How Am I Supposed To Feel About Israel vs. Iran? | Ramadan Pause & Reflec

 

No Prophet Lied — So Why Does Trump Lead Some Religious Folk?

Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), his use of negotiations as a stalling tactic while enabling Israeli strikes, and his public lies — such as claiming he would “wait two weeks” before deciding on a military response, only to covertly authorize action — raise not merely political or strategic concerns, but deep moral and theological questions about the very nature of leadership. This concern is amplified by the fact that his base includes many devout Christians who find his bravado motivational and empowering. 

In this piece, I examine the theological implications of his dishonesty through the lens of ʿilm al-kalām (Islamic theology), and his deceit in negotiations with Iran through the lens of classical Islamic law—particularly in the Mālikī tradition.

Prophetic Integrity An Inspiration Prophethood has always held a central place in Islamic theological reflection. Prophets are not followed because of coercion or wealth, but because of their balanced teaching, ethical clarity, and the miracles that support their truth. Their leadership inspires. Of all their qualities, moral integrity—ṣidq (truthfulness)—was considered so foundational that classical theologians listed it among the essential beliefs every Muslim must hold about a prophet. 

This quality was not merely ethical; it was epistemological. The Prophet’s truthfulness is the guarantee of the truth of revelation. As Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī writes:
“If the source of information is corrupt, then what follows is invalid.” (al-Maṭālib al-ʿĀliyah)

Prophetic honesty, then, is not merely a virtue—it is a reflection of the ontological harmony between the Prophet and the Divine Will. His truth mirrors the covenant between him and God. And it was that truth that inspired, and it so clear, that it was logical. Al-Taftāzānī explains in Sharḥ al-ʿAqā’id: 

“If it were possible for a prophet to lie, even once, then belief in revelation would collapse — hence ṣidq is rationally and textually obligatory.”

Treaties & Deceit 
Muslim political theorists extended this principle—though to a lesser degree—to rulers and heads of state. A leader devoid of truthfulness is epistemically unfit: fundamentally unreliable as a source of knowledge, judgment, or legitimate authority. His mirror becomes blurred, reflecting not strength or courage, but weak faith and a severed connection to divine responsibility. As Imām Abū Manṣūr al-Māturīdī taught, divine obligation (taklīf) assumes that those in power speak truthfully. When a ruler severs the bond between language and reality, he collapses the moral framework that makes obedience meaningful. The Muʿtazilī scholar ʿAbd al-Jabbār similarly argued that obedience to a dishonest leader is tantamount to obedience to falsehood—an ethical contradiction and theological impossibility. Shāh Waliyyullāh al-Dihlawī captures this brilliantly in Ḥujjatullāh al-Bāligha:

“The Prophet’s amānah was not just personal but institutional, and imāms who come after must reflect it in justice, restraint, mercy, and dedication to the sharīʿah.”

Shari’ah & Sidq
This is not merely a theological matter. Classical Islamic law, especially within the Mālikī school, explicitly condemns ghadr (treachery)—even in war, and especially in the context of treaties. Al-Dardīr writes in al-Sharḥ al-Kabīr:

“Treachery is not permitted — even with disbelievers.” — 2/196
And more directly:

“Fulfilling the treaty is obligatory. If the Imām fears treachery from the enemy, he may not break the treaty until he openly nullifies it [on equal terms].” — 2/196

Breaking a treaty under the pretense of diplomacy, using negotiations to buy time for military aggression, or lying to the public while secretly escalating conflict—these are all classified as prohibited treachery in Islamic law. From this perspective, Trump’s conduct is not only a breach of political integrity, but a moral betrayal and legal transgression. In Islam, truth is not optional in leadership. Without it, both revelation and governance lose their claim to legitimacy. Sad, his most passionate supporters claim to do so in name of faith and integrity. 

As we move forward in an increasingly unstable world, being known as a nation whose leaders lie will only further erode the trust required to heal a fractured global order. Trumping others is not the way of the Prophets. It is the opposite.
imam Suhaib Webb,
Ella Collins Institute

PROF. SEYED MOHAMMAD MARANDI ON IRAN-ISRAEL WAR TENSIONS AND COLLAPSING US MIDDLE EAST SUPREMACY

 

 Seyed Mohammad Marandi, Professor of English Literature and Orientalism at the University of Tehran and advisor to Iran's nuclear negotiations team (https://x.com/s_m_marandi) joins to discuss the true motives of Iran as geopolitical tensions reach an all-time high amid the most brutal Israeli-US war in a generation. 

Why Iran supports Palestine, with Ali Abunimah and Mohammad Marandi

 

There are few people who can offer a more insightful analysis of Iran’s policies and outlook than Mohammad Marandi, a professor of English literature and Orientalism at the University of Tehran.

Professor Marandi joined Ali Abunimah on The Electronic Intifada Podcast for an extended discussion of recent developments in Palestine and the broader strategic situation in the region as what has come to be known as the axis of resistance – comprising Iran and allies in Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria and Iraq – consolidate their front against US-backed Israeli aggression.

Nobody Did What The Persians Did For Islam - Hamza Yusuf

Looking for love in Iran | Unreported World

The Prophet's Curse: Islam's Ancient Divide Fuels Middle East Conflicts

In the countries that follow the Muslim faith, the lines between past and present often blur, making it seem as though the past is not over, and certainly not forgiven. Indeed, the past can come terribly alive here, and it can turn terribly deadly, again and again, every day.

When representatives from around the world convened in the Iranian capital of Tehran last Thursday for the start of a Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement, an annual meeting of 120 nations that view themselves as not aligned for or against any major powers, the focus was suddenly on 1,300-year-old battles, murders and power struggles. The host was Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a Shiite. Next to him on the dais was Egypt's new president, Mohammed Morsi, a Sunni.

Morsi began his opening address with a mention of the Prophet Muhammad, but then continued: "May Allah's blessing be upon our masters Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali."

Iranian media immediately took the statement as a provocation. Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were Muhammad's successors after the Prophet's death in 632. Sunni Muslims venerate them as the first caliphs -- but Shiite Muslims consider them usurpers and traitors to the faith, hated figures whose very names should not be spoken. Muhammad's true successor, Shiites say, was Ali, their first imam, who later fought against the other three before being murdered.

Morsi went on to discuss the present situation in Syria, where Bashar Assad is overseeing the massacre of rebels who are mostly Sunni. Assad and his clique belong to the country's Alawite minority, which is more closely aligned with the Shiites. "The bloodshed will not stop without intervention from outside," the Egyptian president declared, saying that Assad's regime had lost all legitimacy. Morsi, a Sunni, made these statements while sitting next to the Shiite Ahmadinejad, who has been providing the Syrian regime with weapons and now fighters, too.

Morsi must know that any country that intervenes in Syria risks ending up at war with Iran, as well. The frontlines of the conflict between Sunnis and Shiites run through many countries in the Middle East, and those who fan the flames in one part of the region may find themselves under fire in another part entirely.

An Ancient Conflict

From Tunisia to Bahrain, the Arab Spring began as a rebellion against despots and their rapacious clans. It began with a cry for freedom, justice and prosperity. But, increasingly, these rebellions are being sucked into the maelstrom that is the ancient conflict between these two different camps of Islam, the Sunnis and the Shiites.

It was power that was at stake after Muhammad's death, and it's still at stake today. Like tectonic plates that explode into motion after long periods of apparent calm, there is always friction under the surface between these two groups. In the past, that tension has often burst forth as carnage, for example, in the Iraqi civil war, which began in 2004 and still hasn't really ended. In late July of this year, 27 separate explosions killed 107 people within the space of a few hours. Most of the victims were Shiites, and it's assumed the bombers were Sunnis.

But rarely have so many countries and regimes experienced active tensions at once. There has been far more of this since the rebellions of the Arab Spring began in North Africa, in Yemen, Syria and Bahrain, toppling moribund despots or forcing them into crisis and even open warfare. There are also rumblings in Jordan, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. In Iraq, everyone is afraid of each other, while Iran fears an attack from Israel.

The rebellions all began in a similar way -- people wanted to topple their dictators and bring an end to despotic rule. But these political battles have also fanned new fears along old fronts.

Arab Spring Momentum

When Sunnis in Syria fight their country's Alawite regime, they receive help from Sunnis in Saudi Arabia and Qatar. At the same time, Iran supplies Damascus with money, weapons and, more recently, troops.

When Shiites in Bahrain fight their country's Sunni king, they're applauded by Iran and by Syria's regime. At the same time, Saudi Arabia supports Bahrain's despot.

For years, representatives of Bahrain's Shiite majority, who are treated as second-class citizens, have been demanding more rights from their king. The conflict had been brewing for a long time, but it was the momentum of the other Arab revolutions that brought thousands of Bahrainis out to the streets.

When the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), a consortium consisting primarily of the oil-rich states around the Persian Gulf, met in March 2011, it declared that Libya's Colonel Moammar Gadhafi should resign because he had lost all legitimacy by deploying tanks against his own people. Shortly after, GCC member Saudi Arabia sent tanks into Bahrain to crush the peaceful protests there.

The silence from al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya, the two major satellite news channels operated by the Sunni states of Qatar and Saudi Arabia respectively, is also telling. On some days, these broadcasters provide hourly reports on murders in Syria, yet they give little coverage to the violence in Bahrain.

Syria's state-run media, on the other hand, deplore the harsh treatment of the largely Shiite opposition in Bahrain -- even as Syria's own regime has turned to carpet-bombing entire neighborhoods in which primarily Sunnis live.

Power and Faith

The war that the regime in Damascus is waging against Syria's mostly Sunni rebels is increasingly taking on denominational characteristics, and not just within the country. The struggle is also drawing in external participants belonging to both camps. Soldiers from Lebanon's militant Islamist group Hezbollah, which is Shiite, have come to help the regime, as have elite forces from Iran, while Libyan volunteers have joined the rebels, who also receive significant amounts of money from Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

In Iraq, attacks by Sunni radicals are on the rise once again as the Shiite government forces Sunnis out of positions of power. Sunni terrorists groups in Pakistan murder Shiites, and even a Shiite mosque in Belgium was the target of an arson attack this March that killed the mosque's imam. The presumed attacker, a radical Sunni, declared after his arrest that he had acted out of revenge for Iran's military aid to Syria.

Shiites make up only 10 to 13 percent of the world's 1.4 billion Muslims, but their representation in the states around the Persian Gulf is significantly higher. Shiites account for 90 percent of the population in Iran, 70 percent in Bahrain, over 60 percent in Iraq, 35 percent in Kuwait and around 10 percent in Saudi Arabia.

In the Islamic world, where power and faith have always commingled, political conflicts often become religious ones, turning into a question of power that cuts along one of the region's most important frontlines.

Islam's Curse

It began with a question of power, as well. When the Prophet Muhammad died, he left behind a problem that would become his religion's curse: the question of succession. Unlike Jesus, for example, Muhammad was not only a prophet, but also a military commander. He was both a religious and a political leader, and he left behind a correspondingly large power vacuum. A dispute quickly arose as to whether his legitimate successor should be selected from within the prophet's circle of close associates, or whether it was more important that it be a relative of Muhammad's -- for example, Ali ibn Abu Talib, his cousin and son-in-law. Supporters of this second viewpoint were known as "Shiat Ali," or "followers of Ali," the source of the term "Shiite." Initially, though, the other faction gained the upper hand, and Ali wasn't chosen as caliph until three others -- Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman -- had preceded him. Ali was then murdered in 661.

The initial struggle for power continued for more than two decades until something strange occurred: During the Battle of Kerbala in what is now Iraq, an enemy army killed Ali's son Hussein, and thus his last faithful successor. The struggle was over, and the Shiat Ali had lost.

Yet instead of vanishing into obscurity like so many other minor religious denominations, the Shiites grew stronger. Hussein's downfall became "the big bang that created and set into motion the rapidly expanding cosmos of Shia Islam," says Heinz Halm, an expert on Shia Islam at the University of Tübingen, in Germany. "For Shiites, Kerbala is the pivotal point around which their faith revolves." In other words, it is a faith that grew out of defeat and has defined itself through resistance.

Within Islam, two competing ideas established themselves. There are the Sunnis (named after the Sunnah, the canon of Muhammad's teachings), who see power and faith as one. The Shiites, meanwhile, held little power over the centuries and were left with only the mythos surrounding the hero of their religion, Ali.

An unbroken succession of imams, Ali's successors, continued for the next two centuries. According to legend, the 12th imam disappeared in 874, but did not die. It is believed that this 12th imam will return one day as the enforcer of God's will.

Everlasting Mistrust

But if any legitimate authority on Earth must wait until the return of the 12th imam, what does that mean for real world powers? Nothing good, it turns out, since Shiites' true loyalty is already committed elsewhere.

The result is an everlasting sense of mistrust on the part of Sunni rulers toward their Shiite subjects. The two groups' roles and tensions remained largely the same: Sunni caliphs ruled over Shiite subjects, who were often denied entry into the military or top positions at court.

Then, in the 16th century, the Safavid dynasty came to power in Iran and forced its subjects to adopt Shia Islam. This was the beginning of the rivalry that still smolders today between Shiite Iran and the Arab countries, with their majority Sunni populations. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the Arab world's religious center shifted toward the Arabian Peninsula, where Mecca and other holy sites are located, and where, in 1902, young Ibn Saud took advantage of a religious alliance established by his forefathers to conquer large parts of the peninsula -- an area that became Saudi Arabia, with Ibn Saud as its king.

Here, the particularly narrow-minded Wahhabi branch of Sunni Islam became the state religion, and Shiites from the conquered eastern provinces were condemned as heretics. Then came oil. With each new source discovered, the Saudi kingdom grew to become one of the world's largest energy suppliers, and was then able to put enormous sums of money toward financing Wahhabi preachers around the world.

But Saudi Arabia's enormous oilfields are all located in the east of the country -- where the Shiites live. If the Shiites were to break away from Saudi Arabia, it would spell the end of the country's oil wealth. Yet simply making the Shiites citizens with equal rights would amount to a declaration of war against the country's religious establishment, as well as against large parts of the population, which have been raised in a culture of hate. Saudi Arabia's general population is far more conservative than its 88-year-old monarch Abdullah -- and even he has not yet managed to allow women the right to drive a car.

Declining Western Influence

The same conflict between Sunnis and Shiites also runs through Iraq. In the decades under the ironclad dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, a Sunni, religion in Iraq was a private matter -- not because the Iraqis themselves had decided it should be, but because any show of partisanship amounted to a challenge to the state, and that was a dangerous thing. Even during the eight years of war with Iran that began in 1980, participants on both sides shot at enemies who shared their faith. Many of the Iraqi soldiers were Shiites -- as were most of their Iranian opponents.

Soon after the US Army swept out Saddam's regime over the course of 19 days in 2003, Iraqi Sunnis began fighting the Americans who had forced them out of power. Shiites also fought against the US troops. But more than that, fanatics from both sides began killing each other. Starting in 2004, Baghdad alone was often rocked by multiple attacks a day.

Karl Marx described religion as the opiate of the masses, but religion also serves as a sort of cocaine for those eager to fight, a first-rate means of inciting groups against one another. Iraq remains a divided country to this day, with neighborhoods, local governments and even garbage collection split along denominational lines. Currently, power is in the hands of a Shiite government led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Iraq is ruled by the fear that its Sunni minority could take strength from the coming downfall of Syria's regime and threaten the Iraqi government once again.

The conflict between these religious factions has become so virulent partly because perceived enemy forces from outside the region are growing weaker. The West, and especially the United States, no longer plays such an important role. The occupation of Iraq is over, the US would prefer not to get involved in Syria either and, in general, the Arab revolutions caught the country off guard. When the GCC approved the invasion of Bahrain, it didn't even ask the US, although the Fifth Fleet of the US Navy is stationed there. Saudi Arabia was far more concerned with the possibility that a Shiite takeover in Bahrain, located so close to Saudi Arabia's own Shiite minority, would jeopardize the Saudi rulers' control over oil production.

 

A Dangerous Rebellion

Yet, in a sense, the Sunnis' rise to power in the face of Assad's coming downfall is little more than an adjustment to reflect the demographic situation in Syria, which is home to considerably more Sunnis than Alawites.

Something similar happened in 2003, when the Shiite majority took over power in Iraq at the same time that Hezbollah, also Shiite, was making gains in Lebanon. In 2005, Jordan's King Abdullah II, a Sunni, warned of a "Shiite crescent" that would soon stretch from Baghdad to Tehran. Now the pendulum is swinging back in the opposite direction.

For a time during the revolutions in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, it seemed that the divide between Sunnis and Shiites didn't play a significant role. But things look different in Syria, which is another reason why this is a particularly dangerous rebellion.

There is an apocalyptic prophecy in Islam that some attribute to the Prophet Muhammad. It's only a fragment, the legend of an evil being known as the Sufyani that will one day arrive to sow death and ruin among the faithful. This tradition, supposedly ascribed to Muhammad, says the Sufyani will rise from the depths of the Earth beneath Damascus.

source

The French Morality Police

Since the enforcement of France and Belgium’s bans on face veils (“niqab”), the countries’ policemen have been assigned a singularly difficult task: making sure that Muslim women behave. Police are required to detain and fine Muslim women covering their faces illegally in public. The French police send some of these women to citizenship classes where they can learn the appropriate way to exhibit their spirits of liberté and égalité, whilein Belgium offenders can also be jailed (sans face veils, of course)... As French President Sarkozy stated when promoting the ban, the niqab is “a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement” of women. Recent news articles indicate that, at least in France, the police force is befuddled about how to enforce this ban and ensure that Muslim women are less subservient and debased. Should they approach the veiled Saudi princesses shopping at Louis Vuitton with their security guards? Since that could lead to all kinds of trouble, not to mention antagonize the many Arabian princesses who are lovers of French fashion, perhaps they should instead focus on chasing after veiled housewives in minivans shuttling children to afterschool activities? How should the police handle those rebellious women living in the Muslim ghettos of Paris who cover their faces, particularly if they are carrying about in large numbers? Even more puzzling, how do the police determine if the women are donning the niqab by choice or have been coerced into veiling their faces by their husbands, brothers, or fathers? Being new at the task of apprehending and disciplining unruly Muslim women who refuse to follow the dress code dictated by the government, the French, and even the Belgians, need guidance from the pros. They should reach out to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the members of its Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, also referred to as the muttawas. The muttawas are a highly trained special task force of Saudi men who spend their days stalking Muslim women to make sure that they dress in accordance with the Kingdom’s rules and do not mingle with unrelated members of the opposite sex. There are few people in the world more concerned with ensuring the dignity of Muslim women than the muttawas. Unlike the French security officials feeling uneasy about their new duties, the muttawas have no qualms about personally following, interrogating, and punishing women who dare to dress as they choose. Women in Saudi Arabia, when leaving the house, must carefully tuck all stray hairs into their scarves, and ethnic Saudi women have to make sure their faces are completely concealed. If any of the thousands of muttawas patrolling the streets find these women in violation of the dress code, they often administer a swift tongue-lashing. If the women are particularly rebellious, the muttawas also give them a few good strong whacks with their switch-like canes. Many Saudi women have stories of being caned on the head, shoulder, or back because their hair, ankles, or wrists were showing. The women who prove particularly rebellious and dare to venture out without covering their hair or, even worst, talk back to the muttawas, swiftly find themselves in jail. If the Saudi muttawas cannot provide relevant guidance to the French and Belgians, perhaps they can impose upon the morality police of Iran for assistance. When not chasing after rebellious teenagers out on dates, men wearing effeminate jewelry, and the dog owners in Tehran, the morality police spend their time ensuring that Iranian women are covered up. Like the Saudi muttawas, they have years of experience controlling Muslim women and their errant desires to dress inappropriately. If, in the hundred-degree summer heat, women loosen their head covering or expose their ankles, they, like their Saudi sisters, are subjected to humiliation, fines and arrest by the hands of the morality police. Perhaps, if the French and Belgians fly the morality police from Saudi Arabia and Iran to commence their lessons, they will also learn that these are some of the most misogynistic individuals on earth. They are people who have stripped Muslim women of the basic right to choose how to express their individuality and religiosity, and believe that draconian punitive measures are justified to ensure that women dress and behave only according to the government’s dictates. Surely, their grossly paternalistic viewpoint has no place in a society such as France that prides itself on its ideals of liberté and égalité. If the French and Belgians decide to strictly enforce their bans, and if Italy and Spain carry forward with their own bans as they are currently contemplating, they will only assist fanatics such as the muttawas oppress Muslim women. This, because the muttawas already rely on the assumption that women have no real freedom anywhere in the world, explaining on their website: “There are those who say that we must leave people alone and not interfere in personal matters of virtue from which they refrain, because this conflicts with their individual freedom. [T]here is no such thing as 'personal freedom.' It is a lie. . . Have you found personal freedom in the east of the land or in its west? In Eastern or Western regimes? None whatsoever, neither here nor there.” Muslim women can only hope that the muttawas and their kin are wrong, and that the liberal secular countries of Europe will ultimately reject the notion that it is fair to harass and oppress Muslim women in the same manner they were treated in places like Saudi Araba, Iran, and Afghanistan. Uzma Mariam Ahmed is a Contributing Writer to Altmuslimah.com.

Iranian woman blinded by acid attack pardons assailant as he faces same fate

A woman blinded with acid in Iran has pardoned her attacker, a man who was scheduled to lose his sight in an eye for an eye punishment on Sunday.

Majid Movahedi, 30, had been taken to Tehran's judiciary hospital to be blinded with acid after being rendered unconscious, but Ameneh Bahrami, his victim, spared him at the last minute, Iran's semi-official Isna news agency reported.

Iran's judiciary had given the green light to the administration for the retributive punishment, which would have been the first blinding of a convict in the country, but human rights groups across the world called on Bahrami, who had asked for eye for an eye justice in the court, to pardon him.

Bahrami, who had refused to marry Movahedi, was disfigured and blinded by him when he threw a jar of acid in her face while she was returning home from work in 2004.

"I feel very good. I'm happy that I pardoned him," Isna quoted her as saying. "For seven years I've been trying to pursue retribution and to prove that the punishment for an acid attack is retribution but today I decided to pardon him. This was my right but in future the next victim might not do the same."

On Sunday, Bahrami asked for financial compensation instead of blinding Movahedi, an option she had previously refused to consider.

Speaking to Isna, Abbas Jafari Dolatabadi, prosecutor general of Tehran, confirmed that Bahrami had pardoned Movahedi and described her move as a "courageous act".

Islam's Sharia law allows for qisas (retribution) but it also advises for clemency, especially before and during Ramadan, which starts on Monday in Iran. "Inflict the same life on him that he inflicted on me," she had told the court.

Bahrami said that international focus on the case was a factor she considered in pardoning Movahedi. "The second reason I decided to pardon him was because it seemed like the entire world was waiting to see what will happen," she said.

In a highly publicised dossier in November 2008, a criminal court in Tehran ordered retribution on Movahedi after he admitted throwing acid at Bahrami, and entitled her to blind him with acid.

"He was holding a red container in his hand. He looked into my eyes for a second and threw the contents of the red container into my face," she told the court in 2008.

In reaction to the news, Amnesty International, which had urged Bahrami to pardon Movahedi, called on Iran to review its penal code.

"Majid Movahedi committed a horrendous act which has ruined Ameneh Bahrami's life, and the state has a responsibility to bring him to justice and to ensure that Ameneh Bahrami receives recompense for the damage done to her," said Amnesty International's Middle East and North Africa deputy director, Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui.

"But deliberate blinding inflicted by a medical expert is a cruel punishment which amounts to torture, which is prohibited under international law.

"The Iranian authorities should review the penal code as a matter of urgency to ensure those who cause intentional serious physical harm, like acid attacks, receive an appropriate punishment – but that must never be a penalty which in itself constitutes torture," she added.

Bahrami, who has an electronics degree and worked in a medical engineering company before the attack, moved to Spain with the help of the Iranian government where she has undergone a series of unsuccessful operations.

She briefly recovered half the vision in her right eye in 2007 but an infection blinded her again.

Bahrami has recently published a book in Germany, Eye for an Eye, based on her personal life and her suffering since she was blinded.

source

Gang rapes in Iran cause fear and religious controversy

Comment: Typical of mysogynist patriarchal Iranian authorities blame the victims!

Recent reports of gang rapes in Iran are worrying women and raising questions about social values, reports Mohammad Manzarpour of the BBC Persian Service.

In a religiously conservative town near the city of Isfahan, women at a private party were abducted last month and gang raped at knife point.

One week later, a female university student was attacked and raped by unknown assailants on the heavily-guarded campus in Masshad, a holy city.

In both cases, officials accused the victims of not wearing the hijab or headscarf in the proper fashion and general un-Islamic conduct.

These high-profile cases and the derogatory comments made by Iranian authorities have outraged women's rights groups who have long complained of the increasingly high rate of sexual harassment.

As the stories dominate newspaper headlines, a political and public debate is raging about the reasons for the apparent rise in sexual crimes in the Islamic state and how to prevent and punish them.

Walled garden

It was on the evening of 24 May that two families in the leafy suburbs of Khomeinishahr invited their friends to a private party. In total, 14 people gathered in a walled garden.

According to press reports, it was late when a gang of more than a dozen men armed with long knives entered the garden, locked some men in a room and tied others to trees. Female guests - including one said to have been heavily pregnant - were taken to an adjacent property and raped.

One guest used a hidden mobile phone to call 110, the police emergency hotline. Most of the attackers had fled by the time officers arrived, reports said, but four were later arrested.

In the medium-sized town, word of the rapes spread like wildfire. However they were not covered by the tightly-controlled state press or local media, and no official statements were made for over a week.

With people angered by this silence and fearful about the security of local women, a huge protest was organised outside the courthouse via text messages. Yet the comments then made by state officials were to provoke even greater controversy.

Victims blamed

"Those who were raped were not praiseworthy," said the imam of Khomeinishahr, Musa Salemi, in his Friday sermon.

"Only two out of the 14 were related. They had come to our town to party and provoked the others [the rapists] by their wine drinking and dancing."

His sentiments were echoed in comments made by the town's police commander, Revolutionary Guards Col Hossein Yardoosti.

"I believe the raped women's families are to blame, because if they had proper clothing and if the sound of their music was not so loud, the rapist would not have imagined it as a depraved get-together," he was quoted as saying.

Reports said that he was considering legal action against the rape victims for their behaviour.

The response of the authorities has also been questioned in the university rape case. Fellow students pointed out that the campus is tightly-controlled by security services and suggested that the attack could not have escaped their notice.

As they held a candle-lit vigil to support the rape victim, they made accusations of collusion by guards and a cover-up.

'Dire consequences'

Women's rights groups are now sounding alarm bells.

In an interview with the BBC Persian Service, Shadi Sadr, an Iranian activist and lawyer, warned that officials' judgmental comments, effectively implying that rape is justified if a woman's dress is not deemed modest enough, could have "dire consequences" for society.

Some commentators argue that a recent wave in sexual crimes is caused by extraordinary sexual tensions among the growing youth population, who spend most of their lives separated by gender with little interaction.

The government's political opponents have found other triggers too. They suggest that sexual attacks allegedly perpetrated by security forces in Iran's post-election violence in 2009 may have legitimised such acts for certain segments of the population.

Amid the soul-searching and media frenzy, three men were hanged - two publicly - on 9 June, on separate, non-related rape convictions. The authorities clearly hope this will be a deterrent.

Meanwhile the main suspects sought in the Khomeinishahr and Mashhad cases remain at large.

source

Iran to blind criminal with acid in 'eye for an eye' justice

Comment: The Iranian anthorities are deluded if they think this inhumane sentence will curb attacks on women, such attacks are a result of a patriarchal and unjust society and 'an eye for an eye' will make the world blind.

In a literal application of the sharia law of an eye for an eye, Iran is ready for the first time to blind a man with acid, after he was found guilty of doing the same to a woman who refused to marry him.

Majid Movahedi, 30, is scheduled to be rendered unconscious in Tehran's judiciary hospital at noon on Saturday while Ameneh Bahrami, his victim, drops acid in both his eyes, her lawyer said.

Bahrami who had asked for an eye for an eye retribution in the court, was disfigured and blinded by Movahedi in 2004 when he threw a jar of acid in her face while she was returning home from work. "He was holding a red container in his hand. He looked into my eyes for a second and threw the contents of the red container into my face," she told the court in 2008.

According to Iranian media, Bahrami's lawyer, Ali Sarafi, has said: "A very good sentence has been given and an appropriate method has been adopted so that the convict will be blinded by few drops of acids in eyes after he is rendered unconscious."

In a highly publicised dossier in November 2008, a criminal court in Tehran ordered qisas (retribution) on Movahedi after he admitted throwing acid at Bahrami, and entitled her to blind him with acid. He was also required to pay compensation to the victim. Bahrami refused to accept the "blood money" and told the court: "Inflict the same life on him that he inflicted on me."

Iranian officials have endorsed the the sentence in the hope of halting an increase in the rate of acid attacks. But human rights activists have warned against an "inhumane" sentence.

The British Foreign Office urged Iran to halt the sentence. "The attack on Ameneh Bahrami in 2004 was a horrific crime," a spokesman said. "However, we are deeply concerned by reports that Majid Movahedi's sentence of being blinded by having acid dripped into his eyes may be carried out.

"The FCO calls on the Iranian authorities to commute this inhumane punishment to an appropriate sentence in line with Iran's international obligations and to cease the practice of corporal punishment for crimes."

Iranian media have reported that Movahedi will be blinded in both eyes but Bahrami, in an interview in 2009, said that the man would be blinded only in one eye because "each man is worth two women" under Iranian law.

"The person who did this deserves to go through the same suffering. Only this way will he understand my pain … my intention is to ask for the application of the law not just for revenge but also so that no other woman will have to go through this. It is to set an example," Bahrami was quoted by the Spanish newspaper ABC as saying.

Bahrami, who has an electronics degree and worked in a medical engineering company before the attack, moved to Spain with the help of the Iranian government where she has undergone a series of unsuccessful operations. She briefly recovered half vision in her right eye in 2007 but an infection blinded her again.

Bahrami has recently published a book in Germany, Eye for an Eye, based on her personal life and her suffering since she was blinded.

In recent months, human rights organisations have expressed alarm over the unprecedented increase of capital punishment in Iran, which last year executed more people than any other country apart from China.

source

Women to blame for earthquakes, says Iran cleric

A senior Iranian cleric says women who wear revealing clothing and behave promiscuously are to blame for earthquakes.

Iran is one of the world's most earthquake-prone countries, and the cleric's unusual explanation for why the earth shakes follows a prediction by the president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that a quake is certain to hit Tehran and that many of its 12 million inhabitants should relocate.

"Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which increases earthquakes," Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi was quoted as saying by Iranian media. Women in the Islamic Republic are required by law to cover from head to toe, but many, especially the young, ignore some of the more strict codes and wear tight coats and scarves pulled back that show much of the hair. "What can we do to avoid being buried under the rubble?" Sedighi asked during a prayer sermon last week. "There is no other solution but to take refuge in religion and to adapt our lives to Islam's moral codes." Seismologists have warned for at least two decades that it is likely the sprawling capital will be struck by a catastrophic quake in the near future. Some experts have even suggested Iran should move its capital to a less seismically active location. Tehran straddles scores of fault lines, including one more than 50 miles long, though it has not suffered a major quake since 1830.

In 2003, a powerful earthquake hit the southern city of Bam, killing 31,000 people – about a quarter of that city's population – and destroying its ancient mud-built citadel.

"A divine authority told me to tell the people to make a general repentance. Why? Because calamities threaten us," said Sedighi, Tehran's acting Friday prayer leader. Referring to the violence that followed last June's disputed presidential election, he said: "The political earthquake that occurred was a reaction to some of the actions [that took place]. And now, if a natural earthquake hits Tehran, no one will be able to confront such a calamity but God's power, only God's power ... So let's not disappoint God."

The Iranian government and its security forces have been locked in a bloody battle with a large opposition movement that accuses Ahmadinejad of winning last year's vote by fraud.

Ahmadinejad made his quake prediction two weeks ago but said he could not give an exact date. He acknowledged that he could not order all of Tehran's 12m people to evacuate. "But provisions have to be made ... at least 5 million should leave Tehran so it is less crowded," the president said.

The welfare minister, Sadeq Mahsooli, said prayers and pleas for forgiveness were the best "formulae to repel earthquakes. We cannot invent a system that prevents earthquakes, but God has created this system and that is to avoid sins, to pray, to seek forgiveness, pay alms and self-sacrifice," Mahsooli said.

source

1/4th of the world's population is now Muslim

Islam may be most closely associated with the Middle East, where it emerged in Arabia in the seventh century, but today the region is home to only one in five of the world's Muslims, according to a study of the religion's global distribution.

The world's Muslim population stands at 1.57 billion, meaning that nearly one in four people practise Islam, according to the US Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, which published the survey. This compares to 2.25 billion Christians.

The top five Muslim countries in the world include only one in the Middle East ‑ Egypt ‑ behind Indonesia, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, in that order. Russia, the survey shows, has more Muslims than the populations of Libya and Jordan combined. Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon. China has a bigger Muslim population than Syria.

The work, the largest of its kind, was the result of three years of research examining data from 232 countries and territories.

The reality, as described by Mapping the Global Muslim Population, is that two out of three Muslims are Asians, while the 38 million Muslims in Europe, if treated as a separate group, would be the ninth largest in the world, behind Turkey, with a population of 71 million, and ahead of Algeria, with 34 million.

Pew Forum, in consultation with nearly 50 demographers and social scientists at universities and research centres around the world, analysed about 1,500 sources, including census reports, demographic studies and general population surveys, to arrive at their figures.

The research is the first step in projecting growth trends in the world's Muslim population, and a similar survey is planned by the Pew Forum on the distribution of Christians.

"This whole idea that Muslims are Arabs and Arabs are Muslims is really just obliterated by this report," said Amaney Jamal, an assistant professor of politics at Princeton University.

"There are these countries that we don't think of as Muslim at all, and yet they have very sizeable numbers of Muslims," said Alan Cooperman, associate director of research for the Pew Forum, naming India, Russia and China.

Islam had a huge geographic reach ‑ from the Atlantic coast to central Asia ‑ within a century of the prophet Muhammad's death, but until now its modern global profile was based on rough estimates.

The Pew Forum study depicts the world's second largest religion as complex and nuanced, challenging the notion that its trajectory is defined by a minority of Islamists.

Significantly, one in five of Muslims now lives in a country where they are represented as a religious minority, with three-quarters of that number concentrated in five countries: India (161 million), Ethiopia (28 million), China (22 million), Russia (16 million) and Tanzania (13 million).

The survey also attempted to quantify the relative sizes of the two main branches of Islam - Sunni and Shia - but came up against the difficulty that many national demographers did not distinguish between the two. It ended up suggesting that Shias, concentrated largely in four countries including Iran and Pakistan, probably made up between 10 and 13% of Muslims.

In summary:

• India, a majority-Hindu country, has more Muslims than any country except for Indonesia and Pakistan, and more than twice as many as Egypt.
• China has more Muslims than Syria.
• Germany has more Muslims than Lebanon.

• And Russia has more Muslims than Jordan and Libya put together.

• Nearly two out of three of the world's Muslims are in Asia, stretching from Turkey to Indonesia.

• The Middle East and north Africa, which together are home to about one in five of the world's Muslims, trail a very distant second.

• There are about 1.57 billion Muslims in the world
• One in five of the world's Muslims lives in a country where Muslims are a minority.
• Russia, Albania, Kosovo, those places -- Muslims are an indigenous population
• Roughly nine out of 10 Muslims worldwide are Sunni, and about one in 10 is Shiite

• One in three of the world's Shiite Muslims lives in Iran, which is one of only four countries with a Shiite majority, he said. The others are Iraq, Azerbaijan, and Bahrain.

You can see complete map of the Muslim World here.

Iran: Busy killing its own

Hundreds more people may have died in Iran's post-election unrest than the authorities have admitted, amid allegations that the death toll has been obscured by hiding victims' bodies in secret morgues.

Human rights campaigners say anecdotal evidence suggests the number of demonstrators killed in clashes with government forces after last month's poll was far higher than the official death toll of 20 and may amount to a "massacre".

Suspicions have been fuelled after one woman described seeing corpses piled on top of each other in a refrigeration depot while searching for a missing relative. Another woman was shown pictures of between 50 and 60 people, all said to have died, while searching for her son.

The claims came as Tehran prepares for another day of tension tomorrow when the influential former president Hashemi Rafsanjani addresses Friday prayers at Tehran University. Hardline supporters of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad – who was controversially re-elected in the election on 12 June that opponents say was "stolen" – have threatened to disrupt the event, at which Rafsanjani is expected to speak in support of his ally Mir Hossein Mousavi, the defeated reformist candidate, who will attend the event.

Meanwhile,

It's a long way from Tehran to Zahedan, in Iran's remote south-east, but the hanging of 13 convicted terrorists this week sent out a chilling message about the readiness of the Islamic Republic to act ruthlessly to defend its core interests.

On the face of it, there was no link between the mass execution and last month's disputed presidential election, in which Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won a second term. But these and other recent judicial killings may be designed to intimidate at a time of unprecedented unrest and uncertainty about Iran's future.

The 13 men who mounted the gallows early on Tuesday morning were not supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi, officially defeated by Ahmadinejad, but members of Jundullah (Soldiers of God), a small Sunni rebel group. The worst of its attacks was the suicide bombing of a Shia mosque in May, which killed 25 people in Zahedan, the capital of Sistan-Baluchestan province, which has a Sunni majority.

Jundullah claims to be fighting for the rights of Iran's Baluch minority but is often linked by the regime in Tehran to al-Qaida, and to the west. It has been blamed for drug smuggling, kidnapping and attacks on civilians and revolutionary guards and appears to be based across the border in Pakistani Baluchistan. Iranian media quoted one of the condemned men as "confessing" that the group was trained and financed by "the US and Zionists".

The hangings were to have beenin a public park but in the end took place inside a prison compound. A 14th man, the brother of the group's leader, Abdulmalik Rigi, was given a brief stay of execution - but only to allow him to undergo further questioning.

The charges, in the inimitably stark language of Iranian Islamic justice, included moharebeh - "enmity against God" as well as being "corrupt on earth, killing innocent people and taking hostages while carrying firearms."