeli cities” as a retaliatory measure [see issue of February 16, 2002]. And in another editorial of November 4, 2001 it proposes that “Islamic countries should all together withdraw from the United Nations Organization, which has turned into an institution that supports US and Israeli atrocities, and seriously assist their citizens to strike at the interests of the US, Israel and their European partners.” Yet in another editorial [of April 13, 2002] it questioned why should American and Israeli embassies and businesses, including their staff, in Muslim countries feel secure when there are so many Muslims in those countries?” and wished to know “Why must the leaders of the Muslim countries who are not heeding to the calls of Muslims to fight the barbaric crimes of Israel, and are in reality cooperating with the brutal Israelis, remain in power.” And still in another editorial, Kayhan proposes “the mass killing of all Zionists, wherever they may be” [April 21, 2002].

The “solutions” of the conservatists are not always confined to Israelis and include all “Jews”. Hassani, the Friday prayer leader of Orumie, as quoted in IRNA on June 8, 2002, has said that “At my age of 90 years old, I would tie bombs around my waist and kill 5,000 Jews.” In another example, ayatollah Jannati, the chairman of the Guardians Council has said that, “non Muslims are mere animals who roam the world and corrupt it” [see Entekhab of November 21, 2005]. And to cloak this in religious terms, ayatollah Khazali, a former Guardian Council member said, “Just as fasting for one month is an absolute requirement for a Muslim, so is Jihad once a year. If the enemy does not attack, you must attack them! Sweden, Holland, Germany, London and Austria must not be safe. If they do not come, then you must go there an express your position. If they do not accept, then fight them” [see Sobhe Emrouz of April 20, 2000].

Hassan Abbasi, a TV professional for the national Iranian television network and the director of the Center for Security Doctrines named former president Mohammad Khatami to be the obstacle in the struggle against Israel and its supporters [see ILNA news agency of May 25, 2004]. “Mr. Khatami! It is your Dialogue Between Civilizations that is thwarting Lebanon’s Hizbullah struggle. I am proud that foreign terrorists are trained by us. Who cares that Mr. Khatami calls this violence. Mr. Khatami, we will dry out the roots of the Anglo-Saxon race. One ninth of the US budget last year was our work” he clarified. Ruydad website published more of Abbasi’s words as follows: “Hassan Abbasi further said ’29 weak spots have been identified in the US and the West to be attacked… Anything that can be done to terrorize and create fright in the atheist camp is our privilege and honor… We have identified 6,000 nuclear warheads in the US to be detonated. We have informed guerrilla groups of their weak spots and shall act through them… We have also created a department for Britain and its destruction is on our agenda. We even work with the Mexicans, Argentineans and anybody else who has a problem with the US.’” READ MORE

While perhaps all of this is meant to be simply propaganda, but examples of actual work too exist. One of the most vocal applicant registrations for a war or battle took place in 2002. The Iranian Hizbullah publicly invited volunteers to sign up for “martyrdom operations” and promised to send the volunteers to Palestine to help them in their struggle against Israel. Subsequently, the group announced that on the wishes of Iran’s supreme leader (ostensibly meaning ayatollah Khamenei) who had stressed on the moral support for Palestinian brothers and not the dispatch of any forces there, the group ended the registration process [see Ya Althorat of November 2, 2001].

It was instructive to learn that this noisy and satirical propaganda was taking place at a time when Israel had launched a full military offensive against the Gaza strip and Palestinian Authority in March of 2002 in which it killed many PA leaders and officials, even cutting off electricity and water to Arafat after militarily surrounding and blockading his headquarters, which in turn had prompted some youth in the West to go to Palestine and form human shields in Arafat’s compound. But the ultra-conservative pro-government Kayhan newspaper wrote at the time “Israel’s recent differences with Arafat and even its attack on some of the PA buildings is only a political game and a plot by the great Satan to cleanse Arafat’s conciliatory past and betrayal so that Muslim Palestinians would accept Arafat as their leader” [see Kayhan April 6, 2002].

Of course such attacks on Arafat were not surprising or new. Iranian conservatists have always looked at Arafat as someone who had betrayed the Palestinian cause. So harsh were these views that one of the leading conservative theoreticians, Yusef-Ali Mirshakak, even preferred Israel to Arafat’s forces. “Those in Palestine who hold up photographs of Saddam Hussain in their struggle against Israel (a reference to Al-Fatah’s support of Saddam during the first Gulf war) are the same people who were so cruel to the Shiites in southern Lebanon that when Israeli tanks attacked Lebanon, the Shiites welcomed them by sacrificing their goats and cows for their intervention. Had Israel not been in the region, these people (meaning Arafat’s gang) would have united to massacre all Shiites in all Muslim countries, and even attack Iran” [see Sobh April 21, 2002].

The violent and delusionary views of conservatists in Iran regarding Palestine are so many that it would require a book, if not more, to document them all. But I would like to end the topic by quoting parts of a “scientific” article published in the conservative Resalat newspaper on February 21, 2001] which deals with the economic influence of Israel in the West, with the dependency of Pepsi Cola company on Israel.

“Pepsi Cola began its work 67 years ago in Canada. It is interesting to note that the name Pepsi comes from an Israeli slogan or motto that was designed to attract financial support for the Zionist regime. Pepsi stands for this: P for Pay, E for Each, P for Penny, S for Save, and I for Israel.”

We leave the reader to be the judge for himself.

This is long but must reading.