Interview by Kourosh Ziabari, Tehran Times

The carnage in Gaza and the attacks with white phosphorus weapons will eventually isolate the Zionist regime in the international arena.

In an exclusive interview, American journalist Hannah Mermelstein condemned the Israeli atrocities and called for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza to allow humanitarian assistance to enter the Strip.

She is the co-founder and co-director of Birthright Unplugged Association, which takes mostly Jewish North American people into the West Bank to meet with Palestinian people and to equip them for returning to their own communities and work for justice; moreover, it takes Palestinian children from refugee camps to Al-Quds, the sea, and the villages their grandparents fled in 1948, and supports them to document their experiences and create photography exhibitions to share it with their communities and with the world.

Ms. Mermelstein contributed to many international outlets, magazines and TV stations with her documentaries, reports and live broadcasts from the occupied territories of Palestine. Her Gaza pitches appear on USA Today, Boston Globe, Counter Punch Electronic Intifada and Canada Free Press.

Ms. Mermelstein was in Gaza from the commencement of the blockade in June 2007 until she was forced to leave in late 2007.

“I’m sorry. I want to repeat this over and over again; and in between being sorry and ashamed to be American, I want to yell and scream and act against the massacre and against my government that is helping it to happen.” She [also is] irritated, “I have been so frustrated to see that over and over again, it is the U.S. and Israel against the world. Many Palestinians I speak to say that Israel controls the U.S. I do not believe this. The U.S. has far more power than Israel, and if it wanted to stop Israel, it could.”

The American peace activist then quoted a fresh anecdote from one of her Palestinian friends whose entire house has been demolished by the Israeli army in the second day of conflict: “In the recent days, I have been in touch with my friend, Summer, who is a university student and has never left Gaza. On the second day of the invasion, her house was destroyed and her family displaced. Her dad was injured and her brother was almost lost under the rubble,” she added dejectedly, “As far as I know, everyone in her family is still alive, in Beit Lahia but I am worried about her prospect, constantly.”

Ms. Mermelstein analyzes the reasons [for the] biased media coverage of Gaza and the censorship of Israeli crimes in the occupied Palestine from a different point of view: “I am hesitant to attribute the mainstream media’s actions as solely a result of the Zionist lobby in the U.S., though that is a big factor,” She spots “the truth is, I think many people in power in the U.S. see the support of Israel in their own interest as well. Weapons manufacturers, other big companies benefiting from occupation and the whole military industrial complex in U.S. has an interest in having a European-style country in the middle of the Arab world.”

“If the U.S. at some point comes to the conclusion that it is not in their interest to support Israel, then we will see conflict between certain forces in the government, and AIPAC and other Zionist lobby groups. But until that time, I think we can say their relationship is mutually beneficial,” she added.

Answering a question regarding the background of U.S. citizens’ reluctance to search for realistic and impartial news sources in order to get correct, undistorted information, Hannah Mermelstein said: “In terms of media, there is a lot of good independent media, and one of the great things about the internet is that most of us can get almost any information we want. The problem with most Americans is that they are lazy. They will not seek out information beyond what is told to them from mainstream sources.” Meanwhile, she says: “But there are also mostly misinformed people, who once [they] get the idea that there is a problem, have the instinct to try to fix it. So, for example, when I go and give talks around the country, people understand and believe me and often ask what they can do. Our task is to motivate people to seek out the good media sources on their own and take action on their own. Democracy Now is a sample of non-aligned, independent daily program in U.S.”

She believes that global community needs to support and grow the Boycott/Divestment/Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. “Palestinian civil society called for this, modeled on the movement against South African apartheid. There have already been many successes and the movement is growing. I do think this is the only way to stop Israel.” Mermelstein emphasizes.

In her interview with the Tehran Times, Mermelstein clarifies the disparities between Judaism as a religion and Zionism as an occupational, expansionist notion that is inflicting a batch of pains and burdens to the world: “I absolutely agree that Judaism and Zionism are too often equated mistakenly. I myself am not religious, but I do have a Jewish identity. Historically, Judaism has meant a lot of different things, many of which involved fighting against colonialism and oppression. Now the Zionist movement has too successfully hijacked the Jewish identity and told Jewish people and the rest of the world that the only way to be Jewish is to be Zionist. “

“I watched the news for only an hour yesterday, and cannot get the images out of my head. Parents crying over dead children, injured children being rushed to the hospital in ambulances, taxis, or on foot, the interview with a 16 year old boy whose mother and four brothers were killed in the attack on the Samouni family in the Zeitoun neighborhood last week.” Mermelstein asks “Were there 30 people killed there? 70? Accounts vary, mostly because the Israeli army will not allow journalists or ambulances to approach the neighborhood. One young EMT, exhaustion and trauma written all over his face, explained to Al Jazeera how he and others were able to enter a few houses yesterday and pull out the injured only after parking the ambulance 2 kilometers away from their intended destination and passing by 9 dead bodies on the road. Are these bodies counted in the 935? What about those in the houses the EMTs did not reach?”

“More than 935 people in Gaza are dead so far, with thousands more injured. Taking the total population into account, this is equivalent in U.S. terms to about 200,000 Americans. That’s right, two hundred thousand Americans dead in less than three weeks.”

Interview by Kourosh Ziabari, Tehran Times

Zionist Regime is tightening its grip over the innocent people of Gaza, selecting its victims eminently from infant children, women and the youth.

The casualty rate of civilians is swelling unyieldingly and the global public opinions are astounded by the intolerable, tormenting silence of UN which turned itself into the docile “marionette” of Zionist lobby as easily as it would be possible.

Independent nations, statesmen and even the outstanding figures of sports, science, culture and economy have collectively condemned the flagrant genocide of Zionist Regime over the helpless people of Gaza who are suffering from both the obstruction of Rafah crossing by a so-called Muslim government, Egypt, which simply prevents them from accessing to pharmacy, nutrition, energy and accouterment in one hand, and the multilateral onslaught of Zionist arsenal in the other.

From the Irish Foreign Minister Michael Martin to the famous Spanish athletes Iker Casillas and Rafael Nadal, everybody has condemned and inculpated Israel for the unprecedented massacre of Palestinian people, either expressed strong disappointment about the prospect of peace, humanity in the region and the “suspicious” inaction of Arab leaders.

David Rovics, is an American folklore singer and political activist from Connecticut. Although most of Rovics’ work is fully-copyrighted and commercially-distributed, Rovics has made all of his recorded music freely available on downloadable mp3 files from his website. He encourages the free distribution of his work by all non-profit means to promote his work and spread political messages.

He has strong anti-Zionist, anti-Imperialist feelings and is a regular advocate of peace, establishment in the Middle East without the intervention of external hands; so far, has performed a bunch of concerts worldwide to dedicate their interests and benefits to the oppressed people of Palestine.

In an exclusive interview with Tehran Times, David Rovics condemned the aggressive attacks on Gaza and proposed a lot of interesting subjects about the backgrounds, reasons and consequences of such atrocities in the region.

Following you can read the whole text of interview with David Rovics, the American humanitarian singer.

- Israel is holding an unrelenting and concatenated incursion on the people of Palestine from the air, earth and sea. The casualty rates are surging dramatically and most of the victims are innocent infants, children, women and civilians. What’s your opinion on such atrocities?

I’m so horrified by what Israel is doing to the people of Gaza, and also horrified by what Israel regularly does to the people of the west bank, Lebanon and other countries. Israel’s war against the Palestinian people is not a response to the home-made, ineffective rocket fire coming out of Gaza .Israel’s war is the reason for the rocket fire in the first place. The idea that Israel is ‘retaliating’ is outrageous and if it were retaliating, the retaliation is so far beyond disproportionate that anyone talking like that can only be viewed as some kind of sick comedian.

Israel’s whole modus operandi is collective punishment, and unfortunately it is undoubtedly the case that not only the Zionist leadership but also many regular Israeli people view Arab life as dispensable.

- US vetoed the anti-Israeli resolution of Security Council two times, as it had done several times before. It didn’t allow the UN to impose embargo on Israel for its belligerent massacre of Palestinians. What’s the reason?

The double standards of both ‘democratic’ and ‘republican’ administrations throughout the history of U.S. relations with Israel and the Middle East have been staggering. The U.S. supports a government which has hundreds of nuclear weapons and regularly makes war against other countries. And without this support of the U.S. Israel would not be able to do the things it does. Meanwhile, iron, which has not attacked another country in 2500 years I believe, is punished terribly in many ways by the U.S. for pursuing a nuclear program. I don’t support nuclear weapons and I think they should all be banned from the face of the earth, but the U.S. double standard here is outrageous and is one of many instances that demonstrate why the U.S. government has no moral credibility whatsoever.

- The American media pretend that they are independent and non-aligned to government; however, they simply censor and withhold all of the news regarding to the criticism of American-Israeli lobby, anti-Israeli remarks of world officials, demonstrations and condemnations. Does it mean that the American media are somehow governmental, while disguising themselves under the mask of independence?

Not exactly, I’d say rather that the government is largely corporate-controlled, and so is the media. It would however be an oversimplification to say that the media ‘withhold all of the news’ regarding criticism of Israel by world officials, etc. In fact, this is not true. What might be called the ‘evil genius’ of the American corporate media and the American system in general is that it’s not entirely monolithic. Voices speaking out against Israel do occasionally get heard in the corporate media, thus giving a lot of people a sense that the media is fair. The reality is that overwhelmingly the media represents pro-Israel voices, and very rarely does one hear the critical voices. That way the media can insure that most Americans are terribly ill-informed, while still allowing many Americans to live under the illusion that the media is not actually censored. In fact, I’d say that keeping critical voices out of the media 95% of the time is much more effective in brainwashing a population than keeping those voices out 100% of the time.

In any case, the corporate media is not independent, though many of the good journalists working for it wish it were. It serves the interests of the elite, even if it does allow a bit of dissenting voices to be heard now and then.

- What’s in your view, the main reason behind the unconditional and overall vindication that the US government purveys to Israel, even in the event that Israel commits such a multitude of evident crimes and genocides? Why it does not deal with Israel such as other countries?

I often wonder this myself. I mean, generally the U.S. government’s foreign policy represents U.S. corporate interests. You can see this over and over in the history of U.S. foreign policy. When the United Fruit Company wanted the government of Guatemala overthrown, the CIA overthrew it. When the oil companies wanted Mossadegh’s overthrown, the CIA put the shah into power and so on. But given the economic importance of U.S. relations with Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries, why does the U.S. government insist on such unequivocal support for Israeli apartheid and the Israeli slaughter of Arabs?

I’d say the answer is not simple, but actually quite multi-faceted. Partly it’s that the U.S. leadership doesn’t trust Arab regimes, even ‘friendly’ ones, and wants to have a more ‘European’ ally in the region. Partly it’s that the U.S. likes to play with fire, and wants to keep Israel strong in order to constantly demonstrate to the rest of the region what can happen to them if they fall out of line. Partly the U.S. supports Israel because it undermines the so-called democratic movements in the Middle East as long as undemocratic regimes can claim Israel as the source of their problems.

It is more difficult for a democratic movement to succeed in opposing monarchies and dictatorships, and of course the U.S. government does not like democracy either at home or abroad). Partly U.S. support for Israel stems from the profits made by the military-industrial complex from this support. Billions of dollars of arms sales every year to Israel alone. Partly it’s about a fundamentally racist attitude many in the powers-that-be have towards Arabs and Muslims in general. And last but not least, partly U.S. support for Israel stems from the power of AIPAC and the confusion of many Jewish Americans around Israel, what it stands for, why it exists and how it behaves. In many cases ‘confusion’ would be a very generous term, and other stronger words might be more appropriate, such as ‘racist’ or ‘fascist.’

- Israel claimed that it just seeks retaliation against Hamas by raiding on Gaza, while we see that it has closed the Rafah crossing, prevents the admittance of food, cash and pharmacy into Gaza. What’s this obvious contradiction for?

Israel is blatantly lying, and is engaged in the long-standing practice of collective punishment. The slaughter of the people of Gaza currently underway has nothing to do with the things Israel says it’s about. Israel’s policy towards the Palestinian people is genocidal in nature.

- So, How can the artists, by using their means of creativity, novelty and their delicate sense of inventiveness, prevent the world from moving toward more aggression, repugnance and violence? What’s their moral and spiritual duty in this sensitive period of time about the people of Gaza?

I think one of the main roles of artists in a situation like this is to use the media images that everybody is seeing and make sense of them, put them into proper context. When on TV people see the skies lighting up and explosions in the distance, it’s the job of the artists and the authentic journalists to describe the carnage that results on the ground. Most Americans will never leave north America; they won’t even go to Europe to at least experience a somewhat better media and somewhat more educated, more critical people, and they certainly will never go to the Middle East, they will never experience war, never have their friends and family tortured and killed, never know what it’s like to have their houses demolished by tanks. It’s our job to bring this reality to them as best we can without really being able to do that.

Music, theater, poetry and other art forms are perhaps uniquely suited to doing this. One of my favorite means of doing this is to appeal to the familiar to describe the unfamiliar, such as in songs I’ve written such as ‘Jenin,’ ‘my daughter,’ and others. Once people are emotionally sucked in by familiar images, they are then unwittingly perhaps ready to viscerally experience the unfamiliar. Once they have identified with the humanity of the little girl being put to bed by her mother, they are ready, whether or not they know it, to experience some of the pain of the little girl’s father when she and her mother are suddenly killed by a fighter jet.

- What’s your anticipation about the prospect of Israeli regime with this vicious and savage approach which it has taken toward the world? Of course the Israeli regime is not representing the people thereof; so is it going to survive with its current stance that is arousing a global hatred and contempt toward itself?

Israel is the most racist society I have ever spent time in. There are many reasons why this is the case, and it’s not simple. I have no idea what the future holds, but it seems to me that positive change could come from many different potential developments. One is that many Jews don’t want to live in Israel; furthermore, most Jews in the world don’t feel particularly connected to Israel, according to polls I’ve read, and most Israelis don’t want to live in the settlements. This threatens the idea of Zionist expansion. Also, Palestinians have a much higher birth rate than Israeli Jews, which threatens the democratic underpinning of Israeli society. But it seems to me the situation is most likely to change not from within Israel, but from within either the U.S. or the Arab world. Either the U.S. or the Arab world, with decent leadership in either, could change everything. Israel can’t do what it does without US support. Also the U.S can’t do what it does without the Arab world being terribly divided, without regimes like Saudi Arabia being motivated primarily by money rather than by any love of their fellow Arabs. I don’t know when the U.S. might have a better government or when the Arab leadership will come together; however I wish I did!

- And finally, what’s your personal agenda about such a disaster which is underway in Gaza? Do you intend to perform any concert or record any piece of music about that?

In all of the concerts I’ve done since Gaza has been in the headlines I’ve been talking and singing about the situation there more than usual, trying to take advantage of the fact that people are once again thinking about Palestine in one way or another. I’d love to do more than that, and be involved with lots of demonstrations, concert tours focused on the situation there, etc., but this will depend on people and organizations mobilizing that I can plug into. I hope there will be lots of that going on. Here in Australia where i’m finishing a tour right now, I just sang at a rally for Gaza the other day. When I return to the u.s. tomorrow I hope to do much more than that.

Interview by: Kourosh Ziabari

John Feffer is a renowned American journalist, anti-war advocate and currently serving as the co-director of “Foreign Policy in Focus” journal at the Institute for Policy Studies.

He is the author of book “Power Trip: U.S. Unilateralism and Global Strategy After September 11″ which he calls the first book-length critique of this fundamental shift in U.S. foreign policy to consolidate and extend U.S. global control.

In most of his articles, John Feffer examines the current affairs and Middle East issues from an innovative viewpoint and beyond the prevalent stereotypes of mainstream media.

In an exclusive interview with Tehran Times, Feffer condemned the Israeli incursion into Gaza strip harshly and called for an immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces from the occupied territories.

What follows is the excerpt of lengthy interview with the American author and journalist in which we’ve tried to preserve the most pivotal and essential parts and eliminate the rest due to the space shortage.

Mr. Feffer, we would like you to first comment on the ongoing crisis in Gaza and the surging amount of dead civilians which has surpassed 910 last night. What’s your opinion on the military campaign of Israel?

The crisis in Gaza is a tragedy; there is no question about that. The people of Gaza are being punished for choosing Hamas in a free and fair election. Imagine if the people of the United States were similarly punished after choosing George W. Bush, not once but twice!

Israel is guilty of the usual sin of powerful nations. It believes that it can change reality on the ground with military force. Whatever short-term victories it might achieve through the barrel of a gun, however, Israel is making future relations with Palestinians ever more toxic.

What’s your analysis about the outlandish silence of UN, European governments and international community toward the Gaza onslaught?

Well, there hasn’t been total silence. The UN Security Council passed Resolution 1860, which calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, Israeli troop withdrawal, and sustained delivery of humanitarian assistance. European governments have generally pushed for a ceasefire. Human Rights Watch has made several appeals on behalf of specific residents of Gaza as well as calls for investigating Israel’s humanitarian abuses and, for example, the use of white phosphorus during the current conflict. In general, I’d say that the tone of the international community minus the United States has been increasingly critical of Israel. I think it’s also important to acknowledge the growing number of protests in Europe, Asia, and of course throughout the Middle East. 30,000 people protested recently in Brussels. Thousands have protested in Hong Kong and Indonesia.

But they conservatively try to keep a low profile and soften their tones while criticizing the Zionist Regime, implying that they are afraid of Israel or something!

It’s always been interesting that some of the harshest criticism of Israel comes from Israelis. For instance, Avi Shlaim, an Israeli professor, recently wrote a piece in The Guardian calling Gaza “a classic case of colonial exploitation in the post-colonial era.” He’s an Oxford professor who served in the Israeli army and now has come to the conclusion that Israel is a “rogue state.”
When it comes to criticism of Iran, Syria or Palestine, we have to remember that many people consider Israel to be part of Europe, not the Middle East. So, Israelis and Israel are treated as something “civilized” while the rest of the region remains “barbaric.” Anti-Arab sentiment and, sadly, many people mistakenly include the Persians of Iran in this category, is very strong in the world today.
If we look at the pro-Israeli opinion pieces, they are often from people like John Bolton or Michael Gerson who support Israel from political or religious convictions.

So, do you believe that there is a pro-Israeli bias in the western media?

When it comes to the journalistic frame, in other words, Israel has automatically a positive place. Arab countries and Iran simply don’t have a place in this Western narrative that journalists by and large follow. They are the “others” who at best play supportive roles and at worst are the faceless hordes who must be defeated in order to bring Christianity or democracy or free markets to the unenlightened.
I would say that there is a pro-Israeli bias in U.S. media. But journalists in Europe and particularly in England such as John Pilger, Robert Fisk etc are not pro-Israeli, and I am detecting a change even here in the United States in the coverage of Gaza. We’ll see how this Israeli movie “Waltz With Bashir” does over here in changing public opinion.
It is a documentary film by an Israeli film director who served in the army. It is about the Christian Phalangist massacre of 2,000 Palestinians at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982, which was aided and abetted by the Israeli army. The movie recently won top honors at the National Society of Film Critics here in the U.S.

What do you think about the unconditional supports and aids which the US government purveys to Israel even in the event that Israel commits such a batch of widespread war crimes?

The biggest problem, of course, is the military support that the United States provides. US provided Israel, during the Bush administration with $21 billion in security assistance. And these are not exactly defensive weapons systems. According to the Arms and Security Initiative, this includes: “226 U.S.-supplied F-16 fighter and attack jets, over 700 M-60 tanks, 6,000 armored personnel carriers, and scores of transport planes, attack helicopters, utility and training aircraft, bombs, and tactical missiles of all kinds.”
Even though Israel often doesn’t listen to the United States, Washington still has considerable leverage. If we decide to freeze or reduce military assistance, Israel will listen.
We have to remember that the United States, too, has engaged in war crimes in Vietnam, in Iraq. Israel has been a prime supporter of U.S. military actions abroad. It has been a key supporter at the UN. That is what allies do for each other: look the other way when war crimes occur.

So, what’s the solution to end the disastrous situation in Palestine? How to deal with the unyielding bloodshed being carried out by the occupying authority of Israel?

We have to push hard for a ceasefire, a withdrawal of Israeli troops, and for a lifting of the siege.
But we also have to get the larger political settlement back on the table. This would involve an immediate end to Israeli settlement expansion and an end to the checkpoints and walls that have shut down everyday life in the West Bank.
Actually, There are various types of occupation. Israel is occupying Gaza through war. It is occupying the West Bank through settlements. But it acts as an occupying authority in other ways; Pumping out water from under Palestinian territory, controlling commerce, interfering in Palestinian politics. There is also the question of Palestinians’ right of return to Israel itself as well as the resolution of claims from the “Nakba” or the day of catastrophe which Palestinians stick as an epithet to the day of Israel’s emergence. This would be the difference between the United States as an occupying authority in Iraq and an occupying force in America itself, having displaced Native Americans. For the United States, the occupations are divided by space and time. For Israel and Palestine, the occupations overlap.

The flames of anti-Israeli remarks and movements by the independent political parties, NGOs, student coalitions and governments worldwide has been ignited with the unprecedented and inciting rhetoric of some influential political personalities and Members of Parliaments in different countries following the inattentiveness of Zionist authorities to the issuance of ceasefire resolution by the UN Security Council.

Israel, which has reportedly killed more than 800 Gazan civilians since the commencement of its belligerent onslaught in the 2008 mid-December, is provoking more anger and hatred toward itself by committing new types of unacceptable war crimes in the region and paying the least heeds to the frequent calls of international community on the immediate cessation of its military operations on defenseless civilians.

The upheaval of anti-Israeli utterances by the politicians, journalists, university professors, statesmen and citizens worldwide, even inside the cities of occupied territories and on behalf of the residing Jews can simply visualize the depth of disaster in Gaza.

In an exclusive interview with Tehran Times, a high-ranking member of New Zealand Parliament condemned the inaction of his affiliated government about the continuance of calamitous situation in Gaza.

Keith Locke, the member of New Zealand Parliament and a representative of Green Party criticized the state of New Zealand and demanded an immediate and unconditional action of NZ state to help ending the ongoing crisis in Gaza: “I question the New Zealand government’s failure to strongly criticize Israel’s massive military assault on the people of Gaza. What the Israeli government constitutes war crimes under international law and cannot be justified.”

The representative of Auckland city in the NZ parliament blamed the ineffectiveness of UNSC due to the designation of veto right to U.S. authority in his exclusive interview with Tehran Times: “The Green Party says that proper solutions to this crisis can unfortunately not be found through the United Nations because the U.S. supports Israel and has veto power.”

“The Greens believe the stance of most Western powers towards a nuclear-free Middle East is hypocritical because they put sanctions on Iran, which hasn’t developed nuclear weapons, yet ignore Israel’s nuclear arsenal” Said Keith Locke while lambasting the pro-Israeli bias in western media.

Locke has participated in an anti-Israeli demonstration in New Zealand last week where he first blasted the government of NZ for its inaction and passive stance toward the Gaza massacre and told the media: “It is clearly a war crime for the Israeli government to target mosques, universities, TV stations, police stations, government buildings and the private homes of political leaders” Locke believes that the NZ government “Fiddles” while the people of Gaza are under fire.

“New Zealand should be providing some moral leadership amid an insipid response from other Western nations. The Bush administration is backing Israel’s murderous assault, and European nations are restricting themselves to calling on both sides to cease fire” he stressed sharply, “ It also makes a mockery of New Zealand’s participation in a ‘war on terror’ to allow such obvious state terrorism to pass without comment.”

An Australian voice

In a more conservative approach toward the issue, an Australian MP and representative of New South Wales Legislative Council, recapitulated by condemning the abominable usage of force and ongoing military assault of Israel against the defenseless people of Gaza.

In his exclusive talk to Tehran Times, Ian Cohen reiterated that there is no justification for the incapability of UN to impose its resolution on Israel except the Realpolitik of the day which is to the advantage of situations for the advantage of particular nation states. He called the failure of UN to reach a comprehensive consensus for ending the massacre of Gaza a “tragedy and anarchy in the international level.”

Interview by Kourosh Ziabari

Dr. Saba Valadkhan is a world-renowned biomedical scientist and the Assistant Professor of Case Western Reserve University of USA.
After graduating from the Tehran University of Medial Sciences, Saba Valadkhan moved to New York where she could continue her further studies at the Columbia University upon the fellowship which she had been granted from RNA Research Society.
This young Iranian scientist has won several international awards for her effective, determinant contribution to the field of Molecular Biology such as Peter Sajovic Memorial Award, Harold M. Weintraub Graduate Student Award and James Howard McGregor Prize.
In 2005, she was awarded the American Academy for the Advancement of Sciences (AAAS) award of Young Scientist of the Year for her breakthrough in understanding the mechanism of spliceosomes which was something unprecedented and innovative until that time.
By developing a new strategy to prevent the occurrence of some disastrous cancer types, she identified and determined a slight and insignificant deficiency in the functionality of DNA strands and found an effective way of solving it.
Following is the text of exclusive interview with Dr. Saba Valadkhan in which a stack of interesting subjects around the details of her latest discovery, scientific community of Iran and the prospect of research in Iran and has been discussed.

Dr. Valadkhan; we know that your landmark discovery in understanding the actual function of Spliceosome lead you toward receiving the prominent 2005 AAAS Young Scientist Award which was a honor for all of Iranians, rather than yourself. Would you please elucidate for us that, in a simple and general language, what your discovery specifically was and how much it would be useful to solve RNA-related problems practically?

Human genome has many fascinating features, but perhaps one of the most interesting is the fact that our genes come in fragments. In our genome, we have between 25,000 to 100,000 genes, depending on whom you ask. Now each human gene is on average divided into 8 fragments, but some genes are divided into as many as 100 fragments.

As we all know, our genetic information is stored in DNA strands, which are very long, thin linear polymers, just like very long strings of pearls, except that instead of pearls we have DNA nucleotides adenosine, guanosine, cytidine and thymidine. You can think of them as four different types of pearls, of four different colors, for example. Our genetic information is stored as the sequence of these four DNA nucleotides, for example, two adenosines followed by three guanosines mean: the product of this gene should be taken to the surface of the cell, and so on.

Now imagine that the gene that has the information for making hemoglobin is divided into three fragments, to use a simple example. It means that after a certain combination of nucleotides that indicate the beginning of a gene, we have about 300 nucleotides that constitute fragment 1 of hemoglobin, followed by 5000 nucleotides that are not part of the hemoglobin gene. Then we have another 250 nucleotides that form the fragment 2 of hemoglobin, followed by 3000 intervening nucleotides, and finally, 180 bases that make up the last fragment of the hemoglobin gene, followed by a certain sequence of nucleotides that indicate the end of the gene. Clearly, in order for our bodies to make hemoglobin, these fragments should be put together.

The way that this is done in our bodies is that whenever our bodies need to make hemoglobin, they make a copy of the hemoglobin gene from the start sequence to the end sequence, this contains the three hemoglobin gene fragments and the two long stretches of nucleotides that separate them. Then, the beginning and ends of these intervening sequences are recognized by the cell, and they are removed, and the three hemoglobin gene fragments are attached together. Only then, after all the extra sequences are gone, will this copy of the hemoglobin gene be used by the cell for making hemoglobin.

This process, the removal of the intervening sequences that separate gene fragments, is called splicing, and the group of molecules in the cell that perform this job are collectively referred to as “the spliceosome”.

Now imagine what would happen if splicing is performed incorrectly, for example, if the beginning of the second fragment of hemoglobin is mistakenly recognized as part of the intervening sequence. Then, the spliced copy that is used by the cell will lack the information that was contained in the beginning of the second fragment, which can result in a hemoglobin that cannot bind oxygen. Red blood cells are made, but they cannot function. Or conversely, if part of the intervening sequence is by mistake recognized as a piece of the hemoglobin gene fragments. Then, we have extra information that might tell the cells, by mistake, that the resulting hemoglobin protein should be rapidly destroyed by the cell.

The result would be a severe lack of hemoglobin, although the cell is making a lot of it. The clinical outcome of both cases would be Thalassemia. And these were just two of the many possible problems. Remember that each human gene, on average, has 7 of these intervening sequences, and that every time our bodies need to access the information in our genes, they need to make a copy of the gene and splice it correctly.

At any given moment in the cell, there are more than 200,000 copies of different genes that are used for various cellular functions. Now you can see how incredibly critical splicing is. One mistake is enough for one cell to die or become severely ill. Indeed, it is thought that more than half of all human genetic diseases are caused by mistakes in splicing. And splicing-related diseases are not limited to genetic diseases. Any disease with a genetic element, such as cancers, neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s, etc, can result from splicing mistakes.

I hope I have convinced you by now that splicing is a very important cellular process! The spliceosome, which is the assembly of molecules that perform splicing, is extremely complicated, as expected. However, this complexity prevents us from understanding its function. Thus, despite all the human tragedies caused by splicing-related diseases, we are very far from understanding the problem and curing it. What I did was to make a simple model for the spliceosome, which allows us to understand this critical process. Clearly, this opens the door to understanding how splicing-related diseases happen and hopefully, finding a cure.

With all of your explications, we see that a great respect is being paid to the “Molecular Biology” that is your academic major of study, but seems to be somewhat less known in Iran and the rest of Middle East, as well. What kind of biology branch is it and which sort of subjects it deals with?

Molecular biology is in fact an approach to biology, rather than a field of study. In molecular biology, we try to understand biology at the level of molecules: which molecules are involved in each biological process, how they interact with each other, and how they are made and destroyed by the cell, when necessary. You can use this approach in any field in biology, from neurobiology to botany to microbiology, molecules govern how living cells function, and molecular biology can tell us exactly how these molecules work.
It is an extremely powerful way of approaching biological questions, and these days it is impossible to have an in-depth knowledge of biological phenomena without employing molecular biology. A very large share of new discoveries in medical sciences is based on molecular approaches. For example, in modern cancer therapy, screening of the population for early detection, diagnosis, classification and treatment are all based on molecular biology approaches. Molecular biology has already revolutionized medicine and will continue to do so in the future.

It’s more than 15 years that you are far from your homeland, Iran. Do you have still some scientific relations with universities and institutions inside the country? Are you enthusiastic to return to Iran someday if the preliminaries of a substantive scientific environment for you are provided satisfactorily?

I am trying to forge scientific relationships with the Iranian research community, and I am hoping to have a broader interaction with the Iranian scientific community in the future. I am unfortunately not very familiar with the status of research in Iran, but I know that the number and quality of scientific publications from Iran have been on the rise, which is a very encouraging sign Hopefully this trend will continue.

The status of science seems to be improving in Iran, however, the infrastructure is still a concern, and interaction with the broader scientific community is still very limited. These factors prevent the science enterprise in Iran to achieve its full potential. Hopefully with effective planning, sufficient funding, and the cooperation of the scientific community these issues will become less of a hurdle in the future. There are many talented scientists currently in Iran that if given the opportunity will do great things. I want to stress that we don’t lack talent or skill, what is limiting science in Iran is the lack infrastructure and the right type of environment. Even if all the Iranian scientists currently living abroad return to Iran, there will not be any significant changes in the quantity or quality of scientific productivity in Iran until these shortcomings are addressed. Now if the government solves these shortcomings, the scientists currently residing in Iran are more than qualified to do cutting edge research.

So is it going to be fair that we conclude Iran lacks the basic fundamentals and accouterments of effective scientific, research works to be carried out in?

See, I have young Iranian scientists in my laboratory that have previously performed research in Iranian universities. They all agree that in terms of equipment, they had all they needed in Iran, that is they had better equipment in Iran than they do in my lab. They also had easy access to research animals and human tissues or samples, for which we need to conduct three months’ worth of paperwork in US. What seemed to be limiting their research was access to reagents, many of which were ordered from abroad and took a long time to arrive and perhaps more importantly, not appreciating all they had. We Iranians have a tendency to see the empty half of the glass, and this is something that hopefully will be alleviated by more extensive interaction with laboratories abroad. There are shortcomings everywhere, so we all need to use our talents and energy to overcome them.

Therefore, what causes that a load of young Iranian talents leave the country each year to abroad and make us encounter the phenomenon of “Brains Escape”?

I think this is the wrong way of looking at the problem and in fact, it’s not seeing the real problem at all. In Iran, we can’t complain about brain drain, we have many more educated, trained forces than can be gainfully employed. We don’t need any additional educated work force; we already have more than the country needs. The real problem in Iran is that the country spends a lot of resources training medical doctors or physics PhDs and they can’t find jobs that match their training and end up doing carpet business. Our problem is brain inflation, not brain drain. It is not that educated people choose to live and work abroad despite having equally good opportunities in their home countries, the issue is that they don’t have acceptable choices at home. Nobody enjoys the often very painful process of emigration, but lack of opportunities forces many to leave their home countries. And let’s not forget that after these “overflow” educated forces leave, they often remain committed to contributing to their motherland in any way possible. There are many prominent Iranian academics abroad that have made significant contributions to the human society that have made all Iranians proud, and that continue to contribute to their homeland by transferring their knowledge through teaching in universities and workshops in Iran.

If we put the work force aside, we can take a glance at Iran’s scientific stride from the view of scientific indicators including ISI, as well. What are the most remarkable ones among these indicators and what they narrate about Iran’s research productivity?

There are many such indices and depending on whom you talk with, they might prefer one or the other. I think a reliable way of measuring the level of scientific productivity in the biomedical field is the number of publications in Pubmed-listed journals. Number of publications in top tier journals in biomedical fields, Science, Nature, Cell and the New England Journal of Medicine, is a good indicator of the quality of scientific work done in a country. I took a moment and calculated these numbers for Iran and a number of other countries in Asia. Although the total level of productivity in Iran is still lower than Turkey, India and China, while we are doing better than all our other neighbors, the rate of growth of our productivity has been excellent, although it has slowed down in the last three years. We need to address this slow down and correct it. In terms of quality, we need to improve but I think as our level of productivity rises, so will the scientific quality.

In your view, what kind of efforts should the Iranian universities, scientific institutions and organizations make in order to attain the international position and authenticity they deserve for?

In every country, science is mainly a state enterprise, most of the funding everywhere comes from the government. If we want to improve our scientific standing in the world, we should ask our government for better planning and more funding.
There are several issues to consider. One is that scientific progress does not happen overnight, it takes time and patience on the part of both the funding agency and the scientist. While the government should made a long-term commitment to a steadily increasing level of funding, the scientists should be given the level of job security they need to endure the many years of effort it takes for a major discovery to be made.
This is both in terms of salary levels that should be sufficiently high to retain the scientists in the workforce and prevent them from going into carpet business!
And also in terms of long-term stability of their jobs, Scientists should feel that their jobs are extremely secure, and they will lose their jobs only if they are not productive scientifically. Although it goes without saying, meritocracy is pivotal as the basis for employment should be scientific credentials and nothing else. The government can encourage the development of the required infrastructure. For instance, the level of chemistry research is very high in Iran; we clearly have many good chemists. Why do we need to import chemicals and reagents? Why not encourage these chemists to start companies and support the needs of the Iranian scientific community? Finally, something else that is sorely lacking in Iran is a spirit of collaboration and self-sufficiency.
Sharing expensive equipment and reagents is a must, even labs in Harvard share! Sometimes during my visits to Iranian universities I hear from doctoral students that although the neighboring lab has such and such equipment that they need, they are not allowed to use it which is unacceptable. Self-sufficiency is also important. We should note that not everything should be bought from abroad. Many expensive reagents are easy to make but unfortunately I hear about these reagents being ordered from abroad, which is a waste of money and time.

Interview by: Kourosh Ziabari, Ahmadreza Tavassoli

Cinema Verite International Documentary Film Festival which was held in Iran on the third week of October 2008 was undoubtedly an occasional and magnificent opportunity for documentary filmmakers from 75 countries worldwide to congregate for a landmark event and share their precious artistic experiences with together along with being acquainted with the obscured and folded culture of Iran i.e. one of the most disputatious and controversial countries of the world these days.

The festival which was inaugurated by the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance of Islamic Republic of Iran has hosted a stack of artists, journalists, filmmakers and analysts from US; which is not in an official friendly and impartial stance toward Iran these days, though is considered as a close cultural and scientific ally of Iran on behalf of its independent and non-governmental organizations and communities.

Shannon Kelley who is the Director of Programming of the Morelia International Film Festival in Morelia (Mexico) was among the guests who attended the festival from US and attracted lots of reporters, audiences and festival curators, as well.

Kelley is an independent movie consultant and has worked for the Sundance Film Festival as Associate Short Film Programmer since 1997; furthermore presently he is serving there as the Festival Senior Consultant to the Documentary Program.

Following is the text of our exclusive interview with Shannon Kelley in which we discussed a variety of art-related topics and explored his perceptions of being in Iran to attend the 2008 Cinema Verite Film Festival for the very first time.

Explaining the legends of interview, K&A refers to Kourosh and Ahmadreza as the interviewers and SH refers to Shannon as our honorable guest who patiently answered everything of our concern and interest.

K&A: You are promoting yourself as an “independent” movie consultant; however nowadays, being independent is made difficult and the political lobbies do not tolerate your being non-aligned to them, even if you are not political at all. In the other words, the state-affiliated powers are trying their best to abuse all of the artistic, cultural, religious, social means to fulfill their desires and plans. What to do if somebody wants to resist against them and not to be stymied by them, too?

SH: There are different ways to understand ‘independence.’ None of us enters the world entirely free, and it’s because of this that the stories we tell can be potentially interesting. My use of ‘independence’ in this case refers to film artists who work without the financial or logistical support, nor any commitment, from a distributor, and thus, without any guarantee of their film ever being widely seen. Such artists assume tremendous risk and act on personal commitment, as opposed to artists whose risk is ameliorated by someone else, and who may – if they choose- depend on the commitments of the sponsor or the job, without having to generate a commitment of their own.

I’m not sure every state entity is out to get artists or co-opt their work. In some cases they have so much contempt for the arts they ignore them entirely. This can create an interesting space, or vacuum, in which to speak. One has to be resourceful and artful to do so, but then, that’s a recipe for good filmmaking anyway.

K&A: So it seems that you don’t provide technical and special consultations, but help the directors to develop strategies and programs for a successful production and output. Would you please explain the details of such strategies? Are they somehow related to the content of movies, or “how-to”s for attracting more audience?

SH: This can be very simple. Deciding which festivals are priorities, and which distributors may be especially important to a project, and when the approach to a particular festival, company or person should take place, in what order, and at what pace.

Should you show your rough cut? Should you give away your premiere to this or that festival? Such decisions have real consequences that impact the life of a film. Should you adapt your filmmaking to these parameters? There may be compromises you don’t mind making; you simply should be conscious of every compromise. Also, you may choose to concentrate on one project as opposed to another, based on the availability of resources or apparent prospects.

One should always make a movie one believes in, but it is well also to look out for yourself and your career. Taking care of yourself is a good way to take care of your film. If you cannot survive, your film probably cannot be realized.

K&A: Having all you said in mind, which is the paramount, in your view; the public approach and prosperity of a movie or the loyalty of producer and director to principles and essentials? Do you call a movie with the less tickets sold and more professional virtues as successful? Can we estimate the values of a movie by considering its attractiveness on the booth?

SH: These are entirely relative values, because it depends whom you ask. “Popular” movies have their place; something is happening between members of a public at a movie that they “like.” but I concentrate on supporting the vision of artists who have something new and risky to offer. Such a person, and such a project, simply offers the promise of a previously unknown breakthrough in conversation or even consciousness. It’s just the most interesting area of film culture, to my way of thinking. And it can, occasionally, lead to “box office success,” so one need not necessarily choose between the distinctions you mention.

K&A: But we see that most of the modern generation filmmakers, under the flag of giant media companies, assume it is necessary to add violence and immorality to movies for gaining the public fortune and obtaining more spectators, purchasing more tickets and reaching more profits.

What is your estimation about that? Should we bargain the human values in lieu of the financial benefits? Is it acceptable that we offer atrocity, aggression and unhealthy relations in our movies to absorb the more viewers?

SH: I deplore mindless, meaningless, gratuitous violence, as I deplore mindless, gratuitous righteous indignation. I would hope that a film which frames violence or other controversial matter would do so in a way that is curious and reflective, as I always hope that audiences willingly bring their own curiosity and reflection to each work of art.

Too many movies employ violence for convenience; it’s easier than writing! As for immorality there are so many kinds! My answer is the same. It all depends upon what is being suggested or explored in the depiction. If it is mindless, I feel that my time is being wasted, and that I’m being talked down to. I tend not to categorize what is technically permissible to show. I just want to know that it is being shown thoughtfully and with sensitivity and originality.

K&A: Ok. Let’s switch to Cinema Verite festival in Iran. You were in Iran to attend the second edition of Cinema Verite festival. What do you think about the quality of screened films and the professional dexterity of attending filmmakers? Which film most attracted you?

SH: I appreciated the extraordinary range of interests and stylistic approaches, especially in a film culture I only know through the works of a few producers. It would be impossible to select a favorite, given so much variety! I recognized a strong vein of artistic passion running throughout the work. This made me want to see more!

K&A: explain a bit about your default perceptions before traveling to the misunderstood country, Iran. How was your imagination about Iran and its people? How much you think the media propaganda was effective to shape these perceptions?

SH: I expected that some conversations might be impossible, or that I might be viewed with hostility. I attribute this to the excesses of the international press; but in the contrary, I found a community of like-minded, hospitable, curious people, including complete strangers who approached me with great energy and kindness. I spent a woefully short amount of time in Iran, but my point of view on what is possible between us has dramatically shifted, for the better!

As with any country, one can only know very little before experiencing a place firsthand. Iran seems to me beautiful, complicated and fascinating, like my own home. It seems to me our governments have had serious differences, and I’m hopeful of a betterment of international relationships, of course.

K&A: The main goal of documentary filmmaking, of course, is to unveil the concealed facts, expose the hidden face of society to a wide range of addressees and unfolding the stories that are not being offered to the public. Are you willing to produce (or participate in the production process) of a documentary film about the people and culture of Iran? What will you do if you want to produce a film about Iran? Which references and resources do you refer to in order to gather information about the country and its people’s lifestyle? Which facts and truths about Iran are being withheld from the public opinions, you think?

SH: I’m not a producer, but Iran seems an endlessly fruitful subject. Any depiction should simply be dimensional, open, curious, exploratory, and intellectually “independent” of outside intervention, as much as possible. I’m nervous to speculate about what truths are being withheld. But certainly some visions are rarer than the others, and I support a multiplicity of visions, so that these can be sorted, compared, and weighed by a discerning public.

K&A: What are the most crucial challenges, in your view, to the cinema of 21st century? Is the global cinema moving toward an absolute satisfactory future?

SH: Corporate control of media production and distribution, I am afraid, is having a slow suffocating effect on media culture. This is a very big topic, I don’t know if a small fix will be sufficient, or if a big fix is possible. This is why the “independent” artist is such a heroic type to me. Occasionally, someone intelligent, brave and committed is able to realize and offer a vision I’ve never seen before; through enormous work, risk and sacrifice. How can anyone who cares about the cinema be but grateful for this?

K&A: We are living in a turbulent and chaotic world. Violence and aggression is reaching to its utmost. The industrialized countries are seeking the ways to invade and dominate the developing, impoverished nations. Every day, we hear something new about a US attack on another country. Do you believe there is any duty or assignment for the artistic community to prevent the world’s path toward insurgence and insecurity?

SH: Films that can save the world are few, if there has ever been a film. But why should films be expected to do everything? What they can do, which is not sufficient to save the world, but I do think is totally necessary, is to offer new possibilities for consciousness itself; ways of seeing, thinking and feeling that modern life tries to shut down. This is a big enough responsibility to become a filmmaker’s life work

Iranian artists have created the world’s largest sand carpet from the colorful sand found on the country’s southern island of Hormuz.
Some 25 visual artists used 70 types of colorful sand to create the ‘Persian Gulf’ sand carpet, which will be displayed on the island from Dec. 9 to 17, 2008.
The 12000-square-meter carpet is unique in magnitude, pattern and color and its title which shares the name of the forever Persian Gulf.
The previous sand carpet record belonged to 900-square-meter one created on the Canary Islands in the North Atlantic Ocean.
Known for its beautiful red soil, Hormuz Island has witnessed numerous artistic events, including Iran’s 15th Environmental Art Festival.

More photos and details here

The second anniversary of Anousheh Ansari’s adventurous travel to the spatial station as the first Iranian space explorer passed over with the reticence of global media who have been busy analyzing the very earliest “side effects” of President-elect Barack Obama’s victory in the 2008 US Presidential Elections.

In the heat of Ansari’s space voyage, American media broached bunches of controversial issues such as the reluctance of half-blooded astronaut to introduce herself as Iranian or Muslim, but she never found the opportunity to clarify this.

Furthermore, most of the newspapers or websites dedicated their conversations to professional and technical matters when interviewing Anousheh Ansari which caused many stories to remain untold.

Following is the text of exclusive interview with the first female private space explorer Anousheh Ansari, the Iranian businesswomen who has perpetuated the name of Iran in the 2007 edition of Guinness World Records Book with her everlasting record.

Mrs. Ansari! Two years passed since you made that historic travel to the spatial station as the first female space explorer; but on that specific time the mainstream media focused on you, not only for being a female voyager, but also for being an Iranian Muslim. What’s your conception of being a Muslim born in Iran? Are you restraining to announce or approve it publicly?

I have always advertised my Persian roots and I’m proud to do so. I always start my story by telling everyone that I was born in Iran and show the map of Iran with my place of birth, Mashhad. My Iranian root is a big part of who I am the same way that my life in America has shaped my life.I have always been a spiritual person and my spiritual beliefs were strengthened during my trip to Space. When you see the earth from space and understand how small and fragile it is compared to the dark universe that surrounds it, it gives you a new perspective on life and how small and insignificant we are and how silly it is to fight over things that are but a speck of dust in the grand scheme of things.

Furthermore, I had also brought a copy of Holy Quran with myself to the spatial station which was a personal decision without any political motivation.I also carried prayers given to me by my parents and friends.Also I have to add something for the accuracy of title which I had been given, which many newspapers and TV channels broadcast it mistakenly. I was considered the first Private women space traveler, not the first female astronaut.

The first woman cosmonaut was also the first woman to ever fly to space and her name was Valentina Terishkova. The Guinness Book of World Records has registered my name as the first Private woman space explorer as well as the first Iranian in space.

Many of your fans or those who follow your prosperities regularly remember that you had started the blogging carrier few months before commencing the space mission. Your space blog was gaining an unprecedented popularity worldwide, but you stopped updating it suddenly. What had happened on that time?

I started blogging because I wanted to share my experience with as many people as possible and I was very happy to see how well receive the blog was. However writing from the heat and writing something of significance, requires a level of dedication that I could afford at that time.

I am very engaged with my new company and between my educational projects and my business; I have very little time to blog. I enjoyed blogging and read most of the comments people wrote to me; hence, I continue to receive many messages, I cannot possibly read and respond to every message I get because it is more than a full time job, but I try to keep up with them.

At the beginning, when the slated schedule of your affiliated company for the space program was announced, you were not supposed to be that astronaut who had been appointed to run for the mission.

But after your Japanese colleague failed to pass the medical and practical examinations successfully, you were replaced immediately which should have been a kind of shocking news for Mr. Enomoto beside of being an unbelievable, exciting incident to you. am I right on that?

As soon as I found out, I called him to see how he was doing. On one had as you mentioned, I was very exited at the prospect of being able to fly to space, on the other hand I felt uneasy since I had become friend with Mr. Enomoto during our training together and I knew how much he wanted to fly.When I talked to him, naturally he was disappointed, but he was determined to take care of his medical issue and to try again to fly in a future flight. He encouraged me to fly and offered to help.

I asked him if I could do anything for him and he gave me a few of his personal items to fly to ISS with me, which I did.

Once the news on your space exploration came out in the media, many critics and journalists worldwide stated that $20 million is too much to be spent for such an individual intention which could be potentially used for charity or instructional purposes, instead. Do you agree with them?

I believe that each person is entitled to their opinion. My family and I worked hard and made many sacrifices for the money we earned and the decision on how to spend it should be ours alone.I support causes that are important to me and my family in the ways that I believe is effective.At the same time I feel that my trip has impacted many lives and inspired many people around the world to pursue their dreams.

Having hope and inspiration is a priceless gift and I was fortunate enough to have been able to play a small role in giving a glimpse of hope and inspiration to many.

For the last question, let me ask if you have any idea or suggestion for the scientific communities and researchers of Iran to improve their skills and find their dissevered global position? 

I believe Iranians are very smart and have great potential given the right opportunities. This is obvious based on their accomplishments in their new homelands around the world.

Unfortunately their opportunities are limited inside Iran and because of wars and sanctions and other issues, the country is not considered as art of the advanced world. I believe if Iran would join the global economy and provided the right opportunities, it could advance and catch-up with developed countries with a few year lag.