Brothers of Iran! Liberate from the Shackles of Arab Religious Imperialism

A group of Iranian intellectuals, writers, thinkers, poets, artists and academicians issued a call to Iranians, asking them to leave Islam. They should heed the call and return to their glorious past and legacy of great humanitarians, like Cyrus the Great, as was dreamt by Ferdowsi.

---

A call to Iranians to liberate from Islam

On March 23, 2011, a report in www.faithfreedom.org said:

"The 21^st of March was the first day of spring in the Northern hemisphere and the New Year for Iranians. In this year, a group of Iranian intellectuals, writers, thinkers, poets, artists and academicians issued a declaration asking the people of Iran to leave Islam. They blame Islam for the downfall of their country. They believe Islam is violent and abusive and incompatible with the peace loving nature of Iranians. Today Islam is the biggest abuser of human rights. The Islamic regime of Iran kills more Iranians per capita than any other regime killing their citizens. This has not always been the case. The first declaration of human rights was issued in Iran by King Cyrus 2500 years ago."

This is highly encouraging, which repudiates the common notion that Muslims are so thoroughly brainwashed that it is impossible for them to question Islam and come out of it; instead, in every eventuality, they will seek a solution within the frame-work of Islam. The above report clearly shows that a section of the Iranian society have succeeded in coming out of the labyrinth of Islam, and are aspiring to liberate their nation from the slavery to Arab religious imperialism embedded in Islam. Presently, young Muslims in the Islamic world are agitating for freedom from despotic rulers. But real freedom cannot be achieved unless they abandon Islam, an authoritarian and suppressive religio-political creed, which stifles critical and independent thinking and freedom of expression, without which a nation cannot prosper. So, the young protesters, who are taking to the street in the Muslim world, must include Islam alongside the despotic rulers in their campaign for freedom and liberty. They must realize that it is Islam that incubates, fosters and nurtures authoritarianism, misrule and oppression. To establish true freedom, rule of law and democracy, uprooting the edifice of Islam is as important, if not more, as deposing their current dictatorial rulers.

The ideal Islamic state is what Prophet Muhammad had founded in Media, in which Muhammad was the supreme dictator: the head of administration, chief of army and the head of judiciary. So, there lies a strong propensity for the government of an Islamic state to become dictatorial, rather than democratic. As a result, most Islamic states in the world are dictatorial as we witness today. To achieve real freedom and democracy, Islam must be thrown into dustbin of history.

Pernicious Impact of Islam, the Arab Imperialism

Islam, in the guise of a religion, is an imperialism Arab religious-cultural-social doctrine that uproots a convert from his/ her ancestral culture, thus, crippling the natural growth of a human being. Furthermore, Islam is a creed of intense hate and violence, and pollutes the mind of its follower with the bane of hatred and bloodshed, thus, driving its followers of their humanity. So says the Nobel Laureate author V S Naipaul:

“Islam is not simply a matter of conscience or private belief. It makes imperial demands. A convert’s worldview alters. His holy places are in Arab lands. His sacred language is Arabic. His idea of history alters. He rejects whatever is his own: he becomes, whether he likes it or not, a part of the Arab story. The convert has to turn away from everything that is his.”

He add:

“Islam asks its followers to abandon their past histories, culture, and identities… Islam has had a calamitous effect on converted peoples. To be converted you have to destroy your past, destroy your history. You have to stamp on it, you have to say ‘my ancestral culture does not exist, it does not matter’….” (Beyond Belief)

Islam, thus, aims to turn every convert into a slave of Arabia.

Naipaul's above-mentioned observation is beyond dispute; it's all too obvious to the discerning eye. In Islamic Iraq today, there is no taker of the rich ancient Mesopotamian and Babylonian culture; the same applies to Iran, a proud heir to one of the world's finest ancient civilizations. In Pakistan, there are no takers for the ancient Harappan civilization. The same pattern runs through the entire Islamic world.

The greater irony is that the Muslim invaders -- who once massacred their ancestors, enslaved and raped in massive numbers, and converted them to Islam through inhuman torture and at the point of sword -- are seen by today's Muslims as their saviors. For example, Pakistan has named its most up-to-date long-range missile as Ghauri, after the same of one of the most brutal Muslim invaders of India. And when they sought to celebrate the cessation of Pakistan on August 14, 1947 from India, they chose Karachi as the venue, because this was the place where Mohammad bin Qasem, the first successful Islamic invader of India, brought the light of the Koran and Hadith in 712.

Iran's glorious heritage

Iran has a glorious past, a brilliant cultural heritage, which was much more superior to that of the nomadic Arabs, who invaded it in the 630s. In this context, it should be mentioned that, in the early days of human civilization, people earned their living either by food-gathering or by hunting; later on they raised themselves to the pastoral stage through domestication of animals. Up to this stage civilization, killing of animals was a daily routine matter and meat was the principle food item and this practice turns people naturally cruel. Then, with advent agriculture, men became less and less dependent on animal flesh and in this regard, the position of Iran was unique. There is sufficient evidence that Iran became agricultural as early as 8000 BC. Early agricultural communities such as Chogha Bonut etc. lived nearly in 8000 BC.

It is also important to note that, with the advent of agriculture, urban civilization came into being in western Iran as early as in 8000 or 7000 BC. The city of Susa and Chogha Mish still exist since their founding in 7000 BC and 6800 BC respectively. Dozens of pre-historic sites across the Iranian plateau point to the existence of ancient cultures and urban settlements in the fourth millennium BC, centuries before the earliest civilizations arose in nearby Mesopotamia.

Arabia on the other hand is land of semi-desert nature and paucity of rainfall made it hopelessly unsuitable for agriculture. As result, the Arabian society, till today, is somewhat pastoral in nature. Due to their pastoral life-style, the Arabs still manage their daily affairs by using the lunar calendar (Hijri). But adoption of a solar calendar is a must for an agricultural society, as farming is intimately connected with the annual movement of sun and the subsequent changes of seasons. This is the reason why the National Calendar of Islamic State of Bangladesh is not Hijri, but the Bengali solar calendar, as the Bangladeshi society is agricultural.

Agriculture was a milestone in the history of human civilization. Firstly, it terminated the nomadic and pastoral lifestyle and provided man with permanent settlements, which in turn led to the formation of states and governments with well-defined constitutions and judiciaries. Secondly, with the progress of farming, a section of people was able to detach them from hard day-to-day labor for earning a living, and devote their time on pursuit of knowledge and other cultural activities. So, it can safely be said that agriculture was womb of modern human civilization.

Ferdowsi, Persian poet & philosopher Cyrus the Great

In Iran, this process began very early, ca. 8000 BC, and helped her to emerge as one of the oldest as well as the richest civilization on earth. In fact, this enabled Persian thinkers and seekers of truth to spend much time to devote themselves in very intricate as well as subtle philosophical thoughts, while people in the other part of the world, including Arabia, stayed far behind in the race of civilization. So, today’s Iran did not become Islamic due to the superiority of the Arabian culture. It was, instead, forced upon the civilized people of Persian with brute force by the Arab Muslim invaders. In fact, Islamization has dragged down Iran from the pinnacle of civilization.

It should also be mentioned that, Iran was not Islamized overnight but gradually; and its Islamization was never complete, it was never totally Arabized unlike Egypt, Syria and Palestine. Iran could retain strands of cultural identity and vigour, and this inner strength of Iran helped it re-emerge with a separate and distinctive character, and enabled her make immense contribution to the Islamic civilization even within an atmosphere of alien Islamic-Arabic culture. Arab Islam in Iran emerged as a distinct Iranian Islam or Persian Islam; this new Islam is sometimes referred to as Islam-i Ajam (Persian Islam) by scholars.

The Great Iranian poet and philosopher Ferdowsi (d. 1020 CE) comprehended this tragic downfall of his motherland, her culture and civilization. So, nearly a thousand years ago, he gave a call to his converted countrymen through his literary epic, Shahnameh, to return to their cultural and civilizational roots by narrating the Herculean efforts of the Princes of Samanid dynasty (r. 819–999 CE) to revive the Persian cultural heritage, which had been ravaged by the Arab invaders. But unfortunately, the Samanids were later on conquered by the Ghaznavid Turks. He wished that his masterpiece epic would last the test of time, and inspire his countrymen to return to original culture. Ferdowsi's call to the Iranians still rings in the air of Persia.

Today Muslims youths, who are taking to the streets in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Bahrain and other Islamic states in the Middle-East, defying bullets and death, must also keep in mind that in 1979, the Iranian people revolted against the oppressive dictatorship of Shah Reza Pahlavi, but the Iranians ended up within the clasp of a much more brutal and ruthless Islamic dictatorship, leading their nation into greater abyss and darkness. If they sidestep Islam today, it will create another, probably more vicious, dictator.

Conclusion

Amidst the wind of aspiration for freedom in the Muslim world, our brothers of Iran should heed the call of their intellectuals to free themselves from the enslaving shackle of Islam, which was once forced upon their forefathers through inhuman torture and oppression. They should throw away the edifice of Islam, and return to their own ancestral culture and faith of great sage, Zoroaster. It's unfortunate that the heirs of the glorious Persian civilization have been forced to follow the legacy of a pedophile, rapist, plunderer, mass murderer imposter-prophet of Arabia for so long. They should go back to the tradition of the great humanitarian king, Cyrus the Great, who propagated the basic principles human rights nearly in 600 BC, which were strictly followed by the Achaemenids, who introduced and adopted policies based on human rights, equality. It is high time that the people of Iran today take steps to salvage their glorious and rich ancient culture. The Iranians should make efforts to emerge out of the abyss of Islam, and stand on the world stage as a respectable people in fitting with their brilliant ancient heritage.

America's Odyssey with Islamic Terror: The Failure to Retaliate

America's encounter with Islamic terrorism for decades, and her failure to take decisive actions might have had emboldened Islamic militants to land us where we are today...

---

The Islamic terror attacks of September 11, 2001 did not come as a bolt out of the blue. For close to thirty years, America's record of dealing with the hydra of Islamic terror was at best abysmal. Two earlier attacks, however, and the lack of American retaliation to these attacks, might very well have paved the way for the atrocity of 9/11. These two attacks were the Iranian takeover of the American embassy in Tehran in 1979 and the bombing massacre of the Marines in Beirut in 1983.

On November 4, 1979, hundreds of so-called "Muslim students" or "militants" stormed the American embassy in Tehran, Iran, taking dozens of Americans hostage. The "Iranian hostage crisis" had begun. After 444 days of brutal captivity, fifty-two American hostages were released on January 20, 1981. The attack, sanctioned by the government of Iran, may be considered the date when fanatical Islam began its official war on America.

The imprisonment of the American hostages and the ongoing ordeal that ensued remain one of America's most embarrassing humiliations. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his Islamic Republic of Iran had brought the United States to its knees. Had the Carter administration immediately threatened retaliatory military strikes on Iran's political, military, and oil infrastructures, it is possible that the hostages might have spent 444 minutes of captivity instead of the 444 days that they were forced to endure. Instead, Carter wrote a polite letter to the Ayatollah requesting that the hostages be released. The letter appeared only to embolden Khomeini, who later boasted that "America cannot do a damn thing." The failed rescue attempt on April 24, 1980 only added to America's humiliation and Iran's contempt for Carter and the nation he led.

(The storming of embassies and taking of hostages was not an Iranian invention. On March 2, 1973, PLO militants stormed the embassy in Khartoum, Sudan, and viciously executed the United States ambassador and his charges d'affaires under the explicit order of Yasser Arafat, the then godfather of terrorism. The Nixon administration took no action. While the two embassy takeovers had no direct connection, the PLO and Khomeini had excellent relations dating back to the early 1970s.)

When Iran freed the hostages on January 20, 1981, it came minutes after Ronald Reagan had been sworn in as president. Whether the Iranians feared Reagan or wanted to further humiliate Carter is still open to debate. However, if Iran was indeed fearful of Reagan, the fear did not last long. Iran suffered no repercussions from the U.S. after the hostage crisis. Close to two and a half years later, Ronald Reagan would have his first devastating encounter with Iran and its proxies, leaving a trail of American blood in the Middle East.

The background to the bloody encounters began in August 1982. The United States had entered Lebanon for the express purpose of overseeing the withdrawal of the PLO in the wake of Israel's June incursion into Lebanon. Israel had conducted a military campaign to stop PLO rockets from shelling northern Israel. However, a series of bloody events followed in September with the assassination of the Maronite Christian president-elect and reprisals by Christians and Muslims against each other. The U.S., which had already withdrawn its troops, reentered Lebanon in late September to try and stabilize the chaotic situation.

On April 18, 1983, the American embassy was rocked by a suicide truck bomber which killed 63 people. Seventeen Americans, including the Beirut CIA chief, were among the victims. The Iranian- and Syrian-backed terrorist group Hezb'allah claimed responsibility. As with the hostage crisis, there was no American response. The failure to retaliate to this massacre was a catastrophic mistake that would lead some five months later to a much worse murderous attack.

On early Sunday morning, October 23, 1983, another suicide bomber struck. This time, the target was the U.S. Marine barracks located at the Beirut International Airport. A Mercedes truck laden with an estimated six tons of TNT was exploded. The blast resulted in the murder of 220 Marines, 18 Navy, and three Army personnel. In the aftermath of various investigations, including that of the FBI, the blast was considered to be the biggest non-nuclear explosion since World War II.

Once again, Hezb'allah claimed responsibility. While President Reagan ordered a retaliatory strike, nothing followed. According to a 2001 PBS interview, then National Security Advisor, Robert McFarlane stated that Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger had "aborted" the retaliatory raid. In any event, the United States soon pulled out of Lebanon once and for all. This "cut and run" behavior of America was not lost on a young Osama bin Laden, who later recalled it as a sign of America being a "paper tiger."

Terrorist attacks against Americans continued throughout the 1980s, with more attacks in Lebanon and elsewhere. The attacks included hijackings, kidnappings, murder, and bombings. Time and time again, there was no American retaliation.

On October 7, 1985, Arab terrorists from the PLO faction the Palestine Liberation Front hijacked a passenger ship, murdering one disabled American Jewish man and throwing his body into the sea. Finally, America acted. President Reagan ordered the plane carrying the hijackers -- who had been freed by Egypt -- to be forced down and to land in Italy. On April 5, 1986, a Berlin discotheque was bombed. Three American servicemen were killed. American intelligence traced the source of the attack to Muammar Qaddafi's Libya. This time, President Reagan acted with strong retaliation, striking Libya's capital of Tripoli and the city of Benghazi with U.S. aircraft.

As the 1980s turned into the 1990s, the first World Trade Center bombing occurred. This attack was treated as if it were a simple criminal matter and not a case of international terrorism. President Clinton didn't even bother to visit the site of the first Islamic terror attack to hit the United States mainland. The Clinton administration also exhibited a "cut and run" attitude, most notably in Somalia in October 1993. Eighteen American soldiers were killed in battles with Somali militias, with some of the bodies dragged through the streets of the capital, Mogadishu.

As the Clinton years continued, there were the Khobar towers bombing, the twin bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the suicide attack against the USS Cole. Al-Qaeda had claimed credit for the attacks, but Clinton's attempts to capture or kill bin Laden were lukewarm at best. A few cruise missiles were fired into Afghanistan, and a pharmaceutical factory was struck in Sudan in response to the Cole bombing.

Of course, all changed on September 11, 2001. George W. Bush finally took the war to the heart of where the Islamic terrorists had devised their plans for 9/11 by invading Afghanistan. To bin Laden and other terrorists, this must have come as a great shock, based on the behavior of past American administrations.

The lesson to be learned, especially from the Iranian hostage crisis and the Beirut massacre of the Marines, is to strongly retaliate as quickly as possible. Not responding only emboldens the enemy and is an invitation for even worse atrocities. The attacks of 9/11 are witness to the decades of America's mistake in its tragic failure to respond resolutely to Islamic terror.

---

This article first appeared in American Thinker.

The Islamic Republic is NOT Iran

Because unlike the mass-murderer, oppressive Islamofascist regime of the Islamic Republic, the Iranian people greatly cherish freedom and liberty...

---

"We just don't get it. The Left in America is screaming to high heaven that the mess we are in, in Iraq and the war on terrorism has been caused by the right-wing and that George W. Bush, the so-called "dim-witted cowboy," has created the entire mess. The truth is the entire nightmare can be traced back to the liberal democratic policies of the leftist Jimmy Carter, who created a firestorm that destabilized our greatest ally in the Muslim world, the shah of Iran, in favor of a religious fanatic, the ayatollah Khomeini.” --- Michael Evans, Jerusalem Times, Jan 20, 2007

In 1979, the U.S. Government, notably, Jimmy Carter and company, with the help of its allied forces created the greatest Islamic terrorist nation on the face of the earth and the rise of Islamofascisim elsewhere. In fact, Jimmy Carter by his mere interference in another country betrayed the most valued friend to the West, the late Shah of Iran, and he is perhaps responsible for the formation of Islamicterrorism, not only in Iran, but around the world, including the United States. There have been more than 10,000 Islamic terrorist attacks since 9/11 with 60,000 dead and 90,000 injured.

“Carter’s pro Human Rights campaign shocked the foundations of many American allies including the late Shah of Iran who was running an ancient country with cultural and historical complications that needed time to be corrected.”

“In November 1978 then President Carter nominated George Ball as a member of the Trilateral Commission. The commission acted under the direct control of the National Security Council’s Zbigniew Brzezinski, an ardent opponent of the Shah of Iran. This commission cultivated a clandestine Iran task force. While serving on this commission, George Ball championed cessation of United States support for the Shah and clandestine support for Ruhollah Ayatollah Khomeini who, albeit in exile, led a proletariat Islamic opposition.”

It is interesting that Carter’s UN ambassador, Andrew Young, called Ayatollah Khomeini, (an Islamist mass murderer) “a kind of saint.” Ironically, after 31 years of devastation of civility by the radical Muslims, Mr. Carter is still active in siding with terrorist groups such as Hamas and other terrorist organizations, something the current administration appears to be following.

“Jimmy Carter's belief that every crisis can be resolved with diplomacy has had many catastrophic results. What we encounter today, as Islamic Terrorism mostly backed by the current Iranian regime, is one of the few gifts of Carter’s failed foreign policy. Had he shown resolve in dealing with the 1979 revolution and the US embassy hostage crisis, we would not be in this mess we are today. Diplomacy is a great tool to enforce your policies, if other tools of foreign policy including military might and economic incentive and disincentives correctly back it. Jimmy Carter didn’t apply these tools properly in order to handle many crises he faced during his 4-year presidency. All the blame does not lie with Carter’s failure but he played an important role in this.” Michael Evans

To most Iranians, including me, the name of the Ayatollah Khomeini was unheard of until the Western policy makers decided to remove the Shah (the best friend of the West) and install so called a “Holy Man” Ayatollah Khomeini and carelessly forced the Shah of Iran to leave his homeland. For 31 years, the U.S. is still making big mistakes with respect to its policy regarding Iran. It is as though the U.S. is unable to or unwilling to recruit experienced and capable people as advisors on Iranian affairs. For the past 60 years, every U.S. policy with respect to Iran has been failure upon failure. Currently, pro-Islamic Republic lobbyists known as the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) has been given carte blanche to the Obama administration. Instead of confiscating their assets, sealing their offices, and deporting them immediately, this pro-Islamic Republic group has comfortably found its way into the White House.

As early as December 1954, the Shah noted,

“the potentialities of friendly and close relations between the people of Iran and the United States are immense. There is a deep and fundamental identity of national interests which overshadows everything else. We both believe that the individual is the central figure in society, and that freedom is the supreme blessing. . . Iran has a great deal in common, in convictions with the Western world regarding freedom and democracy.”

During the revolution of 1979, the communists of course were very active in the original uprisings against the Shah. A very strange marriage took place early on between the Islamists (who were an insignificant minority) and the variety of communist factions. They buried their hatchets and supposedly "unified" the nation for a "common" cause, which was supposed to be the achievement of democracy and political freedom.

Unbeknownst to most Iranians who jumped on the bandwagon with these two main groups, the communists had the dream of socialism and the Islamists wanted to bring about Islamic fascism. They both lied to the people and betrayed their trust. Periodically the Islamists used the idea of "Taqeyya" or an Islamic lie, took the nation and its revolution hostage.

Then the Islamists started to arrest and murder the communists and anyone else they found to be against the establishment of an Islamic Ummah. This is exactly the way these forms of uprisings turn out. You can see it played out almost as a parallel in the October Revolution in Russia, which was the basis for George Orwell's book "Animal Farm."

For the past 31 years, Iranian people have been kept hostage in their own county by a group of barbaric Muslim terrorists who despise anything Persian and are slowly purging the remnant of pre-Islamic Persia as well as Persian textbooks. These pro-Arab invaders are not Iranians by any means. Iranian is defined by a state of mind, not by a place of residence. The barbaric Islamist mullahs and their mercenaries presently ruling Iran are not Iranians. They are Islamofascists who have betrayed their magnificent heritage and have enlisted themselves in the service of a most oppressive, discriminating, and demeaning ideology, Islam.

Iranians are proud spiritual descendants of King Cyrus the Great, the author of the first charter of human rights. Some of Cyrus’ children live in the patch of land called Iran. The overwhelming majority—free humans with human beliefs—live in every country, city, and village of the earth.

These world-wide people, one and all, irrespective of nationality, color, or creed are Iranians because they all adhere to the Cyrus Charter; they practice and defend its lofty tenets, and transfer this precious humanity’s treasure to the next generation.

What makes people different is not their biology, but the “software” that runs them.

There is ample proof to support the above assertion. A case in point is the present menace posed by the people whose life is programmed by the software of Islam: an ideology anathema to the Cyrus Charter. And the results are self-evident. Hate, superstition, violence, and a raft of other inhuman beliefs drives these religious fascists. These captive followers of the primitive Islamic Charter are both the perpetrators and the victims of much suffering. The result is backward Islamic societies that are intent at dragging the rest of the world into the same sorry state. Misery likes company, it is said.

We recognize that the dysfunctional Islamic software is deeply engrained in the minds of many Muslims who opt to remain in mental bondage rather than purge their minds of the Islamic programming and join the rest of the human family with a new emancipating program for life—liberty.

Islamic clergy, the parasitic prime beneficiaries of Islam, are master practitioners of the carrot-and-stick strategy. By drawing heavily from the Quran and the Hadith, the conniving mullahs and imams have assembled a potent arsenal of threats and promises to keep the faithful in line. They had little trouble in so doing, since Islamic scripture is replete with graphic horrific punishment awaiting the wayward and the unbelievers, while the rewards for the obedient docile, if he is male, are described as an endless variety of sensual pleasures. Anyone daring to leave the corral of Islam is apostate and automatically condemned to death. And that’s just for starters. The punishment awaiting the ungrateful deserter of the one and only true path, Islam threatens a raft of horrific eternal torment in Allah’s hell.

And for the true faithful—the mindless robot—the promised rewards, all physical pleasures, are infinite and eternal.

In spite of these horrid threats and empty promises, more and more people are beginning to recognize Islam for what it is. It is difficult, but not impossible to leave fraudulent Islam’s captivity. Millions of Iranians have done so successfully, yet aren’t able to announce it for the obvious reason, and hundreds of thousands of non-Iranians have left Islam as well and are enjoying the blessings of liberty.

A great threat facing free people is the recently petrodollar-energized Islam embarking on a campaign of recruiting more people under its dark banner. Millions of disenfranchised underclass in the non-Islamic world, and millions more mentally under-developed, may flock to Islam, deluded by its empty promises.

Islam is no longer in its own self-made cage. It has broken out and has established a powerful presence in much of the non-Islamic world. Islam is a charter of submission. It is a sworn enemy of freedom and views the Cyrus Charter as heresy. Freedom and tyranny are incompatible. Free people must do all they can to preserve their birthright of liberty and assist others to break from the bondage of Islamic captivity.

The interdependent world community faces great challenges that demand a united effort, uncompromisingly based on justice, to meet the various ills it faces. We can no longer be complacent about events in a distant world affecting alien people. Distances are bridged and alien people are now diverse members of the human family.

We honor Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. for proclaiming from a Birmingham jail, “Injustice anywhere is threat to justice everywhere.” To demand justice for others, he risked his life, left his native Georgia, and ended up in jail in the then-bigoted south—Birmingham, Alabama. We “Iranians” of the world—free humans—must do no less. We must demand justice for our belief-kin who are suffering under the yoke of Islamofascisim in Iran or anywhere in the world.

Now the world is facing wall-builders of a different kind: the Islamofascists who have been at their shameless work for centuries. As their walls built with superstition, discrimination and blood are crumbling; they are intent at building walls in new territories.

But once again, human decency is rising to the challenge, this time in the voices and actions of billions of free people who proclaim: we are also children of Iran in the spirit of Cyrus the Great; “we meet any challenge and pay any price” to defeat Islamofascisim; and, we will not rest until humanity is completely free of the despotic rule of Islam.

We Iranians in spirit—free people of the world—greatly cherish liberty, where the mind is imbued with enlightenment, and every individual by the virtue of being born human is afforded measured freedom. It is within the open expanse of liberty that each and every person can be at his or her best. And when the individual person is at his best, humanity is at its best.

---

This article appeared in FamilySecurityMatters.org.

Inside Iran's Sex Slave Industry

The misogynistic Islamist Mullah regime of Iran are turning the women into sex-slaves...

---

Iranians protesting election of 2009 (Photo by Emiliya_1998)

With the approaching first anniversary on June 12th of last year's controversial Iranian presidential elections, officials of the Islamic Republic are bracing for possibly millions of protestors pouring into the streets in a show of strength that could eventually spell the end of the government's 30-year reign of terror and oppression. So terrified is the current regime, apparently, that the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, on the recent celebration of Ayatollah Khomeini's birthday, ordered all Iranians living abroad to return to their native land to be hanged or jailed for being "enemies of the Islamic Republic."

The list of the Iranian people's grievances against the Islamic Republic headed by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is long indeed, and includes the blatant and vicious oppression of women, manifested most pathologically in government-sponsored prostitution and sex slavery.

While the regime's apologists put forth weak arguments and excuses for the blatant Islamist abuse of women in Iran—claiming, for example, that because there are female Iranian lawyers and doctors women are thus treated well and fairly—festering below this shallow surface remains a horrendous record of sexism and misogyny justified by classical, not "radical" or "extremist," Islamic teachings.

Iranian Shah's wife, before 1979 revolution

One need only look at images preceding the Islamic fundamentalist takeover of Iran in 1979 to see how poorly women have fared in the past three decades under what some Iranians consider a criminal occupation of their ancient nation. Says Iranian-American writer Amil Imani, for example:

"Under the late Shah, Iranian women were the most respected females in the entire Muslim world. These thugs who are currently running my native country are not Iranians but packs of Muslim wolves who are simply following the examples of the prophet of Islam, Muhammad.

"This misogynist religion of Allah is custom-made for the savage male. A faithful follower of Allah is allowed to have as many as four permanent wives—and replace any of them at any time he wants—as well as an unlimited number of one-night or one-hour-standers that he can afford to rent. But, woe unto a woman if she even has a single love affair with another man. Nothing less than death by stoning is her just punishment."

Mr. Imani, an ex-Muslim co-founder of Former Muslims United, has good reason to make what sound to the untrained eye to be inflammatory remarks about the Islamic Republic, as he has watched from the safety of his well-appreciated adopted home of America the absolute oppression of his beloved Persian people, male and female, by rabid Islamists who use Islamic sharia law in order to establish a male-dominant, sexist and misogynistic regime that abuses, enslaves and exploits girls and women to the hilt. This exploitation and abuse include the kidnapping of girls and women off the streets to be enslaved in government-approved brothels, as well as to be trafficked in sex slavery around the Arab world and elsewhere globally.

Iranian brothels service male "pilgrims"

The government-approved or run whorehouses with kidnapped sex slaves who service male "pilgrims" and others are Iran's "dirty little secret," which mainstream media and human-rights activists may be ignoring as a "cultural idiosyncrasy" or "religious freedom" but which is in reality the cause of the intense suffering of thousands of Persian girls and women, as men have turned them into sex slaves, to be used in Iran as well as to be sold to men in other countries, including in the West, according to Dr. Donna M. Hughes of the University of Rhode Island.

Dr. Hughes is a "leading international researcher on trafficking of women and children" whose studies have included the trafficking of girls and women in such diverse places as not only Iran, Russia and Korea, but also the United States, France and Great Britain. In "Islamic Fundamentalism and the Sex Slave Trade in Iran" (2005), Hughes writes:

"A measure of Islamic fundamentalists’ success in controlling society is the depth and totality with which they suppress the freedom and rights of women. In Iran for 25 years, the ruling mullahs have enforced humiliating and sadistic rules and punishments on women and girls, enslaving them in a gender apartheid system of segregation, forced veiling, second-class status, lashing, and stoning to death.

"Joining a global trend, the fundamentalists have added another way to dehumanize women and girls: buying and selling them for prostitution. Exact numbers of victims are impossible to obtain, but according to an official source in Tehran, there has been a 635 percent increase in the number of teenage girls in prostitution. The magnitude of this statistic conveys how rapidly this form of abuse has grown. In Tehran, there are an estimated 84,000 women and girls in prostitution, many of them are on the streets, others are in the 250 brothels that reportedly operate in the city. The trade is also international: thousands of Iranian women and girls have been sold into sexual slavery abroad.

"The head of Iran’s Interpol bureau believes that the sex slave trade is one of the most profitable activities in Iran today. This criminal trade is not conducted outside the knowledge and participation of the ruling fundamentalists. Government officials themselves are involved in buying, selling, and sexually abusing women and girls.

"Many of the girls come from impoverished rural areas. Drug addiction is epidemic throughout Iran, and some addicted parents sell their children to support their habits. High unemployment—28 percent for youth 15-29 years of age and 43 percent for women 15-20 years of age—is a serious factor in driving restless youth to accept risky offers for work. Slave traders take advantage of any opportunity in which women and children are vulnerable. For example, following the recent earthquake in Bam, orphaned girls have been kidnapped and taken to a known slave market in Tehran where Iranian and foreign traders meet.

"Popular destinations for victims of the slave trade are the Arab countries in the Persian Gulf. According to the head of the Tehran province judiciary, traffickers target girls between 13 and 17, although there are reports of some girls as young as 8 and 10, to send to Arab countries...."

Hughes's article also reports the breaking up of several prostitution networks thriving in Turkey and Europe, extending to Pakistan and Afghanistan as well. In the Islamic fundamentalist country of Pakistan, she explains, also exist institutionalized brothels in which these sex slaves often end up.

Islamic sexism and misogyny

Iranian women today
(Photo by Zoom Zoom)

While Islamist apologists may argue that sex slavery exists around the world, exploiting innocent girls, women, boys and men, the fact will remain that in these Muslim nations this human-rights abuse has become institutionalized, with government-run brothels in Iran, for instance, offering what is called mutah or a temporary contract that allows men to "marry" for sexual purposes women other than the four concurrent wives alloted by Muhammad. Many of these brothels are near "holy sites," so that male pilgrims can "relieve their urges" while on a "religious" pilgrimage.

These sexist practices are justified by Quranic verses and other Islamic texts that proclaim women to be inferior subhumans to be used and exploited at will by men, who are given permission to beat and control them as they would property and animals.

For example, the Quranic verse or ayah 4:24 is held up as justification for mutah:

"Also [forbidden to you are] married women, except those whom you own as slaves. Such is the decree of God. All women other than these are lawful for you, provided you court them with your wealth in modest conduct, not in fornication. Give them their dowry for the enjoyment you have had of them as a duty; but it shall be no offense for you to make any other agreement among yourselves after you have fulfilled your duty. Surely God is all-knowing and wise."

Believers in a literal and eternal interpretation of the Quran/Koran seem to have only one place to go with this verse, which basically says that Muslim men can own sex slaves. Moreover, according to Islamic or sharia law, a woman has no right to divorce, as only a man does, a right he may freely exercise in some Muslim areas merely by saying the word talaq—"I divorce you"—three times. A man can then proceed to marry another woman and another after that by doing the same thing.

The notorious Quranic ayah 4:34 makes men superior to women and allows them to beat them:

"Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and forsake them in beds apart, and beat them."

Woman in niqab in Yemen
(Photo by Steve Evans)

As concerns the guarding of "unseen parts," in some Muslim sects, a woman's entire body is considered awrah or "naked" and thus must be completely cloaked. In other words, a woman is wholly a sex organ. In other sects, a woman's hands and face may be exposed, but the rest of her is a "walking vagina" and must be covered up in loose-fitting clothes so that no man but her husband-owner may see her shape.

Additionally, there are many hadiths or commentaries on the Quran and Muhammad that disparage women and essentially allow for their subjugation and enslavement. In the Tabari (9:113) or History of the Prophets and Kings, written in the 10th century by a respected Islamic scholar and theologian, we read the following about women:

"Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur'an."

Islamic misogyny is so rampant that it extends to the Muslim hell, the main occupants of which are women, allegedly seen by Muhammad himself:

"I stood at the gates of Paradise, most of those who entered there were poor, I stood at the gates of Hell, most of those who went in there, were women."

Forced prostitution is illegal in civilized countries

While it may be argued that even the United States has legal, government-approved brothels, as in the state of Nevada, the fact is that forced prostitution is against American law and is generally vigorously prosecuted wherever it is found. The victims of forced prostitution in Western countries are not imprisoned and raped as they are in Iran and elsewhere, as part of the "religious" punishment according to Islamic or sharia law. Nor is the sexploitation of women in the West justified by "sacred scriptures" or "religious traditions" of any sort, although sexism and misogyny themselves are also common to the other Abrahamic faiths of Judaism and Christianity, as well as other religions.

In the end, the fact will remain that according to mainstream, classical Islam, women are subordinate to men and can be exploited at will. As the Quran (2:223) also says:

"Women are your fields: go then, into your fields whence you please."

Concerning the Iranian Islamic fundamentalists, Hughes states, "Misogyny is at the heart of their ideology and is the framework of their state structure and authority." Until the world grapples with the fact of religiously justified sexism and misogyny, it cannot call itself enlightened and civilized.

In conclusion, the videos appended to this article give a sad view of what has happened to so many women in Iran since Islamic fundamentalists took over—as well as what happens to any nation that oppresses women and does not allow them the opportunity to pursue their own natural and God-given gifts and talents. As Dr. Hughes also says, "Only the overthrow of the mullahs and the defeat of their theocracy will liberate women from a system of contempt and hatred for women." The lovely women—and men—of Iran deserve a much better life than they have been consigned to these many years, including the right to self-rule in a free, democratic state.

---

D.M. Murdock is the author of controversial books and articles on comparative religion and mythology that can be found at Truth Be Known, Stellar House Publishing and Freethought Nation.

Iran, Islam & Cyrus the Great

The current Islamic regime under the mullahs has shown, on countless occasions, its contempt both in words and deeds for the memory of the founding father of Persia, Cyrus the Great, including flooding the plain which houses the King’s tomb, destroying the archeological sites of Pasargad and Persepolis, and harassing and intimidating those who would gather at the tomb of the enlightened king to commemorate the International Day of Cyrus the Great.

The Islamic Republic of Iran is staffed by devout Islamists that are determined to wipe out all traces of the pre-Islamic era. They aim to surpass every heinous crime committed for the past 1400 years by the Mohammedan followers. What is enshrined in the Cyrus Cylinder is unconditional respect for the complete rights of all the people of the world, an anathema to the Islamists' credo.

I have come to the realization that it is not possible for a person to be a Muslim and live by the standards that the great king enunciated some 2500 years ago. Tolerating evil is not tolerance, it is a crime. That's why Cyrus the Great clearly proclaimed that he would punish any official in his empire who did violate anyone's human rights anywhere in his empire.

An illustration of the benevolent beliefs and practices launched by this unsurpassed historical figure goes back to the landmark action of King Cyrus the Great of Persia. The father of the human rights charter freed the "enslaved" Jews in Babylon and helped them go to their homeland, lead a peaceful life and worship their God without harming others or forcing them to become Zoroastrian. I learned from the Great King how to be human and honor human rights. That's what I have learned from the enlightened king and that is why I honor the great trailblazer of our ancient Iran. Human rights do not come with our birth certificates. People must defend this sacred right. And in my own humble way, that's exactly what I am doing. I hold Islam in violation of the sacred charter of Cyrus the Great by invading other lands, enslaving people, destroying their heritage and their way of life.

I find Islam guilty of pursuing a multi-front attack, even to this day, on much of what is sacred to all civilized people. I consider Islam responsible for 1400 years of atrocities committed against my people. The litany of Islam's wrong-doings is beyond the scope of this writing. Just look around you in the world and see the horrific things that true Muslims are doing, not only to the people they label infidel, but to their own various sects, under the misogynist, discriminatory banner of their belief.

Shamelessness, dissimulation, and all forms of deceptions and distortions seem be infused in true Muslims. Some, the brave few, manage to get a transfusion and replace the toxins in their systems. Most just plod along and don't get all that concerned with the intricate issues of their religion, a sort of superficial affiliation that serves them in a complex way. Yet, others go the distance. These latter types do anything and say anything to keep the toxin intact in themselves and transmitting it to the next generation and all the people that they can infuse. That's my take.

Millions of Iranians consider the mullahs, their lackeys and lobbyists as true enemies of Iran, the country of my birth. Let’s be clear, Iranians have never asked for charity from anybody, but all they are saying is that people and countries that are at clear risk from the mullahs ought to step to the plate and help the Iranians, in numerous effective ways to get rid of these usurpers, these religious fanatics who are hell-bent on promoting their deadly agenda. The Iranian people will assuredly dislodge these wolves and try them for their crimes with all due process, the due process that they have completely denied for the people of Iran for 31 years. But, tried they will be and we need help from our friends to destroy the common enemy before it escalates its bloodletting program, both in Iran and against Israel and eventually engulfing the entire world.

Iranians are dismayed by President Obama's intent to make deals with these leaches and they would like to see the American people dissuade him from giving these murderers legitimacy. We do understand that self-interest is the motivating force for the individual and groups as well as nations. Thus, it is understandable that President Obama is taking serious steps to further America’s interest by negotiating with Iran’s Mullahs in the hope of stopping them from building nuclear weapons. This is an admirable objective. However, a number of troubling issues immediately come to mind.

For one, stopping the Mullahs from their pursuit of making the bomb is an unlikely possibility. It is an ineluctable fate. That achievement treats a symptom rather than eliminates the virulent disease of Shi’a’ Islamism. The best strategy that stands the greatest chance of success and entails the least risk of starting a cataclysmic chain reaction is for a “coalition of the willing,” to borrow a phrase, to rally behind the Iranian people.

President Obama is not a dictatorial leader like Iran's so-called supreme leader Ali Khamenei. President Obama is elected by the people and he stands accountable to the people. Every American concerned about the well-being and security of the country should embark on a tireless campaign of convincing President Obama that a deal he aims to make with the illegitimate rulers of Iran is not worth the paper it will be written on.

It is, at best, appeasement to make any deals with the sworn enemy of the United States of America. How clearly and how often do the mullahs have to proclaim their irreconcilable and irreversible hostility toward the U.S. and Israel? These mullahs believe their own delusions of grandeur. They think that they can win their brinkmanship and they do firmly believe that they will outsmart America, rest of the world and will have their way. In the process, they are more than willing to do whatever services their objective, by any and all devious means. Dealing with the mullahs brings to mind the "peace in our time" that Chamberlin brought to England by his deal-making with the Fuhrer. Except that this time the stakes can be much higher and deadlier.

With respect to Israel, I have always said that the Israelis shouldn't be trigger happy. If the hawks in Israel succeed in convincing the government to attack Iran's facilities, it would be an answered prayer for the mullahs. My advice: Don't do it. Don't even think of doing it. Use all your power and influence to get the U.S. and its allies to move with serious extensive, crippling and immediate sanctions, in conjunction with counterrevolution, even if the duplicitous Russians and the conniving Chinese refuse to sign up in the effort. The slap-on-the-wrist type of sanctions is almost as bad as a military attack. It would give the mullahs more time to pursue their dream weapon.

We have invaluable allies on the ground in Iran. There are some 50 million Iranians who are the best hope of the world in that part of the world. These enlightened Iranians despise the Mullahs

and have no animosity toward Israel or the United States. Most of these people are well-educated and smart and have broken away from the slavery and fraud of Islamism. They are in the best position to send the Mullahs packing for good. Instead of throwing a lifeline to the sinking ship of the Mullacracy, we must act resolutely in doing everything non-violent to help them defeat the Mullahs. It is our best bet.

As I see things now, the house -- the world -- is being set on fire by the hordes of front-line jihadists and millions of Muslims, in one form or another, are forced to support these front-liners. The masses of Muslims are just as guilty as the front-liners. Without their support, much of it monetary, there won't be enough jihadists to worry about. Keep in mind that money is the lifeblood of any movement. And the Islamist nations, sheiks and others have their treasuries filled to the rim with mindless and apathetic people like us who burn their oil and give them our money. These individuals and governments feel that it is their religious duty to channel much of this money to do the work of Allah and establish the pipe-dream of Caliphate in the world.

Presumably, we all agree that there are some fires in the house, but many appeasers don't want me to cry at the top of my voice that it is a raging fire. They say that I might frighten the sleepers. Well, let me do that. It is better that I frighten and even insult people than they burn in the ever-escalating inferno. Islam is indeed a deadly social retrovirus. Telling people to take two aspirin and not worry about it is not the kind of medicine the world needs today.

The Islamdom is at a crossroad. Millions in Iran, a hugely important force of sustaining and fanning the Islamic fire, have already turned and are turning against Islam. They and the rest of the world need to hear the voices of secular decent people who are in league with them. I am sure you want to play your part in this honorable endeavor and lend your help to put Islam, the very spawning swamp of the deadly virus that makes for jihadists, out of business.

The Coming War with Iran

Real question is not if, but when

War with Iran is now inevitable. The only question is: Will it happen sooner or later? Tehran's recent missile tests and war games suggest that the apocalyptic mullahs have reached the same conclusion.

Iran is on the march. Their medium-range Shahab-3 and Sajjil missiles can reach Israel, the entire Middle East and parts of Europe. Tehran is slowing expanding its regional sphere of influence. It has backed insurgency groups in Iraq, which have killed U.S. soldiers. It sponsors Hamas and Hezbollah. It has transformed Syria into a political vassal. It has forged an alliance with Hugo Chavez's Venezuela. It has purchased key air defense systems from Vladimir Putin's Russia.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust-denier and virulent anti-Semite. He is a Persian Nazi strongman who vows to wipe Israel "off the map." He is a revolutionary Shi'ite. He believes the Jews must be extinguished in order to usher the coming of the Shi'ite Messiah, the so-called "Hidden Imam."

For years, the fascist theocracy has invested considerable resources into developing a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Mr. Ahmadinejad insists Tehran only wants atomic energy for "peaceful purposes." Yet, he cannot answer one simple question: Why does a country with the world's second-largest natural gas reserves and third-largest oil supply need domestic nuclear power?

Moreover, Mr. Ahmadinejad is a congenital liar. He repeatedly insists that Iran is a "democracy." Rather, it is a brutal police state based on rigged elections and the torture and murder of dissidents. He claims that Iran has "no homosexuals" and that women are treated "fairly." In fact, the Islamist regime routinely executes gays and subjugates women. He says Iran has "nothing to hide" about its nuclear program. The West, however, recently discovered a hidden, underground facility near the holy city of Qom capable of producing highly enriched uranium for weapons-grade nuclear material.

Since establishment of the Islamic Republic in 1979, Iran has been engaged in an ideological struggle against the West. Its two main enemies have been the United States ("the Great Satan") and Israel ("the Little Satan"). From its inception, Tehran has sought to erect a world Muslim empire; to restore medieval Islamic civilization to its former dominance. The regime is reactionary and - in a twisted manner - even utopian. Nuclear weapons are about more than attaining great-power status. They are the means to achieve the final triumph of messianic Shi'ism.

Iran is on the verge of acquiring the bomb. The mullahs have reached the point of no return. Israel - the country that has to live in that dangerous part of the world - believes the mullahs are six to nine months away from getting it.

Hence, President Obama's policy of diplomatic engagement combined with possible sanctions is doomed to fail. It is ineffective, naive and reckless. Direct talks, like those conducted in Geneva on Thursday, only give Iran more time. Mr. Obama is simply providing the mullahs with the cover they need to finish completing their nuclear arsenal.

Washington now has two choices: Sanction an American or Israeli military attack to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities or allow Tehran to go nuclear. Either option means war.

A devastating strike would likely trigger a fierce Iranian response, including waves of suicide bombers targeting Israeli civilians and U.S. troops in Iraq. Iranian missiles would pound Israeli and, maybe, European cities. Vital shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf would be disrupted, driving the price of oil to more than $300 a barrel - plunging the West into a possible depression. Hezbollah sleeper cells might be activated within the United States, unleashing deadly atrocities on American soil.

Yet, allowing a nuclear-armed Iran is likely to lead to an even worse regional war. Once the ruling clerics get their hands on nukes, a military showdown with Israel is inevitable. They will seek to destroy the Jewish state once and for all. Jerusalem will not stand by and commit existential suicide. It will retaliate. The result would be a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East.

The winds of war are blowing across the Persian Gulf. Following this summer's crackdown on pro-democracy protesters, the Iranian regime is weak, desperate and fracturing. Washington should vigorously pursue a policy of internal regime change; otherwise, Tehran will drag the Middle East into a certain conflagration that could lead to the slaughter of millions.

Instead, Mr. Obama has ruled out "meddling in Iran's internal affairs." His peace-at-any-cost diplomacy guarantees military conflict. It is no longer a question of if this will happen, but when and on whose terms. Mr. Obama is sleepwalking into disaster. America and the Middle East will pay the price.