Refugees Abused by Captors

Detained Afghans ordered to hit themselves

01-Sep-2011
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Ghormeh SabziCommentsDate
Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day
5
Dec 02, 2012
Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day
2
Dec 01, 2012
Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day
2
Nov 30, 2012
more from Ghormeh Sabzi
 
Tabarzin

Hooshang Tarreh-Gol

by Tabarzin on

I have read Ervand Abrahamian's Khomeinism and I generally agree with his analysis, but disagree with his final conclusions. Yes, the Khomeinism of 1978 to the April referendum of 1979 was a populist Khomeinism and Khomeini was clearly acting out the role of a populist during this period. He was even called by some "Mossadeq in turban." But the Khomeini which emerges leading up to and after the April 1979 referendum is clearly a different creature altogether, and most decidedly not a classic populist. This is where Abrahamian, in my opinion, gets it wrong, because the Khomeini emerging from that point onwards was explicitly the fundamentalist (or 'political Islamist') Khomeini. This is easily demonstrable because this Khomeini (as opposed to the Khomeini before this date) no longer believed sovereignty belonged to the popular will, but rather belonged to God as mediated through the juriconsult (namely, himself). At this point Khomeini cannot be labelled a populist but must instead be called what he is, a fundamentalist. 


Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

They are just

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

 

teaching them to be good Shia Muslims. A good Shia man is supposed to hit himself on the head. Preferably with an axe to mourn Imam Hossain. So this is just a part of their normal cultural introduction.

When I moved to USA I had to learn about US government. The Afghans need to learn about "getting hit on the head" lessons. It is normal. Next is "abuse". Once they are proficient the really good ones are recruited as Basiji.

The rest must go become "amaleh". Of course wife beating lessons are also required. Why are you people so un-PC? Don't you understand different cultural norms and practices?


Maryam Hojjat

Tabarzin, Thank you for your great Comments & Exchange with R-B

by Maryam Hojjat on

I agree with you %100.  I have mentioned about Iranian Gullibility several times in my comments.  I believe there is no other MELAT as Gullibile & Naive as IRANIANS.   One of the reason is Iranians generally do not read books & Have very low political intelligence eventhough it seems all are involved in politics.  The other reason is we have been under dictatorship for most of our history and it has caused us not to be able to think outside the BOX. 


Reality-Bites

Tabarzin jaan

by Reality-Bites on

That was a fascinating story and very instructive to read. Thanks for sharing.

You know, although I don't/didn't necessarily agree with many things that people like Foruhar believed in, I had respect for their patriotism and their intelligence to a degree. So, I'm flabbergasted at how naive they were by being taken in by Khomeini so easily. It's as if, they were caught up in some of kind of wishful thinking bubble.

How Iran has paid for their incomprehensible gullibility.


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

On Blog topic, what a religion! What a government!

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Now that I got off my chest the &$%$% who pushed these IRI on us and who want to talk to these guys *&*&%$%%$ not remove them,

we need to ask what else does this regime need to do to go bye bye?????????

They lose their legitimacy to rule on like a weekly basis.

There is nothing the IRI can do to get their legitimacy back, the trust is totally shattered,

I would even go as far as saying people who used to love the mullahs can't afford to support them because they are broke/& have given up hope.

The remainder on their side are directly financially benefiting by them being in power.

I see another major mass confrontation with the regime.


Simorgh5555

Amir

by Simorgh5555 on

As Roozbeh said, I do not want to deviate from the subject of the thread, but you are taking your conspiracies too far.
Assuming your Clash of Civilisation and theory of divide and rule are to be accepted as truth, thebproblem remains ourselves for allowing imperialist powers to implement their plans. King Hussein of Jordan stifled plans by Israel and the USA to turn his kingdom into a home for Palestinians crushing them with force even though he was universally condenmed. I am sorry to say that if our Shah had half the guts of Hussein he would not only have restored law and order in 1979 by listening to his generals advice to stamp out the protesterst he could also have killed Khomeini years ago. First he sent Khomeini into exile in Turkey and then Iraq where he ignored the wise suggestion of Saddam Hussein to assassinate him. His departure led him to France giving him untremelled access to mass media making him not just an icon for Islamists but also a champion of the Left and all opponents of the Shah's rule. Do not blame our shortcommings on a simplistic international conspiracy.
Furthermore, Iran could have been, and indeed there was a plan in thr pipe line to fragment Iran along ethnic lines in the 1920's but this was shelved by the British who lent their support to Reza Shah and believed that a united Iran would infact further their interest.
Also another opportunity to split Iran could have been realized after WW2 but again this did not happen. The only country that intended and has continued to embark on dividing Iran was anti-imperialist Soviet Union who set up short lived break away republics in Gilan and Azarbaijan.
Also how woule you edplain your divide and rule theory in light of the fact that post Saddam Iraq was not divided despite earlier fears and had it been done so it would have easily freed up oil to the USA and allowed it to dominate the country.
Amir, I respect you and share your love of our monarchy, but this almost dayee jan Napelon syndrome spoils your arguments.
This oghde is not helpful and indeed we need to stop giving the ball to our enemies if they are indeed the West.


Tabarzin

RB

by Tabarzin on

My father was exactly like yours in his assesment of Khomeini. But let me tell you this story. In November 1978 my father was invited to a meeting at the house of one of his best friends in North Tehran whose whole family had recently switched loyalties as diehard supporters of the Shah to diehard supporters of the Shah's overthrow and Khomeini. One of the family members of this friend was even known as being at one time a senior officer for the 2nd (Special) Branch of SAVAK, this friend himself briefly supporting the political platform of Pezeshkzad and his Pan-Iranists during the 1960s.

At this meeting the distinguished guest was Daryush Foruhar, then in close association with Mehdi Bazargan. Foruhar was there to rally a whole community of European educated middle class North Tehran acquintances to the cause of the Devolution. My father listened to Foruhar's talk and then point blank asked him, "let us say Khomeini comes to Iran, overthrows the Shah, and replaces the Shah with his own dictatorship, what then? How can we trust the mullahs?" Daryush Foruhar naively responded by opening his jacket and revealing his Colt Handgun, responding, "no such dictatorship will replace the Shah's; but if Khomeini were to try to setup another dictatorship, I will shoot him myself with this Colt!" This was Daryush Foruhar, a minister in Bazargan's provisional government, who together with his wife Parvaneh fell to the knife of the state assassin during the height of the chain murders in 1998!

This is a true story and is a gauge to 1) the depth of the naivete and self-delusion of Iran's intellectual class in 1978/79 and 2) the rigor by which social engineering was being implimented throughout Iran to get all sectors of Iranian society to rally behind Khomeini. Chomsky needs to be read with a fine tooth comb to understand how this was all executed to conclusion.


Reality-Bites

Tabarzin jaan

by Reality-Bites on

The whole idea of social engineering is a complex subject and open to various interpretations (as I'm sure you'll know). I'm not proposing to get into it here and now as I'm at work and my boss will have me for breakfast, if I spend much more time oneline. Besides, you'll get bored silly reading my views on it.

But just a very quick note on the specific subject of Khomeini and what he said in 1978/9. You are correct about the impact of Khomeini's rhetoric duping and fooling people. I know all about his speeches and various proclamations during that period.

But aziz, Khomeini didn't suddenly fall to Earth from the outer space as a totally unknown character. Surely the people, especially those from the so called educated classes, who were so vehement in supporting that Akhoond, would've or should've been fully aware of his history and his distinctly reactionary and intolerant views during the 1963 religious uprising that led to his exile. Furthermore, I cannot believe Khomeini's frequent messages, and the narrow-minded philosophies they espoused, coming from his Najaf base over the next 15 years, were totally unknown to all the millions that supported him in 1979.

I remember at the time, my own father, even though he never cared much for Shah, told us (i.e. my brothers/sister, even though we were only kids then in 1978), that the people must be mad to put their faith an Iran's future in the hands this backward and dangerous Mullah, because he was fully aware of Khomeini's history.

Again, I agree that many people were fooled by Khomeini's nonsense at the time, but quite honestly that is no excuse. Apart from the uneducated, they should've known better.


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

Roozbeh Gilani

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

To hell with the Islamists.

They are anti USA for one reason, having been pro shah

I am anti usa for the opposite reason having betrayed the shah

and following a policy known as clash of civilizations, which aims to support fundamentalist governments like the IRI.

I think its essential to remind everyone and scream from the top of every hill when we see an islamic thug committing a crime exactly who is behind this thug!!!!!!!!!

Roozbeh start to read, please read, I can't waste my time answering your same objection 100 times, put in a different way,

Now please read this article and realize who is the real enemy is that is behind creating this problem.

http://www.ukcolumn.org/articles/who-enemy

By the way, I could just say your posts follow the same line of thinking as the CIA, do you see me harrassing you for this, get off my case and dispute my logic, if you can't dispute my documentation and agree wth it, then join me.

But for gods sakes, read the article it is 100% relevant to this post.  It asks who are behind the agent provocateurs.

I am in no way defending the IRI. They are sick, but to me personally the sickest people are those who brought them to power and are keeping them there.Please tell me exactly how is that line of argumentlike the IRI's this line of argument requests that the USA change its game and help remove the regime in IRAN, which IRI supporter wants the IRI gone?


default

Amiri, your very language and the terminology you use in Western

by Hooshang Tarreh-Gol on

based. Khomini is associated with Masjid not Church!

Reading Abrahamian essay first could help.

Khomeinism Essays on the Islamic Republic Ervand Abrahamian (Author) Not available in British Commonwealth, Europe; Available in Canada

 

"Fanatic," "dogmatic," "fundamentalist"—these are the words most often
used in the West to describe the Ayatollah Khomeini. The essays in this
book challenge that view, arguing that Khomeini and his Islamic movement
should be seen as a form of Third World political populism—a radical
but pragmatic middle-class movement that strives to enter, rather than
reject, the modern age.

Ervand Abrahamian, while critical of
Khomeini, asks us to look directly at the Ayatollah's own works and to
understand what they meant to his principal audience—his followers in
Iran. Abrahamian analyzes political tracts dating back to 1943, along
with Khomeini's theological writings and his many public statements in
the form of speeches, interviews, proclamations and fatwas
(judicial decrees). What emerges, according to Abrahamian, is a
militant, sometimes contradictory, political ideology that focuses not
on issues of scripture and theology but on the immediate political,
social, and economic grievances of workers and the middle class.

These
essays reveal how the Islamic Republic has systematically manipulated
history through televised "recantations," newspapers, school textbooks,
and even postage stamps. All are designed to bolster the clergy's
reputation as champions of the downtrodden and as defenders against
foreign powers. Abrahamian also discusses the paranoia that permeates
the political spectrum in Iran, contending that such deep distrust is
symptomatic of populist regimes everywhere.


Roozbeh_Gilani

amirparviz... , PLEASE: Just stick to the blog topic

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

And stop distracting. This blog has nothing to do with your obsession with "US imperialism".

Now since you mentioned, I have to tell you, your line of argument on this site, consistently matches the islamist regime's line of argument, which is at odds with your chosen nick name....

 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

Roozbeh Gilani

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

In my case just my username is an insult to IRI and for public knowledge of course I am disgusted and condemn the IRI,

however when I see this nasty work, it's really hard for me personally to let go of those who betrayed the shah and removed him from power, to give us this sick creation.  The USA and UK earned my disgust by propping these guys up.  Obviously as a secular monarchist you should expect me to have these views.

But more important is to ask how true is what I am saying, if it's true and you can see it then I have been of service in getting you to see the root of the problem, not just the problem itself.


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

HTG what are you implying?

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

That when khomeini ordered over 10,000 muslims who had been released from prison after serving their sentences back to prison to be executed that he was expressing islamic populism?????????

What exactly is fundamentalism to you?

Does it not include the church running the government as khomeini advocated?

Those are not islamic populism. 


Roozbeh_Gilani

Why is it.....

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

That whenever there is solid, irrefutable evidence of IRI brutality and criminal acts, like this blog, we get a few who immediately embark on trying to divert the discussion, shifting the focus away from IRI,  by screaming at "US imperialism", "BBC", "Bush", etc? I mean what the heck has lybia got to do with this clip?! 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."


default

...

by Hooshang Tarreh-Gol on

Amir P, Khomieni of Kashfol Asrar, is not a Fundamentalist. He's an Islamic populist, part of a very comrehensive, extensive tradition.

The concept of Fundemantalism is actually what Western journalist and media incorrectly interjected into the debate, a naming, based on the history of Christian Fundamenatlism in the US. 

Ervand Abrahamian in his essay on "Khomienism" explains why he was actually more of an Islamic  Populist rather than a fundamentalist.

On the continued presence of Concpiracy Culture in Iran see below:

جنبش
آزادیخواهانه مردم منطقه را منسوب به توطئه‌های دولت‌های غربی و اسرائیل
نمودن همانقدر درست است که انقلاب ایران را توطئه کارتر و جلسه هفت کشور
صنعتی و بی بی سی معرفی کردن. اینکه این دولت‌ها در تغییراتی که در کشورهای
منطقه می‌شود بسیار حساس هستند و این تغییرات با منافع مستقیم یا
غیرمستقیم ایشان سروکاردارد، تردیدی نیست واینکه می‌توانند در حرکت این
جنبش‌ها بشکلی تآثیر گذار باشند امکانش وجود دارد، ولی آنها نمی‌توانند
جنبشی را بوجود بیاورند. علل پیدایش پدیده‌های اجتماعی که جنبشها ازآن
نمونه‌اند دردرون جامعه قراردارند وعوامل خارج ازاین پدیده‌ها درشکل گیری
آینده این پدیده‌ها می‌توانند تآثیراتی داشته باشند. شناسائی و ریشه یابی
هرپدیده‌ای با بکارگیری تئوری توطئه ساده ترین روش است. ولی با واقعیت
بسیارفاصله دارد. جنبش‌های آزادیخواهانه امروز منطقه را توطئه دولت‌های
بزرگ غرب خواندن تنها بمعنی درک نادرست قدرت مردم و تحقیراراده ملت‌های
درگیراست. تئوری توطئه موضوعی جدید درمیان مردم نیست. مطالعات و نظرهای
دانشورانی چون دکتر احمد اشرف و دکترداریوش شایگان قدمت موضوع "توطئه" را
بخوبی نشان می‌دهند.(۱)

.
احمد اشرف، جامع شناس و از ویراستاران دانشنامه ایران، تئوری توطئه درقدیم
را حتی در پیدایش ایران در سلطنت فریدون و پند ارسطو به اسکندر نشان
می‌دهد. نگاه کنید به: "توهم توطئه" نشریه گفتگو، منتشر در ایران، شماره ۸
در تابستان ۱۳۷۴. سخنرانی دکتر داریوش شایگان، فیلسوف ایرانی در دانشگاه
تهران: مردم توطئه را در قدیم از سوی نیروهای ماوراء الطبیعه می‌پنداشتند و
امروزه آنرا در دست گروههای انسانی می‌بینند.

default

Two things things keeping IR in power: mass indifferance, severe

by Hooshang Tarreh-Gol on

repression.

Both these factors have begun to change in the past year or so. Continued disagreement and cracks at the top, and continued protests (mass or activists centered) could easily change the equation. 

As far as the influence of  US on Iranian affairs: exactly how does a  country that could hardly manage its own crises , have so much control over managing "Iranian Crisis?" Shades of conspiracy theory.


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

HTG spreading & creating extremism and fundamentalism is

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

the primary aim of USA and UK,

they were not clueless when they picked the unknown to Iranians Khomeini, KHOMEINI didn't change one bit from the person that wrote the books he did about creating a fundamentalist state and the west knew of his real agenda which they wanted to help bring about, even though Iranians innocently did not know.

My stomach turns sick when I think how the USA and UK are helping maintain one of the largest concentration camps in history, run by their affiliate the IRI for Iranians.


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

Tabarzin well said and good info

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

The manufacturing of consent is a relatively new, did not exist in 19th century to this degree.

Simorgh5555 everytime we see video's like this we shouldn't forget who put these scumbags in power and who is using all their resources to keep them there while containing their power.  The Scum standing behind this IRI is far nastier and filthier than the naziesque IRI, it's bipartisan in both the USA and UK establishment.


default

RB & Amir, you're seriously forgetting Khomeini's deceits,

by Hooshang Tarreh-Gol on

Even an amature historian could easily find a stark difference between the "Early Khomieni" of France, under the apple tree (promising everything under the sun to everybody in Iran, and a "late" one: fully in power and in control of the State. You could practically find two 'distinct' Khomeinis between the one under the apple tree in France, and in Iran, especially after Feb 11. When we call  Khomeini Ayyat Shaytan there's a good reason for it.

So the question might become: how do you deal with an Ayyat Shaytan? And realistically speaking, exactly what chances do you think you might have?

 


Simorgh5555

The IR is already a standard

by Simorgh5555 on

The IR is already a standard bearer when it comes to state terror but this marks a new low. No comparison to Guantanamo, Abu Gharib, Palestine or Vietnam can explain or justify this mass humiliation of fellow human beings.
The scum bag may not be acting on direct orders to inflict this torture on the refugees but his employers, the IR Terror state remains vicariously liable for his actions.
If Israel did this to Paleestinians in Ramallah or Gaza then this would recieve almost uiversal condemnation in the Media and a resolution will be passed in the UN condemning Israel.
It also highlights, unfortunately, not just institutional racism but racism amongst many Iranians towards our Afghan brothers and sisters. I hear derogatory attitudes towards Afghans amongst many Iranians and its time people felt ashamed of their actions.
Iranians should remember this video each time we complain about being harassed at the airport or at work.


Tabarzin

RB

by Tabarzin on

The modern politics of the mass media has made social engineering that much easier for elites wishing to influence events on a large scale. The recent episode in Libya is a case in point. The events of 1978/79 were clearly orchestrated and the population manipulated wholesale.

That said, do not forget that before the revolution Khomeini's discourse was distinctly as a populist articulating positions in terms not many could argue with. He was talking about social justice, rights and equality. He was being projected as a democrat and not interested in ruling or imposing a government by shar'ia. There was virtually no discussion of the VF and Khomeini is on record in an interview in November 1978 saying his age and health precluded him from exercising political power. The image of Khomeini at that point was being clearly and carefully managed in order to manufacture consent. This explains why all those Iranians who overwhelming supported Khomeini - such as the urban middle class - were really duped and manipulated in their support because if Khomeini's real intentions were known at the time, there is no doubt that he would not have enjoyed such overwhelming support from sectors of Iranian society who otherwise should have known better. And it was the support of the urban middle class for Khomeini that sealed the Shah's fate.

Yet all of this was being carefully socially enigeneered and stage managed from abroad. The sinister role of the Persian section of the BBC should never be lost sight of in its role of galvanizing a huge cross-section of the Iranian population because it had literally become a bully pulpit for Khomeini and the overthrow of the Shah.

Where the Iranians of the former generation are to be blamed is in their gullibility. But they cannot be blamed any more or less than the American electorate should be blamed for believing in George W. Bush's lies about WMDs in Iraq. In the modern age, when elites are determined to do something, all the mechanisms exist for them to manipulate masses to execute such designs - and the social science literature (not just whacky conspiracy theories pontificated by mercurial minds) exist which theoretically detail how this all works. Another case in point is the US presidential election of 2000 which Al Gore clearly won - including, as it later turned out, in the disputed state of Florida! Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent is one such study I encourage everybody to go out and read.


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

They are such a source of humiliation...

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Terrible,


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

You haven't read the link yet have you RB?

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

but we are where we are mainly because we gave this bunch the opportunity to turn Iran into the mess that it is today.

In Neocolonialism the people are used to set themselves backwards and into a state of stagnation.  Trust me in one thing here, when I say the leaders of the IRI never knew and never cared for what reason the USA wanted them in power, they just saw power and went for it.  That's how stupid they are.  But that doesn't make it the IRI's fault either, just because they are patsys.

 


Roozbeh_Gilani

Islamist Regime Nazis are an inventive bunch.

by Roozbeh_Gilani on

Even Nazis would not make their prisoners beat themselves. The'd do it for them! 

"Personal business must yield to collective interest."


Reality-Bites

Hooshang

by Reality-Bites on

You are right, maybe I should have elaborated further.

So in a nutshell, the IR and its supporters are also Iranian, whether we like or not. The millions that poured into the streets chanting "doorad bar Khomeini", demanding the Imam's return were also Iranian. In this specific case, the people mistreating the Afghans are Iranian too.

I'm not saying that IR's crimes should blamed on all Iranians, but we are where we are mainly because we gave this bunch the opportunity to turn Iran into the mess that it is today. Continually blaming outsiders takes us away from tackling the problem at hand and only serves to prolong the rule of this tyranny.


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

RB..... Niet, No, Wrong,

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

You say...

My comment was intended to put forth the idea that we cannot and should
not continue this age old Iranian obsessive folly to blame all our ills
as a nation on the West, while the primary cause of our problems is us,
the Iranian people.

It's not true.  Not in this case.  The Folly is to diagnose the primary cause of us as the iranian people, the primary cause is the west in this case.

The link helps inform about what the real agenda is, who is creating and sustaining fundamentalism and to what end.

Those Are Fundamentalists, not just any iranian, who brought them to power, who sustains them, why?

Iranians weren't wonderful people one day when the Shah was in power and just became a force for evil the next day,

the people are the same, just struggling under a tough situation they were deceived into and that they do not have the power or leadership to get out of.

I don't know about you, but I with all Iranians united behind me, couldn't personally can't take on the USA/UK/France/Germany on all together at once. 


default

The primary cause of problem is the State: IR, not the people

by Hooshang Tarreh-Gol on

Islamic Republic  has been the one shaping and creating 'new' Islamic culture, ethics, morality,  laws,... and rather forcefully imposing them on everybody in sight for the past three decades. Now, how is it that the people who are at the receiving end of this equation get the blame?!?


Reality-Bites

Tabarzin jaan

by Reality-Bites on

My comment was not intended to defend the West and claim it is perfect, because, as any student of history and international affairs knows, it is far from that.

My comment was intended to put forth the idea that we cannot and should not continue this age old Iranian obsessive folly to blame all our ills as a nation on the West, while the primary cause of our problems is us, the Iranian people.

amirpaviz jaan, I'm not sure what it has to do with a bunch of Iranians mistreating some Afghanis, but thank you for the link anyway.


Tabarzin

Reaity-Bites

by Tabarzin on

The Western democracies don't tolerate dissent either. Here is what the greatest sociologist of America had to say about it in the 1830s:

...formerly tyranny used the clumsy weapons of chains and hangmen; nowadays even despotism, though it seemed to have nothing more to learn, has been perfected by civilization. Princes made violence a physical thing, but our contemporary democratic republics have turned it into something as intellectual as the human will is intended to constrain. Under the absolute government of a single man, despotism, to reach the soul, clumsily struck at the body, and the soul, escaping from such blows, rose gloriously above it; but in democratic republics that is not at all how tyranny behaves; it leaves the body alone and goes straight to the soul...

 

In the proudest nations of the Old World works were published which faithfully portrayed the vices and absurdities of contemporaries...But the power that dominates in the United States does not understand being mocked like that. The least reproach offends it, and the slightest sting of truth turns it fierce, and one must praise everything, from the turn of its phrases to its most robust virtues. No writer, no matter how famous, can escape from this obligation to sprinkle incense over his fellow citizens. Hence the majority lives in a state of perpetual self-adoration; only strangers or experience may be able to bring certain truth to the Americans' attention.

Alexis de Tocqueville, DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA


amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

RB who do you point fault at for slavery of negro's?

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on

Do you blame the victims of the policy, the slaves.

Or do you rightly point fault at the more powerful side that made slavery the law of the land, used its military to impose its policy and enslaved people for being black.

You sound ridiculous upon reflecting on just a few realities here.  In Irans case you are blaming the victim of disasterous and cruel policies intended to roll back the democratic process, but reading your comments elsewhere looks like no one has clued you in.

Get educated, discover policy, at starting point on your journey. http://www.ukcolumn.org/articles/who-enemy