Who defines terrorism?


by Asghar_Massombagi

Lost in all the sound and the fury raised by the US and its allies (the UK and France primarily) about Iran’s role in propagating terror in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and other points west and east, is that the biggest sponsor of terror in the region may be Saudi Arabia, home to Wahhabism, the most vitriolic brand of fundamentalist Islam.

It’s well known that Al-qaeda (a name by the way invented by US Justice Department lawyers back in the late 1990’s to prosecute among others the bombing of US embassy in Kenya) has its roots in the Saudi oil oligarchy.

The majority of 9/11 terrorists were Saudi citizens and of course the big kahuna himself, Osama, is a Saudi mega rich boy, trained by the CIA back in the “great Jihad” days against the Soviets.

Since the US invasion of Iraq the elephant in the room that everyone refuses to acknowledge is that the Sunni insurgency in Iraq, the same insurgency that has been responsible for the majority of US deaths in the past four years, has been in part bankrolled by the Saudis and aided by their sidekick, the son of Plucky Little King (the PLK, as King Hussein was affectionately known to the Israelis) King Abdullah of Jordan.

These are by the way the same insurgents that have planted bombs in mosques and markets, in funeral processions and religious gatherings killing thousands of Iraqi Shi’a and Kurds in the most savage manner.

The bugaboo term “Shi’a Crescent” is attributed to King Abdullah.

The Shi’a apparently are poised to take over the entire Middle East.

This little bit of demagoguery has been used to mask the illegitimacy of the largely corrupt Arab dictatorships that the US counts among its allies.

Cowered and outclassed by Israel on one hand and humiliated by Hezballah’s defiant battle against Israel’s massive war machine in 2006, it seems that the Arab states, from Egypt to the sheikhdoms of the Persian Gulf are trying to use Iran and the Shi’a as an escape goat.

Just recently the toothless gutless Arab league, in a pathetic parody of the language of Arab-Israeli conflict, called for Iran to leave “Arab occupied land”, meaning the three disputed islands in the Gulf.

The assassination of senior Hezballah commander, Imad Mughnieh, in Damascus has been attributed at least in part to Saudi intelligence1.

And that’s not all of it.

The emergence of Al-Ahvaz movement in Iran’s Khuzestan may very well be inspired and bankrolled by the Saudis and their Gulf friends.

If the reports that have attributed the mosque explosion in Shiraz yesterday to a bomb are proved to be accurate, it’s a good bet that the money and resource trail behind it will lead to the Saudis.

The callous murderous nature of this action with its absolute disregard for the civilians bears all the hallmarks of Sunni extremists’ atrocities against their so-called Moslem brothers from Iraq to Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of this is to absolve the ruling clergy in Iran of their own foreign adventurism or repressive measures against the ordinary Bahais (the preaching Imam in the Shiraz mosque apparently is known for his Bahai baiting) and kneejerk violent mishandling of Sunni grievances that has fed into reactionary movements like al-Ahvaz but it seems that when it comes to “war on terror”, defining terror and terrorism is contingent on the US geopolitical interests.


At least that’s what Iranians are saying.

Although the proposed scenario should be taken with a grain of salt (//middleeast.foreignpolicyblogs.com/), it sounds quite plausible.

The Saudis’ enmity against Shi’a is no secret.


Recently by Asghar_MassombagiCommentsDate
Stoning - Monty Python
Sep 21, 2010
The Invention of Jewish People
Nov 24, 2009
Climate Justice
Oct 13, 2009
more from Asghar_Massombagi

lotta horse ....

by I wonder (not verified) on

First of all, that is a lotta horse shit concocted by a bunch of sore losers whose ass got deeply burned! the Supreme Court already decided on that, that is final and everybody significant accepted it!

It is your prerogative if you wanna believe in conspiracy theories but don't try to force it down on everybody else as facts.

Secondly you said in your post earlier "It is the same in Iran. Most people don't agree or support the criminals in power there but they love their counry and choose to live there for many reasons. "

No dear, that does not apply to the younger unemployed generation which comprise a high percentage of population in Iran. It is not out of love that they live there, they have no other choice. I assure you that they would get out as fast as they could and emigrate to other countries, specially to the West if they could first get the entry visa to those countries.

A lot of Western countries' embassies in Iran refuse to give Iranian citizens entry visa to their countries, even tourist visas, out of the fear that they might go there, seek refugee status and do not want to leave! Iranians inside Iran do not have a CHOICE!


Yes, No-elected in America

by farokh2000 on

I guess you were either sleep or had not "immigrated to the U.S." in 2000 and did not pay attention to what kind of criminal acts Big Dick and GW and their buddies committed to push their way to the WH and how they have destroyed the lives of millions since they have taken over.

You sound like you are a "Native American"? and don't really like people who have taken your land here in this country? Maybe that is why you don't really have your real name? or maybe you are just an everyday Redneck, who hates all foreigners who live here.


No differenc

by Anonymous 33 (not verified) on

As a banal method, the pro IRI author highlights topics like sectarian conflicts, terrorism, power conflicts between Shiites and Sunnis if the topics were any damn important for Iranians who mostly hate any Islamic meddling in their lives. Iranians are the victims of Islamism, no matter in which form or side. There is no difference if Sunni corrupt Saudi Sheiks or Shiite criminal Mullahs kill, imprison, torture, devastate our national resources and humiliate our people.


Non-Elected in America?

by I wonder (not verified) on

Non-Elected ruling government? you must be talking about Mullahs in Iran!

As far as everybody knows we have never had any "non-elected" ruling government in America!

Even "Mainstream" Democrats, liberal media and affiliates who made a lot of noise over the Democrats' candidate not winning in 2000 and again in 2004 had no argument about it and accepted the result of the election one way or the other! Nobody calls it the "non-elected" ruling government.

America is America, the sole superpower of the world, will always have one foot in the ME, is and will always be the closest ally Israel will ever have, no matter who is in the White House! GET OVER IT! if you have a problem with that (and it seems that a lot of posters like you do; all being Iranian immigrants and all with a lot of issues which they carried over from Iran under their belt), go back to Iran! you have a choice!!


You are missing the Big Picture!

by farokh2000 on

For your information, the actions of a Government don't totally reflect the mentality of the poeple living there.

Just because I live in this country doesnot require that I support the criminal actions of the Non-Elected ruling government.

It is the same in Iran. Most people don't agree or support the criminals in power there but they love their counry and choose to live there for many reasons.

If you and people like you can justify the illegal actions of these criminals, then I feel so sorry and sad for you. You have a ton of blood on your hands and I hope you pay for it at some point in your life.


Who defines terrorism?

by Faribors Maleknasri M.D. (not verified) on

According to youngest History: The greate satan. It`s problem is only that it is not soo greate any more, lays in it`s death bed, snapping for air. As the german FM went to Tehran to invite the Islamic Republic to cooperate with westerns and help them - of course they manage the job - by their war against terrorism iranians wanted first to know how the westerns define terrorism? The answer was: The time is too short to be spent for these unbasical questions. so he could go home. sadam for example was first terrorist and later no terrorist. taliban were, in contrary to sadam, first no terrorists, suddenly they were some. All venezuelans, Iranians at home, Libaneses and Palestines are infected with terrorism virus. The westerns define not only the "terrorism". No. They define the Ethics, the religions, the politically correct and uncorrect statements and - short - just everything. They define the daily life of man kind on th earth. She/He who has questions to their definitions is against them. She/He who is against their definitions, well, that individual is may be allready dead. so is terrorism defind by westerns regarding to their just in Needs most differently. If you are FOR them - it means if you do blindly what they order you to do and you do - so you are no terrorist. because you help them only by their terror actions and that on your own account. If you ask for any kind of explanation so you are against them. It means you are a terrorist. Look up in their Media. You can have a nice time by studying them. Greeting



by I wonder (not verified) on


Why don't you move on back to Iran then to live there with "angels" who are ruling over Iran?

Did anybody twist your arm or put a revolver to your temple to go and live in the U.S.?

I don't understand! a lot of the grumbling, nagging posters in here who happen to be mostly dysfunctional Commies, politically bankrupt leftists, and/or backward Islamists/IR supporters with an agenda, loathe everything about the "decadent" Western world , "American Imperialism", "Neocolonialism" and other BS, yet strangley enough (and I should add quite hypocritically) they all chose to emigrate from Iran (the land of ruling angels) to the "terrorist" West (as they call it), settle down in those countries and become immigrants and permanent residents.

I know all about your civil rights as immigrants and citizens of those countries to complain, but for goodness' gracious' sake, REALIZE that you had A CHOICE, you could have stayed with your angels in Iran or emigrated to somewhere else, like to China, Russia, Venezuela, Bolivia, or some godforsaken place where you would probably feel more at ease with your surroundings. Someplace where their domestic and foreign policies, would be, in layman terms, right up your alley.


The real "terrorist"?

by farokh2000 on

They are right here in Washington D.C.

If the murder of millions of innocent human beings is not the worst kind of terror, I don't know what is.

The Saudies are just the puppets of U.S. at this point anyway. They will do anything for U.S. so that they can be protected by their Bosses and stay in power.



The Real Terrorists

by Naazokbin (not verified) on

Certainly NOT the IRI agents and death squads!


Agha bas konid dige.....

by Irane Azad (not verified) on

agha bayad in basato jam konim dige, baba khafe kardin in irano iraneyo ba in eslam, baba shia ham didim, agha cheghadr bayad sar boride she, cheghadr bayad be dokhtaramon tajavoz beshe, cheghadr bayad sangsar she, cheghadr bayad dastopaye bachehaye iran ghat beshe ke shoma befahmid "pehen" hichvaght boye khob nemide chonke zatesh boye bade, hala shoma beya sonish kon, shiash kon or whatever, they are all the same thing, 1400 sal az in azemato saadaty ke mikhast beyare didim, 1400 sal darin darbareye in saadat va khoshbakhtish bala manbar mirid, agha yekamam dige mohlat bedin ma harf bezanim va ino zire soal bebarim, agha bande chykar daram U.S terrotisto chetory tarif mikone, bande baram in moheme ke in Islame nabe mohamadeye shoma khafe karde, boye taafonesh dige donyaro vardashte, sharafo namoso harchy dashtimo borde, shodim nokaraye ye mosht arab va hey meyaym dige khodemono ba Suadi moghayese mikonim, agha jan boro yekam ketab bekhon bebin in Shia va sonny che balahaee ke sare ma nayvorde, boro shahname bekhon bebin andisheye Irany ghablaz ina chy bode, che farghy mikone kodom terrorist tare.

Ajib mardomany hastim ma vaghean.