Hizbollah is awake and hates the Baha’is
September 21st, 2007So reads the graffitti in Abadeh, Iran.
Well mr Hizbollah, we are awake too and we don’t hate anybody. As The Party of God, I would think you would have learned that hating others is removed from that which God desires. Have you learned that lesson yet? Clearly not.
As Hizbollah was an Iranian creation it is only natural that it would come across or know about the Baha’is. Rest assured, we are the least of your current problems.
If Iran elected Hassan Nasrullah as its president, which wouldn’t surprise me, we Baha’is would still not foster any kind of sedition.
This photo, along with others here, detail a yet another page in the volume of abuse against an innocent people.
Frankly, these incidents just go to show that fanatical and fundamental ideologies, which seem to be so motivational in Iran, are simply hollow and self destructive for the leadership.
Loading ...
Loading...
Does it make sense to base a position off graffitti? I’m not saying it representative Hizbollah or not (I have no idea), but what if it’s just the scribblings of an uneducated, hateful minority? Wouldn’t it be best to just ignore it?
(btw, I did read the linked article. Horrible stuff. According to the article, it’s the government causing the trouble, not the people. Is that a valid distinction?)
gary
[...] “So reads the graffitti in Abadeh, Iran,” writes Omid of Mideast Youth. [...]
The government does it, and also encourages the people.
This graffiti can not be argued as just the views of someone punk teen. NO WAY. Of course it is what Hezbollah feels. The message is an allusion to a much deeper sentiment felt by all political and fundimentalist Islam–the biggest threat to civilization.
Well I’m not sure if Fundamentalist Islam is the biggest threat to civilization. I think the biggest threat is America and Israel’s power and control and their utter disrespect of humanity. It may also be interesting to investigate the real cause of the rise in Islamic Fundamentalism and America’s role in certain events.
I suspect there’s enough blame to go around. IMO the real tragedy is the loss of opportunity on the part of the US. With all the resources at my country’s disposal, it’s a shame that they haven’t been put to better use in achieving world peace. If anything the world has slid in the opposite direction.
gary
No, Gary, I don’t think that’s a valid distinction. For one thing, does it make any practical difference to the Baha’is whether their abuse is government ordered, government sanctioned, or just government ignored?
Uh, what does Hezbollah have anything to do with Iran?
That’s like accusing Hezb-e-Wahdat and the Northern Alliance of formenting strife in Iran.
I meant to say what does Hezbollah have to do with the anti-Baha’i prejudice. Damn lack of editing ability.
to Gary:
an average shiite in Iran would show less respect to Bahais (though the level of respect for Bahais between shiite is not a solid one, affected by many factors such as social class, education, level of fundamentalism, previous conducts with Bahais, etc.), but I strogly doubt if an average person might feel hatred towards Bahais.
to Danial:
Hizbollah (which means: Party of God) is a general islamic term used by many fundamentalist groups to represent themselves as the chosen people of God. actually the history of (creation of) Hizbollah in Iran backs to immediately after islamic revolution. Lebanese Hizbollah might be assumed as a by product of islamic revolution.
but pay attention that though Hizbollah’s members, system and services are widely well known (in Iran’s case I mean) and they cover a wide range of political (and sometimes aggressive) activities, they can be hardly named as a real political party (even compared to other political parties in Iran, none of which do exactly bear the same meaning as political parties in west).
Mohammad has a good point. If left to make up their own minds, Iranians Shia’s as individuals are just like the rest of the people who are part of any religion…They may not agree or even like differing religions, but they really don’t go out of their way to harass them.
Danial, didn’t you read what the graffiti said? If anything at least they publicly spit rhetoric.
There is no doubt that the Iranian clerical establishment stokes anti-Baha’i sentiment and condones negative behavior toward Baha’is. In Iran sadly, it is the clerical establishment that is the government.
MyTwoCents,
But with dictatorships, the government by definition does not represent the people. So whether or not the people feel the same way in this particular case, I think in general it’s a valid distinction.
gary
Hello, Gary,
Did it make a practical difference to the 70 year old man flogged and jailed in Kermanshah?
Gary your idealistic defintion of democracy is simply that; idealistic. Iran is a quasi-democracy and did in fact elect Ahmadinejad. Soon, they will elect another president…I think when it comes to Iran, the mullahs and clerics are good at manipulating the mob, which is what the Iranian populous morphs into at the whim of the clerics.
Hi MyTwoCents,
I don’t know the answer to your question.
————————————————-
Hi Omid,
I agree….I’m very idealistic. I’ll take that as a complement! We need more idealism in this world, less ‘business as usual’. What exactly is a quasi-democracy? I’m certainly not an expert on Iran, but I seem to recall that the government approves all candidates, rejecting those it doesn’t like. I would summarize that as simply undemocratic, basically a trick of dictators to hold onto power. Correct me if I’m wrong.
gary
Here is a chart to kind of connect the dots.
Click here to see the Iranian democracy at work in all its functional glory.
To Gary:
Intellectuals of the Iranian society are trying to push the idea of a democracy further and further, but the ordianary people are confused: they cant understand what is the ultimate solution to all the problems they have in their life. that is why they vote for a reformist canidate (Khatami, who tried to make a more democratic situation in Iran) this year, and vote for Ahmadinejad (a full-option hardliner, upon whom people trusted to make a better economic situation) few years later.
when ordinary people go with the flow of intellectuals, they make a high pressure on regime, and regime approves/allowes more democratic candidates/movements. when the people are misguided by someone like Ahmadinejad, the regime gets more hardliner for it already has all the support it needs. (keep in mind that this regime would do any necessary compromise to keep itself on power. I’ll write something about this issue and post it in mideastyouth, as soon as possible. this is a fact, though sometimes westerners may have every reason to fail to understand it).
that is a kind of Quasi-Democracy, isnt it?
Mohammad Memarian,
Thanks for the info…interesting stuff. So apparently Iranians are Americans are a lot alike…they both have options but are often limited by the information and/or intelligence required to make good decisions. In my country I’ve been frustrated for years at how people keep voting for either Democrats or Republicans when as I see it, the two parties are no different…both in the pockets of corporations. So I created a website earlier this year that allows people to see ALL the candidates, not just those “blessed” by our media…
http://www.ExpertVoter.org
So in the end, people in the world are much more alike than different. Informed people conclude that war isn’t generally necessary.
I very much look forward to your writeup! MEY is a very impressive group of writers.
gary
Gary:
though the process of election in both countries might be somehow similar, the outcomes (with regards to the national interests of each side) are very different.
we hear usually that in a well-established democracy like yours, national interests are generally preserved whether this one is chosen or the other; in other words, people will enjoy an acceptable level of rights, regardless of the chosen president or party. mathematically, you will have 80% (for example), and fight for +10% or -10%.
but in Iran, we usually need to choose lesser of 2 evils when it comes to our national interests: both parties will destroy the country, but one will do it with its maximum power while the other might do less harm. a kind of socio-political structure (like urs) has not been developed in my country to keep all the system ongoing and the progress underway.
even the very basic issues of socio-political structure are not resolved in this country. there are many people who advocate a kind of liberal society, while there are some powerful people and groups which advocate a much more fundamentalist regime!
the other problem is that most of these figures are just some opportunists. I dont trust many of reformist figures, for they have a very dark hihstory of dictatorship when they were on power immediately after islamic revolution, and also ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom of specch’ is just a slogan for them to press the regime and gather some scores for their own. many of them are seeking for their own share, nothing else.
and within this messy bazzar, we (Iranians) are waiting for a hero to come and save us from misery, while the only possible hero is the wisdom of crowd. we lack it, unfortunately!
Omid, I’m not Iranian and Farsi isn’t my language bro, so I can’t read what the graffiti says.
Right, but the Lebanese Hezbollah was created in reaction to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon 2-3 years later.
I see how one could differentiate between the two different entities calling themselves Hezbollah but in reality the Iranian regime was behind the Israeli focused one as well, just as much as its home grown version. In fact, the two are very connected.
Right from Wikipedia…
Danial:
true. I was just referring to the background of Lebanese Hizbollah; this movement might be assumed as a popular movement (at least in some areas of lebanon) against Israeli invasion and occupation, but the one who tried to create it (in its early stages) and continued to support it was Iran.
in the case of bloody fightings between Amal (the political movement of Lebanese Shiite) and Hizbollah, many analysts believed that it was just a struggle between Syria and Iran, Amal was in the side of Syria and Hizbollah was Iran’s representative.
for these reasons and many other things, Lebanese Hizbollah bears almost the same meaning and identity as Iran’s Hizbollah, though Lebanese sample is much closer to an intelligent systematic group.
Hezbollah was behind the Beirut bombing of the US embassy and barracks…FYI.
by the way, “very often it happens” (one of my favorite terms in ‘the prophet’ of Gibran) that an encyclopedia has more to say!
Sorry for the post above, bad tag on the end.
Actually, that has been hotly disputed.
Hezbollah’s military arm wasn’t created until 1985, 2 years after the bombings.
Mohammad and Omid, what did you guys think of Iran’s support for Hezb-e-Wahdat and the rest of the Northern Alliance against the Taliban? I’ll be honest, I wished Iran would have invaded Afghanistan and got rid of the Taliban as they had a chance back in ‘98.
I don’t have any comment as I’m not too aware of Afghani politics. As far as Iranian policies go, they are some of the most inconsistent on the globe. The government has different centers of power that have different agendas.
True, no one has actually claimed responsibility but given the time, I bet my left foot that it was Iranian inspired Hezbollah affiliates. Just because they didn’t have a military wing didn’t mean they had a shortage of young wannabe martyrs.
to Danial:
Iran’s position on Afghanistan during Taliban was good enough: their support of Northern Alliance and Ahmad Shah Masood, denouncing Taliban. also keeping from attack on AFG after Taliban killed several iranian diplomats was a good move, I think. at least, time proved that it was a good move, even if it were not in the first place out of a very true understanding of the situation.
Mohammad, don’t forget that the Taliban was also slaughtering Shi’a Hazaras in the worst possible form.
I guess when you compare Iran and the Taliban, the Taliban were 100 times worse than Iran.
As for myself, I hate the Taliban and other Sunni extremist movements a lot more than any Shi’ite movement in existence.
It’s all speculation at this point. IMO Hezbollah would’ve claimed responsibility since they have a habit of doing so.
[...] single act of their governors’. The latter was due to the experience of Iranians themselves: in a quasi-democratic situation, Iranians had to choose between limited options for different positions (like president, MPs, [...]
[...] Hizbollah is awake and hates the Baha’is [...]
I think that the correct name of the selfnamed “Party of God” is Hizballah.Anyway is a good post.
Hizballah were close here in Argentina to the two terrorist incidents in 1992 and 1994.
You guys may want to read the follow-up here.
the world had changed alot and it is going to get changed more and more. No one is right now! no one except a little! look around and u shall see
Everyone is right, didn’t you know that?