Hujjaj deaths due to Saudi incompetence

by Zafar Bangash October, 2015

The Bani Saud have once again shown they are totally incompetent and callous. The horrific deaths of 4,173 pilgrims in Mina on September 24 is proof of their crimes. They should be put on trial for crimes against humanity. The Saudi regime has become synonymous with death and destruction, especially for the hujjaj (pilgrims). Those planning to go for Hajj or Umrah often go mentally prepared for some disaster to strike. While such awareness is part of a Muslim’s belief, this year the traditionally incompetent and callous Saudis surpassed their own pathetic record. It was reflected in the horrific death of some 4,000 pilgrims in Mina on September 24. This is by far the worst disaster to strike the hujjaj in living memory. While the Saudi regime and its apologists have admitted to more than 770 deaths, the real death toll is 4,173, according to Hamad bin Muhammad al-Duweili, Deputy Health Minister of Saudi Arabia, as reported on September 29 although the Saudi regime quickly denied the figure. When the news first emerged, the Saudi regime mentioned a figure of 310 deaths, not 300 or 350. Perhaps the 310 figure was meant to lend authenticity to their claim. Informed observers were convinced this figure would soon be surpassed but nobody had imagined it would reach 4,000, much less exceed it.

Eyewitnesses have narrated the sequence of events. The disaster occurred at 9 am local time. Pilgrims traditionally try to complete the first day of stoning ritual as early as possible to be able to shower and change from the ihram (two pieces of unstitched cloth) that they don for the three days of Hajj, into regular clothes. During the three days in ihram, they cannot shower or change clothes. They set out from Mina to Arafat and spend the day there in supplications and ibadat. Before offering Maghrib salat, they begin the short journey to Muzdalifah to offer Maghrib and Isha salat together and then spend the night there under the open sky. The pilgrims also collect pebbles for the next three days of stoning the devils in Mina. Immediately after Fajr salat, they head back to Mina for the first of the three-days of stoning of the Shayateen (devils). Rush on the first day of stoning the biggest Shaytan is heaviest because every pilgrim is heading for the same ritual. This is also the day that disasters frequently occur. Saudi Health Minister Khaled al-Falih blamed the pilgrims for the tragedy. “If the pilgrims had followed instructions, this type of accident could have been avoided,” he said, without explaining what those instructions were apart from blocking their passage. What happened and why has been pieced together from eyewitness accounts. They reported that two streets leading to the stoning site were blocked off. Saudi policemen closed all the gates except one leading to the stoning site creating a bottleneck. Further, the policemen held their arms creating a human chain further restricting the area for pilgrims to move in the scorching heat (it was 46 degrees centigrade in Mina!). Also, pilgrims were directed into small alleys through which other pilgrims, also directed by Saudi policemen, were coming to the stoning site. The Saudi regime and the police have not explained why the other gates were closed. There have been reports (in the Lebanese daily Al-Diyar, for instance, as well as from Nigerian pilgrims) that Saudi deputy Crown Prince and Defence Minister Prince Mohammad bin Salman’s presence in Mina caused the tragedy. He was travelling with a security detail of some 350 personnel. A video has also emerged of his presence there just prior to the stampede. Whenever a Saudi ‘royal’ appears anywhere, the surrounding streets are immediately blocked off. The policemen do not give any reason why they are blocking the streets nor do they bother to inform pilgrims further back not to keep moving toward the bottleneck. Pilgrims remain in the dark about what is happening. While the Saudi regime called the story of blocking streets for ibn Salman as “inaccurate”, it did not deny his presence in Mina. Further, it is customary for the king to receive ‘dignitaries’ in Mina [Hajj is supposed to obliterate all distinctions of class or status yet the Bani Saud reinforce it by their antics]. Whenever any ‘dignitaries’ are moved through Mina, traffic is blocked for them. This naturally causes problems for pilgrims because they cannot move to their intended destination. Muhammad bin Salman has become a symbol of disaster for the Saudis as well as pilgrims. It is under his command as defence minister that the Saudi regime has continued its murderous assault on Yemen even in the sacred months—Dhul Qa‘adah and Dhul Hijjah and the attacks are likely to continue in Muharram. Even the mushriks of Makkah of the Prophet’s (saws) time had more regard for the sacred months but not the uncouth Bedouins from Najd. This year’s Hajj has been an unmitigated disaster from the beginning. It started with the crane disaster in al-Masjid al-Haram, the most sacred site in Islam, on September 11 when a huge construction crane collapsed killing 115 people and injuring 398 others. This was followed on September 17 by a fire in a 1,500-room hotel in Aziziya where mercifully no pilgrims died but several suffered burns and other injuries. This was followed by the largest disaster in living memory of Hajj pilgrims: more than 4,000 pilgrims dead and hundreds injured. Several hundred, perhaps a thousand are still missing and unaccounted for including hundreds of Iranian diplomats. The Saudis have refused to provide any information about them leading Dr Ali Akbar Velayati, advisor on foreign affairs to the Rahbar, Imam Seyyed Ali Khamenei, to call the Mina deaths “suspicious.”

For several years now, the Saudi regime has embarked on a furious construction binge in the name of “providing better facilities” for hujjaj. What they mean by better services in unclear but if the disasters are anything go by, the hujjaj would be better off without such “services”. The Masjid al Haram in Makkah resembles a huge construction site these days. It will remain this way for the foreseeable future under the Najdi Bedouins that have embarked on a 30-year construction spree (more like demolition derby) that will allow nothing to stand in its way: mountains or historical sites dating back to the early days of Islam are being dynamited or bulldozed. The Najdi Bedouins consider nothing sacred except their own primitive artefacts. There are giant cranes everywhere, their long arms hanging over the Haram courtyard like the scaffolding of a hangman’s noose. And it was one of these cranes that brought death to more than 100 pilgrims inside the Haram on September 11. The crane tipped over and collapsed inside the Haram crushing the pilgrims to death. The most sacred space on earth was splattered with blood, an act of supreme sacrilege. The regime’s official explanation was that there were strong winds and the contractor, the Bin Laden Group (does that ring a bell?) did not adhere to proper operating procedures. Who is responsible for their supervision? The regime has ordered members of the group not to leave the kingdom until an inquiry is completed. Its other projects have also been suspended.

The regime has said one million riyals ($270,000) compensation would be paid to each dead victim’s family and half that amount to the injured. Is that enough compensation; more importantly, could these deaths have been avoided? The Saudi regime would say, as they have done in the past over such tragedies, it is God’s Will. But what about those that make decisions about the kind of work that has been undertaken and the giant cranes that assault the spiritual ambience of the Haram? The decision to expand the Haram was made in 2008. It is a $200 billion project that would span 30 years. Yet even such lavish outlays would not alleviate the problem of pilgrim congestion because the entire approach is flawed. Even non-Muslim architects working on the project have pointed this out without visiting Makkah or Madinah. Anyone with even limited understanding of crowd management would point out that the first requirement is to have open space for people to be able to move. Building huge structures, as the Saudis have done all around the Haram and in Mina, only add to the problem. The steel, concrete and glass structures being built around the Haram consist of five- or even seven-star hotels, huge shopping plazas where western gadgets, jewellery, fast food and other junk items are sold. These structures are owned by members of the ruling family. They did not purchase the land from the original owners; they simply confiscated it. Further, these structures are not being built with their money. The ever-obliging court ulama have issued fatwas—what else is new—that they can take money from the Bait al Maal because they are providing services to the pilgrims! This is grand larceny compounded by the fact that rich pilgrims are gouged by attracting them to stay in these over-priced hotels. The idea being promoted is not to have a spiritual experience but to indulge in the worst kind of materialism and showmanship. The purpose of Hajj is to shun materialism and obliterate class differences but the Saudis are pushing Muslims in the opposite direction. The theft of land and resources is one dimension of the problem. More serious is the fact that historical monuments are or have been wiped out. This is a loss that can never be recovered.

The house of the Prophet’s beloved wife Khadijah (ra) in Makkah has been razed and replaced with public toilets. How can the Najdi Bedouins get away with such disrespect and why do the Muslims remain silent? Dar al Arqam at the foot of Mount Safa, where the Prophet (saws) taught his companions for 12 years, has been treated with a little less indignity; it has been levelled and replaced with the Hilton Hotel. Nearly 95 per cent of Makkah’s 1,000-year-old buildings have been destroyed during the past 20 years, according to the Gulf Institute in Washington DC. The Najdi Bedouins’ vandalism destroying Islamic heritage sites is unparalleled. Unfortunately most Muslims have paid scant attention to such destruction. The vast majority have remained ignorant of this fact as well as their significance. Those Muslims that have some awareness have either been silenced by buying them off or the more vocal ones have been marginalized. Inside the Arabian Peninsula, they are thrown in jail; outside, the Najdi Bedouins pay huge sums to buy media outlets or their loyalty so that they would not raise such issues. Facts, however, are stubborn things. Such information is seeping out. The Independent of London has been particularly good about it. There are also occasional articles in other newspapers such as the New York Times. This needs to be highlighted more frequently in order to mobilize global opinion against such destructive practices. Once destroyed, Islamic heritage sites cannot be replaced. Muslims that have had an opportunity to perform Hajj—and it is becoming increasingly difficult because of over-pricing as well as the Saudis’ imposition of a quota system completely contrary to the teachings of the Qur’an—have experienced other problems. Deaths of pilgrims have become a common occurrence. Last month’s deaths in Haram when the crane collapsed as well as the deaths in Mina were not the first and will not be the last. The Najdi Bedouins’ incompetence is compounded by their callousness and absolute bloody-mindedness. The Qur’an categorically states that there should be no lewd speech, wicked conduct or quarrelling during pilgrimage (2:197) yet the Najdi Bedouins have slaughtered hundreds of pilgrims in Makkah during Hajj. On Jul 31, 1987, more than 400 Iranian hujjaj many of them women, were mercilessly gunned down or trampled to death when Saudi soldiers opened fire on them. What was the pilgrims’ crime to deserve such fate? They were participating in the Bara’at min al-mushrikeen march as commanded by Allah in the noble Qur’an (9:03). There have been other horrific events. On January 12, 2006, 346 pilgrims were killed at the foot of the Jamarat Bridge when they came to perform the stoning of the Shaytan rites. More than 1,000 others were injured. The stampede occurred only a few days after 76 hujjaj were killed when the building they were staying in collapsed. Such stampedes are common as evidenced by the fact that two years earlier, another 250 pilgrims were crushed to death. And in February 2011, 145 pilgrims, most of them Pakistani women, were crushed to death at the same site for stone throwing rites. The September 24 deaths have surpassed all these disasters with its death toll of 4,173 and counting. In 1990, there was a similar disaster in a tunnel between Makkah and Mina. More than 1400 pilgrims suffocated inside when the Saudi policemen blocked the exit from the tunnel because some prince and his entourage were passing by. In the 25-year period, it seems nothing has changed. As part of their explanation about the Mina disaster, the Saudi regime also indulged in racism. Yes, the Najdi Bedouins are quite racist. They accused the African pilgrims of not following “instructions”. The regime’s spokesmen have not explained what instructions were issued and how they failed to abide by them. Eyewitnesses have said they were forced into narrow congested alleys. There was movement in both directions. Surely, the pilgrims did not choose to go into those alleys to be suffocated; they were ordered to go in there. Again, the regime has not explained why the gates were closed and why pilgrims were forced into the alleys. Eyewitness accounts lend credence to reports of the arrival of Muhammad bin Salman in Mina. This would account for the gates’ closure and indeed closure of several nearby streets so that ‘his royal highness’ could pass without hindrance. This is typical of Saudi behaviour. Even when the disaster struck, it took more than two hours for rescue teams to arrive. The few Saudi policemen with protruding bellies just stood there, looking at the carnage without lifting a finger to help the injured. Other pilgrims helped those that were injured and gave them water to drink.

There was only a small contingent of rescue workers that came and instead of helping the injured to save their lives, they started picking up the dead bodies. This reflects their complete lack of management and rescue skills. The standard operating procedure after any accident, such as a road accident, is to tend to the injured and leave the dead alone. The dead cannot be helped but if the injured do not get timely help, they may also die. This is precisely what happened in Mina: the Saudi rescue teams busied themselves with picking up bodies of the dead. The aftermath of the disaster has been marred by equally callous behaviour of the Saudis. Dead bodies were dumped into trucks as if they were garbage. Little effort was made to ensure proper name tags on bodies for easy identification later. Egyptian pilgrims have confirmed that the Saudi policemen insultingly demanded of them to go and identify some bodies to determine whether they were Egyptians. People looking for loved ones or friends were provided little help. The regime set up a telephone helpline but those that called have reported that it was a waste of time. They got little or no information. Pilgrims made the rounds of hospitals and the morgue outside Mina in search of loved one but were given no information. Even Muslim countries’ consular officials found the Saudis quite unhelpful. As a consequence of the latest disaster to strike the pilgrims, there are renewed calls for taking the management of Hajj affairs from the hands of the Saudi regime. These should be administered by a committee of competent ulama from different Muslim countries, as suggested by Hizbullah Secretary General Shaykh Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah. The Rahbar, Imam Seyyed Ali Khamenei of Iran declared three days of mourning and said the Saudi regime must accept full responsibility for the latest disaster. He also demanded that the Saudi regime should offer an apology for its failure to protect the pilgrims.

Sayyed Nasrallah to Saudi Invaders: Yemeni People will Triumph, You’ll be Defeated

Marwa Haidar Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah lashed out at Saudi Arabia over its war on Yemen, stressing that the failure of Riyadh’s foreign policy is the real reason behind the Kingdom’s attack against its neighbor. Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan NasrallahIn a televised speech aired on al-Manar TV, Sayyed Nasrallah called on Saudi Arabia to halt its military attack on Yemen, saying there’s still a chance for the Kingdom to change its mind over the assault. In this context, the Lebanese resistance leader stressed that the only solution for the Yemeni crisis is political, “or else the invaders will be defeated.” Meanwhile, his eminence said that the problem in Yemen is not because Saudi Arabia wants to defend a government or a president; it is rather because Saudi Arabia has lost its influence in Yemen. “If the aim of the war on Yemen is to save the Yemeni people, then why did Saudi Arabia abandon the Palestinian people for long decades?” Sayyed Nasrallah meanwhile said that the latest developments in Yemen prove “that Arab states have never considered Israel an enemy.” “Saudi Arabia has opposed the revolution which had overthrown Hosni Mubarak. Why didn’t they form a coalition to strike Egypt?” “Baseless Pretext” Hezbollah leader meanwhile elaborated the pretexts used by the Saudi Arabia to justify it war on Yemen, saying they are "baseless" pretexts. “Pretext that Yemen represents a threat to Gulf states is baseless,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, adding that “one of the most big lies Saudi Arabia has been propagating is that Iran is occupying Yemen.” The major mentality of Saudi Arabia is that it does not recognize the rights of the peoples of the region, his eminence said.

Failed Policy “Where are the achievements of Saudi Arabia’s foreign policy since 30 years ago?” Sayyed Nasrallah wondered, stressing that the failure of Riyadh’s policy “is prompting the people of the region to resort to Iran.” Sayyed Nasrallah furthermore accused the Saudi Arabia of being inciting the Iraqi Dictator, Saddam Hussein to wage the war against Iran in the last century. He added that Riyadh has been behind the terrorist crimes committed by the Takfiri suicide bombers in Iraq and Syria. “What did you do for Iraq? You had funded the war waged by Saddam Hussein against Iran. You supported Saddam Hussein as he was committing genocide against Iraqi people. You had also supported George Bush in his war on Iraq. And when the Iraqi people resisted the US occupation you had supported al-Qaeda-linked groups and Takfiri militants, and ISIL is your latest crime.” “The Saudi intelligence was sending the booby-trapped cars and funding the suicide attacks on the Iraqi cities. You have sent the Takfiri monsters to Syria not to save the Syrian people, but to subdue Syria. However Syria will remain free and independent,” Sayyed Nasrallah said referring to Saudi Arabia. Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that it’s the Yemeni people's right to defend their country against the Saudi airstrikes. The invaders have been defeated throughout history, Sayyed Nasrallah said, noting that the airstrikes alone don’t determine the looser and the winner of a battle, and that there is still the ground battle which has the final word. Dialogue, STL, Presidential Vote On the other hand, Hezbollah S.G. stressed that the dialogue between the resistance party and the Future movement is still going on, noting that the move is a national interest. “We will go on with the dialogue with Future movement since it is considered a national interest.” Concerning the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, which is tasked with probing the 2005 assassination of former Premier Rafiq Hariri, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that all its trials and rules do not concern Hezbollah. “We are not concerned with all events related to the STL, and what was said during its sessions has no legal value.” Responding to claims that Iran is hindering the preidnetial elections in Lebanon, Sayyed Nasrallah said: “Iran has not interfered in the presidential elections, and will not do so. Tehran is not responsible for the current deadlock.” His eminence however, stressed that Saudi Arabia is hindering the presidential vote. “Saudi FM, Saud al-Faisal, he who is vetoing the election of the candidate who has the majority within the Christians in Lebanon.”

You’re 36, you’re beautiful, and you’re mine!

by Abu Dharr February, 2015 The Islamic revolution in Iran turns 36 this month. To survive in a cruel world dominated by greedy barons and vultures is a remarkable achievement. Islamic revolutions don’t come easy. Islamic revolutions are not the products of political negotiations. And Islamic revolutions are not cheap. This basic understanding has escaped the aging leaders of Islamic movements in Arab and non-Arab countries. This has been a difficult lesson to learn. What attests to this are the past four to five years of upheavals, internecine warfare, and mass arrests and detentions of Islamic activists from the Islamic sunrise in Indonesia to the Islamic sunset in Morocco and Algeria. Libya is a failing state; Somalia is a failed state; Tunisia is an unfulfilled state; Egypt is a frustrating state; Sudan is a fledgling state; Turkey is a fluctuating state; and Iraq and Syria are factionalized states. We can go on and on describing such states as Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Nigeria just to name a few. But there is one state that stands out; and that state is the Islamic State in Iran. This Islamic resourceful ingenuity has withstood the test of time. Enemies came at it from all directions. There were the internal seculars and sectarians, there were the external Zionists and imperialists; there were wars and assassinations. You can say that the same forces that have been at work against the Islamic movements in Egypt (the deep state), in Tunisia (the secular parties), in Libya (the combination of seculars and sectarians), in Turkey (the military), etc; all these and others were busy hatching their plots and deploying their forces to defeat the Islamic Revolution in Iran and they were all defeated, hands down!

Even the sanctions and economic warfare could not change the course of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. The Islamic Revolution continues to build its infrastructure not giving in to shoddy upper class lifestyles or to the gratification that comes from the contemptible consumerism across the Gulf in Dubai, Doha, Dammam and other markets of materialistic acquisitions and indulgences. Granted, there are individuals and even identities within Islamic Iran who want to “break loose” from the distinct discipline and societal self-restraint that are requisites of an Islamic practical paradigm. The Qur’an and the Prophet (pbuh) teach us that every society shall have its malcontents, mutineers, and munafiqs. The Islamic Revolution in Iran triumphed over the large-scale threats it endured from them with patience and purpose. Not only was the Islamic Revolution successful in affixing Islam to Iran, it went a step further and secured a forward Islamic base in Lebanon. Hizbullah is the natural extension of Islamic Iran onto the borders of occupied Palestine. For anyone who is not afraid to listen to the truth, Hizbullah — the projection of the Islamic Revolution hundreds of miles away — is the only force that has put the fear of God into the Zionist occupation. Zionist civilian and military personnel are scared stiff of Hizbullah and the Islamic resistance. Some of us may need a memory boost: prior to the Islamic Revolution and Hizbullah, the Arabian regimes and their client, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), were flourishing failures who limped from one setback and defeat to another. Then came the no-nonsense Islamic combatants, hailing from a history that understands martyrdom and jihad to show the cowards of Zion midday stars and nocturnal nightmares.

When the Arabian rulers were sleeping at the wheel, these re-embodiments of the sacrifices of Badr and Uhud, Siffin and Karbala’ engaged and gripped the Zionists hiding behind their technological military with a fierce and uncompromising military confrontation that eventually kicked the Israelis out of Lebanon (in 2000), and sapped their morale and arrogance in the heroic defense of Lebanon (in 2006). Imam Khomeini (may he be engulfed in His mercy) as is Imam Khamenei would be proud of these Muhammadi-Husayni warriors who have inflicted serious psychological and military blows upon the Zionist felons and Israeli brigands — those who stole the Holy Land. The spirit of the Islamic Revolution lives on in the valiant warriors and fearless fighters of Hizbullah and the Islamic resistance. The Israelis in the past month after their premeditated attack that killed several brave Hizbullahis near Quneitrah, Syria are worried as they for sure remember Sayyid Hasan Nasrullah’s words from last year when he said that the Golan shall become another confrontational front against the brutal Zionist occupiers. These Hizbullahi personnel were not at the front line of confrontation to “shoot the breeze.” They were there — as they previously were in South Lebanon and Ghazzah — to work out a plan that will draw the snobbish Israeli military into a bleeding confrontation. Thanks to the Hizbullahi legacy of shahadah, the self-admiring Israeli military is mired in bewilderment as to how, when, and where the response of Hizbullah will be?! Last summer, the Israelis were confounded when they saw the fighters of Hamas pop up from beneath the ground and open fire on them from behind, and from one side or another. What if Hizbullah fighters were to pop up from their tunnels beneath the Lebanese-Palestinian borders and commence guerrilla warfare in al-Jalil (the Galilee)? The Israeli head-honchos are particularly alarmed and petrified to have killed an Iranian general who was in the company of those Hizbullahis. Little do the Israelis know, but they are — through their meddling in the internal affairs of Syria and Iraq — setting the stage for a massive people’s war against their military occupation of Palestine. Syria as a civil society has been destroyed. Iraq as a civil society has been devastated. There is no sturdy infrastructure left in either Syria or Iraq. Over 60 million Syrians and Iraqis, due to Zionist inspired policies and strategies, no longer have a society to speak of. The Zionist/imperialist strategy is turning into a stratagem. The unintended consequence of turning Syria and Iraq into failed states will rebound in militarizing their populations. Why would the Syrians and Iraqis, after the virtual destruction of their societies, want to rebuild them when the source of all their problems — the Zionists — can and will destroy them all over again. The virtual destruction of Syria and Iraq is the first step toward the liberation of Palestine. We know that behind the scenes, the Arabian regimes are cheering for Israel. They can’t tolerate an Islamic victory over Zionist aggression and occupation. A pathogen dwells deep down inside their inner-self: it is called chronic failure and spasmodic defeat. They make up for their failures and defeats by rank hypocrisy and insipid statements. We address ourselves now to the Arabian officials borne of defeatism and surrender: 1. Hizbullah is a godsend, betrothed to an Ummah that is still feeling its way. 2. The reputation of Hizbullah is excellent, first rate, and exceptional (don’t allocate a media budget in the hundreds of millions of dollars to extinguish the light of Allah – swt). 3. We remind you, as your red-light-district nights may have taken a toll on you, that Hizbullah kicked the rear of the Zionists and their foot-soldiers out of Beirut in 1982. Hizbullah liberated Lebanon from Zionist occupation in 2000 and Hizbullah incapacitated your idol the Zionist offense force in the Summer of 2006. What did you — the night creatures of Riyadh and Dubai — do for the Lebanese when they were occupied? And for the Palestinians when they are still occupied? What are your accomplishments: Camp David? Oslo? Or is it your pleading and begging the Zionists and imperialists to protect you from Islamic Iran? 4. The Islamic Revolution and the Islamic resistance are noble followers of Imam Husayn (a) who fought the tyrant Yazid. Whose side are you on? Since Karbala’ we have endured persecution, discrimination, and all types of innuendo. Even today you officials in Arabia — high on Zionism and imperialism — never tire of accusing us of “bid‘ah,” “dalalah,” and even “kufr”! We have no time for your nonsense. There is an enemy who has occupied al-Quds and the Holy Land. We dare you to stand with us against that enemy. 5. Was it not we, the followers of the Prophet, the supporters of Imam ‘Ali, and the champions of Imam Husayn (a) who channeled missiles to our Palestinian brothers through Sudan into Egypt so that our Sunni brothers in Hamas and Islamic Jihad are able to defend themselves and potentially go on the offensive against the Zionist military muggers and civilian criminals? Where were you when all of this was happening? In the hotspots of southern Spain? The casinos of Europe, or the red-light districts of Bangkok and Singapore? 6. If this “Sunni-Shi‘i” bug is so entrenched in you, then go ahead and initiate your equivalent of Hizbullah who will take on the Zionist occupation. Or are you beholden to the Zionist interest and are incapable of even accommodating the thought? The Islamic Revolution gave us Hizbullah. The Saudi volition gave us takfiris. Hizbullah fights the Zionists; the takfiris fight the Muslims. Go figure. Thirty-six years is enough time for anyone to wake up; wouldn’t you say? “Then, let all compete as [are willing to] compete for things of high account…” (Qur’an 83:26).

Islamic revolution at 36

by Zafar Bangash February, 2015 How the Islamic revolution in Iran has survived for 36 years despite unrelenting aggression from imperialist and Zionist powers is inspirational. It is the commitment of the people of Iran to Islam and the taqwa of its muttaqi leadership. Given so much turmoil in the world, especially in the Muslim East (aka the Middle East), there is one country in the region — Islamic Iran — that stands out as a beacon of light and stability. Despite decades of illegal Western-imposed sanctions that are still in place, external invasion and massive internal sabotage, it is truly remarkable that the Islamic State is not only standing but making good progress. Other countries would have collapsed long ago. What accounts for Iran’s stability and progress? It would be wrong to assume that just because it is endowed with huge oil and gas wealth, it is able to weather the storm. After all, other oil producers — Iraq, Libya, even Syria and Saudi Arabia — are gripped by turmoil. Iraq has been devastated by repeated invasions and sanctions. Islamic Iran, too, has been subjected to this kind of aggression, ironically even from Iraq, yet it stands strong. Libya is completely broken; there is no government to talk of. Syria is engulfed in a war instigated and financed from abroad. It has been able to withstand this grand conspiracy thanks to the support it has received from Hizbullah (Iran’s ally) and Iran itself. And the artificial Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, despite being described as an “island of stability” by US President Barack Obama (January 28) — Saudis beware, remember Jimmy Carter’s fateful words about declaring the Shah’s regime as an “island of stability” in late 1977 — is teetering on the brink. Its survival is no longer assured and it is not only because it just lost a king or that the new one is also old and suffers from dementia. Its internal contradictions are catching up.

What accounts for Iran’s stability and progress? It can be summed up in one word: Islam. Iran has embarked on the Islamic path to address the needs of its people as well as establish a system in which the downtrodden and the oppressed are treated fairly. True, Islamic Iran is not perfect; there never has been or will be a perfect state but it is far better than almost all others. Unlike Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, Iran’s adherence to Islam is not superficial. There is a genuine commitment to live up to Islamic ideals. It is evident in the simplicity of its leaders, starting with the Rahbar, Imam Seyyed Ali Khamenei, that trickles down all the way to the lowest level. Taqwa (the active self-consciousness of Allah’s (swt) power-presence) flows from the top; when the leaders are muttaqi, they inspire those below to emulate their example. And wealth is not concentrated in the hands of a rapacious few at the top. In every other Muslim society, taqwa exists largely among the poor, downtrodden masses (or whatever their understanding of it) but it does not spread to those at the top. Instead, there is concentration of wealth in their hands at the top. This creates resentment and, therefore, instability in society. It is not surprising that few Muslim societies have any stability; Turkey and Malaysia can be cited as exceptions but in a limited sense.

Two other remarkable aspects of Islamic Iran are its total independence from foreign influence or interference, and no external debt. Measured on any scale, these are absolutely outstanding achievements. Western predatory powers do not tolerate any country exercising independent judgment; they use their massive military muscle to beat the recalcitrant country back into line. They have tried this with Islamic Iran as well for nearly four decades but have failed miserably. Similarly, by not being part of the international financial system — Iran is not a member of the Bank of International Settlements, an institution dominated by international banksters and thieves — it has skillfully avoided the capitalist financial fraud perpetrated regularly to impoverish others while accumulating wealth in the hands of the few. Only adherence to true Islamic principles enables people to withstand such pressure. Iran is the embodiment of such values and a model for other Muslims to emulate, if only they can take off their sectarian blinkers.

Saudi regime’s hatred of Islamic movements

by Zafar Bangash

September, 2014 While claiming to be carrying the banner of ‘Sunni’ Islam, the Saudi regime has visceral hatred for any genuine expression of Islam. We examine why. What explains the Saudi regime’s visceral hatred of Islamic movements struggling to establish fairness and justice in society based on Islamic principles? The question is especially pertinent in view of the fact that successive Saudi rulers have arrogated to themselves the title of Khadim al-Haramayn (Servant of the Two Holy Cities). By so doing, they claim special status among Muslims. In their innocence, many Muslims have unfortunately fallen for this gimmick. Israel’s barbaric assault on tiny Gaza launched officially on July 8 (it had started on July 1), however, has exposed more than the ugly faces of Zionism and US imperialism. It has also laid bare the criminal nature of a number of Arabian regimes. Leading this pack of villains are the tribal regime in Saudi Arabia and the military dictatorship in Egypt. Both have made their position clear in word and deed as staunch enemies of Islamic movements globally and therefore, of Islam itself. In the past, these rulers resorted to rhetorical volleys against Zionist aggression in order to camouflage their impotence and complicity in such crimes. Now even that pretence has been abandoned as both regimes and their putative allies among the tribal sheikhdoms and emirates have openly sided with the Zionists. Israeli officials have publicly admitted that Arabian regimes have told them to “finish the job” in Gaza — meaning, eliminate the Islamic resistance movements Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Such messages have not been communicated secretly: the Saudis and Egyptians are quite open about them. In an interview published in the London-based al-Sharq al-Awsat (July 27), the former Saudi intelligence chief Turki bin Faisal (he owns the paper!) said Hamas was responsible for “the crimes Israel has committed in the Gaza Strip following its bad decisions in the past, and the haughtiness it shows by firing useless rockets at Israel, which contribute nothing to the Palestinian interest. The Hamas rockets pose no threat to the Israeli occupation, even when they reach Tel Aviv.” He offered no solution to the ongoing Zionist occupation of Palestine and onslaught on Gaza but went on to castigate Turkey and Qatar for their mediation efforts because they undermined Egypt’s “leadership role” in the Arabian world. What precisely is this Egyptian “leadership role”? Under the heels of a military dictator who was awarded the highest Saudi medal, the King ‘Abd al- ‘Aziz Necklace, on August 10, General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has been exerting pressure on Hamas and the Palestinians to accept a cease-fire with Israel without addressing the underlying causes of Palestinian anger: the tight siege of Gaza that is strangling its 1.8 million inhabitants to death. The Sisi dictatorship has not only refused to open the Rafah border crossing with Gaza even for injured Palestinians to seek medical help but also destroyed the tunnels through which the Palestinians get much needed supplies. For his services to the Zionists, the Sisi regime has earned the title of Israel’s “most friendly neighbor.” Saudi King Abdullah has been no less nasty with the Palestinians. In a message delivered on Saudi television on August 1, he blamed “terrorist groups” bringing a bad name to Islam. Of course he also referred to the “terrorist regime” without once mentioning Israel by name. One wonders what disrepute has Hamas, Islamic Jihad or Hizbullah brought to Islam? One can cite many examples of the Saudi ruling family bringing disrepute to Islam. For instance, it is financing the terrorists in Syria and Iraq that are slitting people’s throats and stoning women to death in public, allegedly for committing adultery without meeting even the minimum requirements before inflicting such punishment. Besides, such punishment cannot be meted out by hoodlums brandishing Kalashnikovs. There are other examples that prove the Saudi regime’s anti-Islamic practices. There is no freedom for people in the Kingdom when Islam grants such freedom to everyone; women are oppressed and not even allowed to drive cars. There is massive corruption in the Kingdom; the thieving “royals” are rotten to the core and indulge in numerous vices — gambling, adultery, drinking etc. — all prohibited in Islam and for which there is severe punishment. While the Saudi regime has spent billions financing the terrorist mercenaries in Syria and Iraq that incidentally have not lifted a finger against the Zionist criminals murdering innocent Palestinians in Gaza, the king announced a donation of a mere $30 million to the Palestinian Health Ministry to help the people of Gaza. The ministry is controlled by the Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas and dominated by Zionist and imperialist stooges. The people of Gaza are not likely to see a penny of this money once it gets into the grubby hands of the PA opportunists. In any case, $30 million is peanuts for what is needed in Gaza. The Saudi “royals” drop more than this in tips in one night when they visit the brothels of Europe! The Saudis’ hate-filled language against Hamas is identical to that of the foul-mouthed Zionists. Israeli Knesset’s deputy speaker Moshe Feiglin has called for the “annihilation” of the Palestinians in Gaza. A member of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s neo-Nazi Likud Party, Feiglin wrote on his Facebook page on August 2 to re-occupy the entire Gaza Strip. He also called for expelling all the residents of Gaza and for putting them in concentration camps in the Negev desert before shipping them across the world. To achieve this, he said water and electricity should be shut off to the Palestinians to force them to leave their homes. He called for their “extermination,” the precise word used on his Facebook page. Even Saudi court ‘ulama have been pressed into service against the Palestinians and their supporters. They are always ready to issue whatever “fatwa” the regime wants. The latest “fatwa” of the Grand Mufti of the Kingdom, Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Aal al-Shaykh denounced marches in support of the brutalized people of Gaza as “useless” and “demagogic.” The grand mufti who is blind, is the President for Scientific Researches and Fatwas. Denouncing marches in support of the Palestinians in Gaza is necessitated by the Saudi regime’s fear of its own people. If they are allowed to march in support of Gaza, people are bound to raise questions about their own lack of freedoms. After all, there are more than 30,000 political prisoners in the Kingdom. Does the Saudi Grand Mufti’s fatwa have any basis in the Qur’an or the Sunnah of the noble Messenger of Allah (pbuh)? The noble Qur’an says, “And how could you refuse to struggle in the cause of Allah and of the utterly helpless men and women and children who are crying, “O our Sustainer! Lead us forth [to freedom] out of this land whose people are oppressors and raise for us, out of Your grace, a protector, and raise for us, out of Your grace, one who will bring us support!” (4:75). Let us also consider an episode from early Islamic history when Muslims in Makkah were persecuted because they were weak. Abu Jahl, a particularly nasty member of the Makkan elite, was torturing two early Muslims — Sumayya and her husband Yasir. While the noble Messenger (pbuh) could not rescue them, he did not abandon them either. Every day the noble Messenger (pbuh) would come out and stand at a distance expressing solidarity with them. He would say to them, “Isbiru ya aal Yasir! Inna maw‘idakum al-jannah: Have patience, O family of Yasir; verily, your reward is Paradise! The two were tortured to death becoming the first martyrs of Islam. If the noble Messenger (pbuh) expressed solidarity with the oppressed Muslims in early Islamic history even when he was unable to save them from torture and death, how can the paid preachers of Saudi Arabia denounce solidarity marches for the oppressed Palestinians in Gaza? But what do the Saudis propose to do about the unending crisis in Palestine? Why, peace with Israel, of course. Prince Turki bin Faisal lamented in his al-Sharq al-Awsat interview that Hamas’ resistance to Zionist crimes was undermining the “Arab Peace Plan” put forward by the Saudi regime as far back as 1982 and different versions of it have circulated ever since. The Saudi author, Mohammed Aal Shaykh wrote a recent piece in the regime’s mouthpiece, al-Arabiya headlined “Peace with Israel is the solution.” The problem with this proposal is that the Zionists are not prepared to make peace with the Palestinians. Even the Americans who underwrite all of Israel’s expenses have realized this but the Saudis seem to be oblivious. Are they really oblivious of Zionist intentions or are they just plain wicked and against any expression of true Islam? The Saudi regime conspired with the Egyptian military to overthrow the first democratically elected government in the country’s history. The Ikhwan-backed government of President Mohamed Mursi was overthrown in July 2013 and thousands of their supporters were mercilessly gunned down in Rabi‘a al-‘Adawiya Square and al-Nahda Square in the suburbs of Cairo in August 2013. Immediately after the coup, the Saudi ruler congratulated the military for “saving” Egypt and delivered $5 billion in bakhshish. Another $20 billion followed after it carried out the bloodbath. Compare these vast sums to the puny amount promised for Gaza’s brutalized people where more than 2,000 civilians have been murdered by the Zionist regime and virtually the entire infrastructure of the tiny enclave has been destroyed including houses, schools, hospitals, masjids and even the sole power plant. We must, therefore, ask: what is the reason for the Saudi regime’s visceral hatred of Islamic movements and any genuine expression of Islam outside the archaic understanding it peddles globally? If its opposition to Islamic Iran and Hizbullah is based on the fact that they are Shi‘i, why does the Saudi regime hate the Ikhwan in Egypt and Hamas in Palestine who are both Sunnis? Islamic Iran exposed the Saudi regime’s pretensions of being Islamic. After all, anyone claiming to represent Islam or having policy based on Islamic principles must live up to those principles by helping the oppressed Muslims everywhere. Prior to the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Saudi and Egyptian regimes, and indeed all regimes in the Muslim East, had no problem with the US-Zionist backed regime of the Shah even though he was also Shi‘i. The Shah posed no threat to the Saudis’ “Islamic” pretensions; only Islamic Iran does. Similarly, Hizbullah and by extension, Islamic Iran, exposed the fraudulent claims of the Saudis and other Arabian regimes to helping the Palestinians and standing up to Zionist aggression. All these regimes are now openly calling for peace with (read, surrender to) Israel. As far as the Ikhwan in Egypt and Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Palestine are concerned, the Saudis see in them rivals to the claim of carrying the mantle of “Sunni” Islam. The Saudis do not want to share this title with any other group unless of course, it is completely subservient to its version of understanding Islam. As far as the Ikhwan are concerned, many of them spent decades in Saudi Arabia and were instrumental in designing course material for their schools and universities and share many common understandings with them but that is not good enough for the Saudis. The Ikhwan pose a “threat” because they offer an alternative model to that of the Saudis, hence the Saudi regime’s tight embrace of the brutes in uniform in Egypt that perpetrated a bloodbath against the Ikhwan, having thrown tens of thousands of others into prison. The Saudis display no less hatred for Hamas because it refuses to surrender to the Zionists. Hamas has compounded its problem, according to the Saudis, by aligning — horror of horrors — with Islamic Iran and Hizbullah who are both Shi‘i. Some Saudi officials like the Kingdom’s ambassador to Britain, Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf Aal Saud, have tried to put a benign spin on their policy and even claim they are “supporting the Palestinians” but the reality is clearly very different, as David Hearst, editor of Middle East Eye exposed in an article published in Huffington Post on July 28. Hearst did more; he exposed the Saudis’ close links with the Israelis and scoffed at the ambassador’s claim that the Kingdom’s dealings with Israel are “limited to bring about a plan for peace.” Hears wrote, “You are privy to the cables, Mr. Ambassador. Tell us what passed between Prince Bandar and the Mossad director Tamir Pardo at that hotel in Aqaba in November last year [2013]. The Jordanians leaked it to an Israeli newspaper in Eilat. Were Bandar and Pardo: 1. soaking up the winter sun, 2. talking about the Arab Peace Initiative, or 3. plotting how to bomb Iran? “And why are your new friends the Israelis being so loquacious? Why, to take the latest example, did Dan Gillerman, Israeli ambassador to the UN 2003–08, say at the weekend [July 26-27] that ‘representatives from the Gulf states told us to finish the job in Gaza time and again.’ Finish the job? Killing over 1,000 Palestinians [by July 28; the total death toll has exceeded 2,016 as of August 18 when more bodies are pulled out from underneath the rubble], most of them civilian. Is that what you meant when you said, ‘we will never do anything to harm them’?” Despite vicious anti-Hamas propaganda in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, especially in Egypt, the masses do not share the regimes’ view of the resistance movement. Outside of official circles and the small coterie of hangers-on, there is widespread support and sympathy for the resistance movement and the Palestinian people in general. In Egypt, the official media — there are no other media outlets allowed to function — has been relentless in attacking Hamas and the Ikhwan. The latter is seen as the regime’s nemesis and el-Sisi has vowed to eliminate the Ikhwan from Egyptian politics. The movement has been banned after being declared a “terrorist” organization; its assets are frozen, as are those of its leaders. Thousands of its members are languishing in prisons undergoing horrible torture for which the Egyptian regime is notorious; hundreds of others have been sentenced to death. In Saudi Arabia, anti-Hamas propaganda is not so blatant but the regime has made its hatred very clear in statements and actions. Yet the majority of people in Saudi Arabia do not share this view. A poll conducted by Rakeen, the leading pollster in the Kingdom, among a representative sample of 2,000 Saudis found 95% support continuation of the resistance against Zionist aggression despite the regime’s open rejection of it. Similarly, 82% support the firing of rockets into Israel while a mere 14% opposed it (Prince Turki, please note!). Muslims elsewhere, especially in places like Pakistan where there is a naïve view of the Saudi regime, there is need for a realistic assessment of its policies. A Pew Research poll in 2013 found a massive 97% of Pakistanis have a favorable view of Saudi Arabia even while the desert kingdom’s standing everywhere else took a beating. True, both the Pakistani government, especially Nawaz Sharif, and the military are very tight with the Saudis because Saudi rulers give generous bakhshish, such association is costing the Pakistani society dearly. The extremist ideology sweeping the country is the direct result of Saudi financing of Wahhabi ideology in the country. Unless this is checked, and soon, Pakistan itself may not survive the tsunami of hatred that grips much of the country. What Muslims everywhere must understand is that the Saudi regime is a staunch enemy of Islam and Muslims. For decades it peddled the fiction that it was concerned about Muslims; its policies vis-à-vis the Palestinians especially in Gaza hava removed the mask from its face. It is time to support the strugglers for human rights in the Kingdom and demand that the corrupt regime relinquish control of the Haramayn. It is distorting the teachings of Islam and preventing the performance of Hajj according to the commands of Allah (swt) in the Qur’an and the Sunnah and Sirah of the noble Messenger (pbuh). If committed Muslims were to reclaim the Arabian Peninsula, the Ummah would be well on the way to resolving many of its problems and such heart-wrenching tragedies as those witnessed in Gaza would no longer occur with such regularity.

The Islamic Revolution and the International System

By Sayyed Rasoul Mousavi Today a complex condition rules over the world and it seems difficult to perceive the nature of international conflicts. Some conflicts are domestic, some regional and some others international in which to or more actors are engaged, but there exists a general crisis beyond all these conflicts which relates to the international system as a whole and which is a challenge to determine the boundaries, structure and the rules of the international system replacing the bipolar system There are three approaches to analyze and understand the behavior of international actors (states, international organizations) and global trends (alliances, revolutions and movements): a) to focus on activities of the leaders and decision-makers, b) to focus on thoughts and ideas, and c) to focus on the interactions of the current ruling international system and the environment in which the actors or trends operate. Many studies on the Islamic Revolution and Islamic Republic of Iran have hitherto been conducted focusing on the two first approaches, namely recognitions of the leaders and decision-makers and its ideals and aspirations, leading to authoring of many books and articles. The volume of such topics is so extensive that it can be referred to as political literature of the Islamic Revolution, but it seems that the third approach- focusing on identification of interactions between the Islamic Revolution and international system- has not received its appropriate consideration. To clarify the topic three questions are proposed: a) What is the purpose of the international system? b) How is the Islamic Revolution's approach towards the international system? c) Which is the favorite international system for the Islamic Revolution? To answer the first question, various theoreticians of the International System (IR) have developed different views and theories but it can be said, in general, that when the international system is discussed, two conceptual frameworks are considered. The first argues that the international system, as a mechanical system, possesses properties which follow the general theory of systems, its performance is understandable applying mathematical rules and logic and its nature and performance is perceptible with analyzing the interactions and relations between its internal components. The second which is more emphasized, in contrast, considers the international system as a non-mechanical system composed of a set of states (actors) and trends which, in regular connection with each other, create specific behavior patterns. The general theory of systems may not be applied to this conceptual framework for understanding the international system, but it's necessary to initially identify the objectives of the actors and then assess the capacity for realization and fulfillment of such objectives in the system. The approach mainly emphasizes that the behavior of the actors may not be explained singly with focus on internal factors inclusive of domestic needs and national characteristics, but external environment and the structure of power in the international system play a key role in orientation of the trends and national goals and aspirations of the actors. In simple words, countries have unlimited goals or needs but they can't achieve them all in the international scene. Their desires collides with those of others and so inevitably be modified. To some extent these needs are met depends on the country's power as well as the power of other countries and structure of the established international system. It must be pointed that boundaries, structure and rules are the three main characteristics of any international system; in other words, any specific geographical, cultural and political boundary restricts the international system beyond which there exists no interactions between the constituent political units of the system. Example is the balance of power system of 19th century whose geographical boundaries was limited to the Europe. Second, any international system has a structure which defines how of distribution and hierarchy of power in the system. For example, it can be said that the distribution of power in a bipolar system differs from that of a unipolar or multipolar system. Finally, there are some rules in any system regulating the behavior of the political units, to which any violator is called challenger. In addition, another significant point considering the international system is classification of the international systems. IR theoreticians and experts bear different views in this regard amongst them theories of Morton Kaplan and K. J. Holsty are outstandingly prominent. Without getting into discussion on different classifications, theories and definitions that exist in this regard and by accepting Kaplan's classification as a base, it can be said that there can be defined 6 different forms of international systems: the balance of power system, the loose bipolar system, the tight bipolar system, the universal international system, the hierarchical international system, and the Unit Veto International System. Holsty has also developed a somehow similar classification of systems by focusing on conflicts while Kaplan mainly deals with power. Skipping the definitions and concepts of such classifications, we turn to our second question, "How is the Islamic Revolution's approach towards the international system?” The Islamic Revolution came into existence in a bipolar system, but, highlighting the theme of "Neither East nor West”, defied the governing rules of the system from the very beginning. As against the European balance of power system of the 19th and early 20th centuries, the bipolar system, with its defined characteristics, could impose itself all over the world, dividing it into two main blocs. Although some movements like Non-Aligned Movement were formed within the system, they failed to establish a third pole of power or change the bipolar system or even challenge it. The bipolar system had also succeeded to prevent a third world war while unjustly transforming the war between the Great Powers into the war between the weaker countries on behalf of the Superpowers. When the Islamic Revolution defied the bipolar system introduced it as a violator of the nations' rights and sought the only way to save of the nations in breaking the colonial chains of the United States and Soviet Union. With its "Neither East nor West” slogan, the Islamic Revolution became the harbinger of a new way on which it paid a heavy price, and in which it simultaneously condemned both Superpowers' rule over the world, triumphed to maintain its strategic slogan and independence, and succeeded, as a genuine human revolution, to promulgate the strategic view that the injustice predominant in the bipolar system and the Superpowers' domination over the humanity's fate is the main problem of the today world. With dissolution of the Soviet Union which marked the end of the bipolar system a new condition appeared in the world in which the United States as the survived Superpower attempted to replace it with a unipolar system. It was not something easily acceptable by other actors although the US enjoys such an extensive military, economic power that can easily remove many challenges before it. Some international actors admitted the new unipolar system or at least met it with silence, but some others, proportionate to their power, introduced other alternatives such as multipolar system or multiunipolar system. From all topics discussed in regard to the international system it can be concluded that not all international actors have admitted a US-centric unipolar system, with universal boundaries, to succeed the bipolar system. In contrast, it is widely believed that the current international status quo is transitional in which any actor can partake in determination of the type of the system proportionate to its power. The Islamic Revolution which had challenged the bipolar system could not admit, based on its ideological principles, establishment of a unipolar system which had taken share in injustice of its antecedent, especially that the essence of injustice would remain in the new system imposing the very same discriminatory order on the world with more emphasis. Besides the US-sponsored unipolar system, the Islamic Revolution may not approve the balance of power system, backed by the Britain, and limited multipolar system and admit that a limited number of states, like veto holders within the UN Security Council, determine the destination of the entire world. Given above, the question is that "Which is the favorite international system for the Islamic Revolution?” To answer it should be said that the Islamic Revolution favors a justice-centric system with equal sovereignty for nations and equal rights for human beings. Believing in establishment of justice in international relations, equality of humans' rights and sovereignty right of nations, the Islamic Revolution is feeling for a system which fulfils such aspirations and, so, defying any system which lacks such characteristics, as is the case in the current era. The Islamic Revolution which specifies independence, freedom and national development as the strategic goals of Iran cannot be indifferent to the nature of the international system. Many knowledgeable analysts and IR experts now admit that no country is able to pursue its national interests heedless of the international system, but the system has a decisive role in the countries' achievement of their national interests. Hence, there remains no doubt that independence, freedom and national development of the country is tied up with establishment of a justice-centric international system which rejects imposition of discriminatory rules on the world society and truly defends equal rights and sovereignty of individuals and nations. It is a scientific and professional topic which deserves more consideration by the experts.

Post by Anas Sadhiq.