Matthew 18 Who Is the Greatest

LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
February 28/2012

Bible Quotation for today/Jesus Warns against the Teachers of the Law
Luke 20/45-47: "As all the people listened to him, Jesus said to his disciples, Be on your guard against the teachers of the Law, who like to walk around in their long robes and love to be greeted with respect in the marketplace; who choose the reserved seats in the synagogues and the best places at feasts; who take advantage of widows and rob them of their homes, and then make a show of saying long prayers! Their punishment will be all the worse!"

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
Arm the Syrian rebels/By Tariq Alhomayed/February 27/12
The unsung heroes of the Syrian uprising/By Zvi Bar'el /Haaretz/February 27/12
What is really happening in Iran/By: Pepe Escobar/February 27/12
Homs and Achrafieh/By: Tony Badran/February 27/12

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for February 27/12
Israeli Defense Official Warns of 45,000 Missiles Accumulated by ‘Hizbullastan’
Russia's Putin: Attack on Iran would be 'truly catastrophic'
Netanyahu: UN report proves Iran's nuclear program advancing 'uninterrupted'
Israel's Netanyahu says Iran to top talks with Obama
Turkey restricts use of airspace by Israeli cargo planes
Israel signs $1.6 billion arms deal with Azerbaijan
Netanyahu: Abbas speech on Jerusalem was 'incitement'
West calls Syrian referendum a 'sham'
Clinton warns of “every possibility” of civil war in Syria
Clinton: Backing Assad 'stains honor' of Syrian soldiers
Top Hamas official: We left Syria due to Assad regime's crackdown
To draw Iran into nuclear talks, Obama avoids ousting Assad
Syria referendum goes ahead amid military onslaught
Lebanon's Foreign Affairs Minister Adnan Mansour : Lebanon will not recognize SNC
Norman Farrell likely to replace STL Prosecutor Bellemare: report
Qabbani slams Israel for Al-Aqsa Mosque clashes
Iran says it seeks to strengthen Lebanese Army
Hundreds march for social justice, secular Lebanon
Syrian activists stage protest in Tripoli
March 14 MP Marwan Hamadeh: Hezbollah appointed new labor minister
Adwan warns against possible “economic meltdown”
Qortbawi: Judicial authority cannot be leaderless
Canadian Statement on today's Syrian “Referendum”
The Jihad against Bengali/By Janet Levy/February 27/12

Arm the Syrian rebels!
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
For the second time I am writing about the need to arm the Syrian rebels. I wrote about this first on the 16th February, and I am repeating it now, because the conditions on the ground in Syria are becoming increasingly tragic with the brutality of the tyrant of Damascus’s forces. The objective of arming the Syrian rebels does not stem from a desire for further violence, but in order for the Syrians to defend themselves and this is a legitimate right. What some people do not seem to be paying attention to, whether in our region or internationally, is that the al-Assad regime is heading towards an inevitable demise, and this is only a matter of time. Yet the cost of the regime falling now will be far less than if it is delayed further, as the longer it takes for decisive action on Syria, the more the Syrians will suffer. There will be more killings, as Syria faces increased chances of entering a state of alarming collapse, bringing the country back decades, even greater than the magnitude of underdevelopment caused by the al-Assad regime, both father and son. Most importantly of all, of course, is that the Syrians’ human suffering will increase, especially as the death toll has been rising ever since the Russian-Chinese UN veto, to the extent that now nearly a hundred Syrians die every day!
Of course, it must be said that there is no hope of any reform in Syria now. It is inconceivable how the Syrians could take part in the constitutional referendum proposed by al-Assad in light of all the killings carried out by the regime’s forces. How can we rely on any political solution when al-Assad has not even put forward one officer to stand trial for the killing of civilians, or even the destruction of mosques?
Therefore, the option of arming the Syrian rebels is the most apt choice today, in accordance with what is happening on the ground in Syria. Arming the rebels will block the road towards prolonging the Syrian’s suffering. It will reduce the chances of the people descending into a state of despair, for which we could not blame the Syrians, even if they were allied with the devil, let alone al-Qaeda [as some allege]. Likewise, arming the rebels now will create more opportunities for the al-Assad regime to fall and reduce the chances of the “Islamization” of the Syrian revolution, or indeed the inevitable post-Assad era. The other point we must note is that arming the rebels will mean that it will no longer be necessary to impose buffer zones with foreign intervention. International intervention becomes more and more inevitable the longer the fall of al-Assad is delayed, and as soon as the Syrian rebels are armed we will find that Syrian cities fall one after the other from the hands of the tyrant. This in turn will create further chances for defections, at military and political levels, a phenomenon that has certainly been delayed by the Russian-Chinese veto, which was a green light for the al-Assad regime to kill the Syrians. Prince Saud al-Faisal was right when he said that those who used this veto bear the moral responsibility for the killing of the Syrians. Therefore, arming the rebels means that we are taking a stand with the Syrian people, in contrast to Iran and Russia who are standing by al-Assad, and arming him against his own people.
Finally, we must remember that what is happening in Syria is a genuine revolution that al-Assad wants to quell with fire and weapons, and therefore there is no other way to deter him except using arms. Therefore, arming the rebels will not prolong the suffering and humiliation of the Syrians, but rather the longer the fall of al-Assad is delayed, the higher the cost will be.

Israeli Defense Official Warns of 45,000 Missiles Accumulated by ‘Hizbullastan’
by Naharnet/Hizbullah has accumulated 45,000 missiles that pose a threat to Israel, a senior defense ministry official has said, claiming that Iran and Syria supplied the missiles to the party through ships, planes and trains. The Israeli defense ministry’s director of policy and political-military affairs, Amos Gilad, told the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai over the weekend that Lebanon's leaders are unaware of these developments, creating a vacuum that has given rise to a new, independent entity he dubbed "Hizbullastan."President Michel Suleiman, Speaker Nabih Berri and Premier Najib Miqati “know nothing about what’s going on in the country in which they are living,” he said. Gilad expressed confidence in the protesters in Syria, saying they will eventually compel President Bashar Assad to stop the violence, which has so far claimed around 7,600 lives, and implement reform. He added that the Jewish state would have signed a peace deal with Syria, “if it weren't for Damascus' cooperation with terror groups.”

March 14 MP Marwan Hamadeh: Hezbollah appointed new labor minister
February 26, 2012 /March 14 MP Marwan Hamadeh said on Sunday that newly appointed Labor Minister Salim Jreissati “was appointed by Hezbollah.”Hamadeh also told Al-Fajr radio station that “Jreissati has always attacked the work of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon [STL],” which is investigating the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. He also said that “Jreissati has defended the criminals” involved in the 2005 assassination.Four Hezbollah members have been indicted by the UN-backed STL in the assassination of Hariri. However, Hezbollah strongly denied the charges and refuses to cooperate with the court. NOW Lebanon

Norman Farrell likely to replace STL Prosecutor Bellemare: report
February 26, 2012/The Daily Star /BEIRUT: Norman Farrell, a Canadian prosecutor, will likely replace Special Tribunal for Lebanon Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare, Al-Arabiya, quoting diplomatic sources, said Sunday. The sources told the Arabic television station that the government of Lebanon had received a letter with two names: Farrell’s to replace Bellemare and that of a Kenyan judge to replace late STL President Antonio Cassese. Quoting a Western diplomat, An-Nahar reported Saturday that Ban had sent a letter to the Lebanese government proposing three people as possible replacements for Bellemare. The appointment of a new prosecutor to replace Bellemare, whose term ends Feb. 29, is a matter for United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Farrell is the deputy prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the U.N. court dealing with war crimes that took place during the conflicts in the Balkans in the 1990’s. He was the senior appeals counsel and head of the Appeals Section in the Office of the Prosecutor for both the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the ICTY. The STL, established in 2007, is tasked with bringing to justice those involved in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005. The court has indicted four members belonging to Hezbollah in the attack. Hezbollah denies any involvement in the case.

Iran says it seeks to strengthen Lebanese Army
February 26, 2012/Daily Star
TEHRAN: Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met with Lebanon's visiting defense minister on Sunday, telling him that Beirut and Tehran should work toward unity to confront the west and Israel, the country's official news agency reported. The visit comes amid an apparent move by Tehran to strengthen its regional ties, as it faces both pressure from the West over its nuclear program and the possible loss of a key ally, Syria's President Bashar Assad. Ahmadinejad told visiting Lebanese Defense Minister Fayez Ghosn to "resist the plots" of "domination-seeking powers," IRNA said. Ghosn is a member of the Christian political party Marada, which is allied with Tehran's main partner in Lebanon, the Shiite Hezbollah movement. Marada and Hezbollah are also closely linked to Syria's embattled President Bashar Assad, who is traditionally a major power-broker in Lebanon but faces an uprising against his rule. "Friendships and brotherhood should be improved," Ahmedinejad said. He claimed Israel would carry "a massacre against all nations of the region" if it could. "Therefore, we should support and stand by each other more than before."Ghosn said "Lebanon will never forget that Iran stood by them in great difficulties." He said Israel would fear Iran's reaction, should it consider moving in a hostile way against any regional country. Israel and Iran consider each other arch-enemies, and tensions have risen dramatically as Tehran pushes ahead with uranium enrichment and other aspects of its nuclear program. Israel and the West say Iran wants to develop weapons, while Tehran says the program is for peaceful purposes. Tehran has blamed the recent assassinations of nuclear scientists on Israel. It also faces the possibility of Israeli airstrikes against its nuclear facilities. Israel says the military option must remain on the table. Israelis say that Iran may retaliate against such a strike through proxy, by pushing Hezbollah to use its arsenal of rockets against the Jewish state. Such an action however risks triggering another Israeli-Lebanese conflict, such as the 2006 border war between Hezbollah and the Jewish state. Ghosn also met Sunday with Iran's defense minister Gen. Ahmad Vahidi. "Strengthening Lebanese army is among strategic policies of Iran," the Iranian minister said. "Lebanon should have a strong army to defend its interest in the region." In return Ghosn said, "Right now there is a complete coordination between army and the resistance," a term often used by Hezbollah to refer to itself. Earlier on Saturday, Gen. Vahidi said that an Israeli attack on Iran will lead to the collapse of the Jewish state. Iran has also recently hosted visits by leaders from the Palestinian militant movement Hamas. Iran has been alarmed by Hamas' outreach to Sunni Arab states in the wake of the Arab Spring uprisings, which have brough Islamists to political prominence and pushed Hamas leaders to relocate from their longtime headquarters in Syria.

2 killed, Hezbollah official injured in accident on Sidon-Beirut highway
February 26, 2012/By Mohammed Zaatari/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Two people were killed and a Hezbollah official was injured mid-day Sunday in an accident on the main road leading to Beirut from the southern city of Sidon. Hanna Ayyash, who had parked her car on the shoulder of the road for repair work, was instantly killed when a Mercedes belonging to Hezbollah official Mahmoud Qomati – carrying license plate number 221122 – slammed into her vehicle. A mechanic, who was working on Ayyash’s car, was also run over by the Mercedes and, according to hospital sources, soon died in intensive care as a result of the extent of his injuries. Medical sources said Qomati, who was driving the vehicle, received head injuries. He was transported in the second vehicle of his two-car convoy to Al-Rasoul Al-Aazam hospital in Beirut. Following the accident, an unidentified four-wheel-drive vehicle returned to the scene to collect a number of weapons and folders left in Qomati’s car.Qomati is the deputy head of Hezbollah’s Political Council.

Lebanon's Foreign Affairs Minister Adnan Mansour : Lebanon will not recognize SNC
February 26, 2012/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: Foreign Affairs Minister Adnan Mansour ruled out over the weekend Lebanon recognizing the Syrian National Council and reiterated that dialogue was the only means of ending the crisis in Syria. “Even if [Arab League] states recognized it, we will not recognize the Syrian National Council or the so-called Syrian National Council,” Mansour, who spoke to Russia Today in an interview Saturday, said. “If we did recognize it, that would mean us departing from the principles that we have followed,” he added. Lebanon has a long-standing policy of dissociating itself from Syrian politics. Mansour also noted that other Arab states had not carried out decisions by the pan-Arab organization. “Even when the Arab League took decisions against Syria, some states said they could not carry out the decisions, saying they had special circumstances and important ties with Syria,” the Lebanese official said. Mansour also warned that the country would be harmed at various levels should the government decide to implement sanctions against its neighbor. “There is a higher interest, in the sense that we will not go along with any sanctions on Syria because this a matter of costs and benefits and we are the ones who will lose out at the security, economic, trade levels and in terms of our special relationship [with Syria],” he said. The Lebanese official also said there had been progress by the Syrian leadership to implement reforms. “Syria has taken positive steps in terms of reforms, political pluralism, amending the constitution, steps taken at the political level,” he said. Mansour said the coming days would also prove that the situation in Syria was improving. “Things will be fine and the coming days will prove this. So long as there wisdom in the world and great powers in this world seeking to retain balance on the ground then there is no fear on Syria,” he said, in an apparent reference to Moscow and China, both of whom have vetoed resolutions on Syria at the United Nations Security Council.

Canadian Statement on today's Syrian “Referendum”
February 26, 2012 - Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird issued the following statement:
“This is a dubious ploy by the Assad regime to delay the inevitable while continuing its slaughter of Syrian civilians. Assad’s “referendum” is a farce. It is also too little, too late.
“Assad must go. A new day must dawn for the Syrian people.
“Canada will continue working with our international partners to pave the way for a peaceful transition to a society that respects the fundamental rights of all its people.
“Canada stands with the people of Syria as they aspire to build a new Syria based on democratic values and institutions.”

West calls Syrian referendum a 'sham'
By The Associated Press
At least 29 people killed in Syria on Sunday, mostly in Homs where shelling by the Syrian military continues; voters cast ballots on new constitution. Syria's authoritarian regime held a referendum on a new constitution Sunday, a gesture by embattled President Bashar Assad to placate those seeking his ouster. But the opposition deemed it an empty gesture and the West immediately dismissed the vote as a "sham." Even as some cast ballots for what the government has tried to portray as reform, the military kept up shelling of the opposition stronghold of Homs, which has been under attack for more than three weeks after rebels took control of some neighborhoods there. Activists and residents report that hundreds have been killed in Homs in the past few weeks, including two Western journalists. Activist groups said at least 29 people were killed on Sunday, mostly in Homs. At least 89 were reported killed on Saturday alone, one day before the referendum. Activists estimate close to 7,500 people have been killed in the 11 months since the Assad regime's brutal crackdown on dissent began. "The referendum in Syria is nothing more than a farce," German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said. "Sham votes cannot be a contribution to a resolution of the crisis. Assad must finally end the violence and clear the way for a political transition."
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called on Syrians in business and the military who still support Assad to turn against him. "The longer you support the regime's campaign of violence against your brothers and sisters, the more it will stain your honor," she told reporters in Morocco. "If you refuse, however, to prop up the regime or take part in attacks ... your countrymen and women will hail you as heroes." U.S., European and Arab officials met Friday at a major international conference on the Syrian crisis in Tunisia, trying to forge a unified strategy to push Assad from power. They began planning a civilian peacekeeping mission to deploy after the regime falls.
"It is time for that regime to move on," President Barack Obama said Friday of Assad's rule. On Saturday, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said Assad's crackdown belied promised reforms.
The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported intense clashes between troops and army defectors in the villages of Dael and Hirak in the province of Daraa, where the uprising started. The group also said explosions were heard in the village of Khirbet Ghazaleh and Naima as well as the provincial capital, Daraa.
The Observatory and other activist groups reported violence in several areas including Idlib, Homs and the eastern province of Deir el-Zour. The two main umbrella opposition groups, the Syrian National Council and the National Coordination Body for Democratic Change in Syria, have called for a boycott. Other groups have called for a general strike. "I am boycotting the vote," Syria-based activist Mustafa Osso told The Associated Press by phone. He added that previous "reforms" have made little difference. Assad's government revoked the country's official state of emergency in April, but the crackdown on dissent has only intensified.
The referendum on the new constitution allows at least in theory for opening the country's political system. It would create a multiparty system in Syria, which has been ruled by the Baath party since it took power a coup in 1963. Assad's father, Hafez, took power in another coup in 1970. Such change was unthinkable a year ago. It also imposes a limit of two seven-year terms on the president, though Syrian legal expert Omran Zoubi said Assad's time in office so far doesn't count. That means he could serve two more terms after his current one ends 2014, keeping him in office until 2028.
But since Assad's security forces have killed thousands in their effort to end the uprising, most opposition groups say they'll accept nothing short of his ouster.
In the capital Damascus, a regime stronghold where many in the business class and religious minorities support Assad, the Information Ministry took foreign reporters to visit polling stations. Many said they were eager to vote. "This is a good constitution. It calls for party pluralism and the president can only hold the post for two terms. These did not exist in the past," said civil servant Mohammed Diab, 40, who waited with four others to vote in the posh Abu Rummaneh neighborhood. Jaafar Naami, 28, who works for a private insurance company, said: "I am here to say yes for the new constitution. This is not the time to say no. People should unite." The state news agency SANA said Assad and his wife, Asma, voted at the capital's state broadcasting headquarters. Fewer voters turned out in the areas of Rukneddine and Barzeh, where anti-government protesters have recently demonstrated.
In Barzeh, about 20 percent of shops were closed, apparently in compliance with the calls for a strike. Turnout was very low at a polling station in the area, with individuals trickling in to vote every few minutes. One man said he had come to vote at a center away from the district's center, where he said there was "pressure not to vote ... intimidation and calls for public disobedience." He did not give his name for fear of reprisal. In Rukneddine, turnout in the morning was low, but picked up in the afternoon. Still, people cast ballots as they arrived with no need to stand in line.
A Syrian-American voter who only gave her first name, Diana, said after voting yes: "My friends attacked me for voting. They said, 'Don't you see people are dying?' But for me, voting is my right. The president is on the right track. When someone hits you, you have to hit back." She added: "Syria is under attack." Another woman refused to talk to the AP because it is an American agency. She attacked Obama over his call Friday for Assad's regime to "move on."
"Tell Obama I hope he dies, like he is killing Syrian people," she said. One woman emerged from the station and said she voted "no" without elaborating, and walked away quickly.
Posters around the capital Damascus urged people to cast ballots. "Don't turn your back on voting," one said. Another … showing the red, black and white Syrian flag … touted the new constitution. "Syria's constitution: Freedom of belief," it said, referring to clauses protecting religious minorities.
Turnout is expected to be minimal in opposition strongholds such as Homs, the northwestern province Idlib and the southern region of Daraa where armed rebels frequently clash with security forces.
The repercussions of the Syrian conflict are rapidly spilling over borders. Neighboring Jordan's Information Minister Rakan al-Majali said more than 80,000 Syrian refugees have sought refuge in his country. Some 73,000 refugees have entered the country legally. Another 10,000, including security officers, have slipped in through unofficial channels.
Turkey and Lebanon also are harboring many Syrian refugees.

To draw Iran into nuclear talks, Obama avoids ousting Assad
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report February 26, 2012/ Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal did not hide his anger before marching out of the Friends of Syria conference attended by 70 nations in Tunis Friday, Feb. 24 after they fell in behind US plans for avoiding direct action against Syria’s Bashar Assad. Filmed sitting with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Saudi minister told a reporter that arming the Free Syrian Army was an “excellent idea” because they needed to defend themselves. Clinton remained frostily aloof on this obvious bone of contention.
As one of the world’s richest oil and financial powers, Saudi Arabia could buy and sell Iran several times over, and after seeing the ayatollahs get away with insulting America time and time again, the Saudi foreign minister did not pull his punches when he faced his US colleague. He was frank about Riyadh and the Obama administration being miles apart in their perceptions of current Middle East events; resentment over the US role in the overthrow of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak remains a constant irritant.
This dissonance came to the fore when Saudi al Faisal accused Washington of reducing Assad’s butchery of his opponents to the level of a humanitarian issue and so saving his regime
Riyadh is no happier with Moscow than it is with Washington.
Saudi King Abdullah is reported by Middle East sources to have banged down the telephone on Russian President Dmitry Medvedev Wednesday, Feb. 22, when he called to invite the oil kingdom to align with Russia’s Syrian strategy against the West.
Tariq Alhomayed, the talented editor of the London-based Asharq Al-Awsat, who is regarded as having a direct line to the king, wrote later: “This was undoubtedly a historic and unusual telephone call.” He reported that Abdullah rejected out of hand Moscow’s proposal of a two-hour ceasefire in Homs, the Syrian city bombarded now for three weeks. He retorted that this would give Bashar Assad’s killing machine a 22-hour day carte blanche.
Alhomayed did not refer directly to the clash of wills between the Saudi foreign minister and the US secretary of state, except for a snide dig: “He [the Saudi king] is also the one who, during the Arab summit in Riyadh, first described the US army in Iraq as an army of occupation.”
Israel’s Binyamin Netanyahu’s is of one mind with Saudi rulers in his aversion to big power policies for handling the Assad regime: Washington though horrified by the Syrian ruler's violence is yet shy of taking the final steps for his removal, while Moscow showers arms and intelligence on the Syrian despot to preserve him from his enemies.
It may be said that the Saudis and Israelis share a distrust of President Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin, suspecting them both of keeping Bashar Assad in power to promote their divergent interests in Iran.
The Saudi king faults the “safe havens” plan under air force protection – the sum total of foreign intervention taking shape between Washington, Turkey, some European powers and Gulf emirates - because it excludes what he regards as the key component: Bombardment of the presidential palace in Damascus and the crushing of the Syrian army, the same treatment meted out to Muammar Qaddafi in Libya.
The Saudis therefore sees this plan as actually protecting Assad’s regime and not only his victims.
Underlying Obama’s restraint is his indefatigable quest for nuclear negotiations with Iran, which is impelling him to show Tehran he is even prepared to keep its ally Assad in power – albeit with clipped wings - for the sake of a negotiated nuclear accord.
The Saudis think the US president is dreaming if he reckons Iran’s rulers will be so grateful for Assad’s escape that they will be willing to give up their aspirations for a nuclear weapon. They also think Obama misguided in aiming for Russian collaboration in making its political, military, technological and nuclear clout in Tehran available at some point for them to arrive together at agreed accommodations in both Syria and Iran. Riyadh regards its case as proven beyond doubt by events of the past week.Up until Monday, Feb. 20, Washington was bucked up by Iranian signposts apparently pointing to resumed talks with world powers on an eventual nuclear standstill and a freeze on uranium enrichment past five percent. Iranian emissaries in backdoor exchanges were forthcoming on US requests for gestures to confirm that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was serious about entering into diplomatic dialogue. A rude awakening was not long coming. Ten days ago, the Obama administration asked and received from Tehran final proof of goodwill, a promise that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors would be allowed to view the Parchin military facility. US National Security Adviser Tom Donilon, when he first met Israeli leaders in Jerusalem Thursday and Friday (Feb. 16-17), accordingly informed them that since Tehran had agreed to open this suspect site to UN inspection and nuclear negotiations were soon to begin, Israel had no cause to attack its nuclear facilities.
Tuesday, Feb. 21, the UN inspectors arrived in Tehran, certain they would be admitted to Parchin – only to run into their second Iranian refusal this month. Their visit was cut short by IAEA Vienna headquarters. Every attempt by Washington to find out what had gone wrong drew a blank. Iranian officials withdrew into total hush and let the entire diplomatic edifice so painstakingly constructed by Washington start falling apart. But Obama the eternal optimist has not given up. He is treating Tehran’s latest spell of intransigence as no more than a hiccup symptomatic of the run-up to parliamentary elections on March 2, after which Khamenei will revert to the track leading to negotiations.
This approach is what put Saudi backs up. They accuse the US and Russia through their different polices of granting the Syrian ruler a license to keep on massacring his people, regardless of any safe havens or “no kill” zones the West may be planning. Netanyahu is likewise opposed to the Obama administration’s interconnected policies on Syria and Iran. His White House meeting with Obama on March 5 is not expected to put this dispute to rest.

Russia's Putin: Attack on Iran would be 'truly catastrophic'
By Reuters/Russian PM Vladimir Putin also warns West and Arab nations against military intervention in Syria.Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said Russia is concerned about the "growing threat" of an attack on Iran over its nuclear program, warning that the consequences would be "truly catastrophic". In an article on foreign policy for publication on Monday, six days before a March 4 presidential election he is almost certain to win, Putin also warned Western and Arab nations against military intervention in Syria. Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Russia's Vladimir Putin in Tehran, 2007. "I very much hope the United States and other countries ... do not try to set a military scenario in motion in Syria without sanction from the UN Security Council," Putin said, according to a transcript. On Iran, he said that "the growing threat of a military strike on this country alarms Russia, no doubt. If this occurs, the consequences will be truly catastrophic. It is impossible to imagine their real scale."

Israel's Netanyahu says Iran to top talks with Obama
February 26, 2012/Daily Star
OCCUPIED JERUSALEM: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday Iran's nuclear programme was moving forward rapidly and would be the main focus of his upcoming talks with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington. Addressing his cabinet in public remarks, Netanyahu, who meets Obama on March 5, made no mention of steps Israel might seek or take to try to halt what it says is an Iranian drive to build nuclear weapons. Recent statements by Israeli officials that time is running out for sanctions to curb Tehran's atomic ambitions have raised U.S. concern Israel could launch pre-emptive strikes on Iran's nuclear sites. "Undoubtedly one topic will be at the centre of our discussions, and that is, certainly, the continuing strengthening of Iran's nuclear programme," Netanyahu said, referring to his meeting with Obama and talks in Canada several days earlier with Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Netanyahu said a report by the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency on Friday that showed Iran had sharply increased its uranium enrichment drive provided "additional, unequivocal proof ... that Israel's assessments were correct".Echoing a statement issued by his office on Saturday, the Israeli leader said Iran's nuclear programme was moving forward "rapidly and unchecked" in "defiant and blatant disregard of decisions taken by the international community".Iran says its is enriching uranium only as fuel for nuclear power plants, not to build weapons.

The unsung heroes of the Syrian uprising
By Zvi Bar'el /Haaretz
While the West mourns the death of two foreign journalists, it continues to ignore the Syrian citizens who risk their lives to show the international community what is happening in their country.
How many people personally knew the French photographer Remi Ochlik or the American journalist Marie Colvin, who were killed in Syria last week? Conversely, how many people knew Rami al-Sayed, who was killed last week in Homs and was bestowed the title of "the photographer of the revolution" from Baba Amr? In the nightmare called Homs, it seems no one really knows the number of people killed, just as no one knows exactly how many Syrians were killed since the start of the uprising. And no one knows the journalists that provide us with information.
Only a small part of the evidence of Bashar Assad's brutal crackdown comes from Western journalists, who are backed by Western powers that know how to protect their interests. Most of the information – and in some cases all of it – comes from young Syrians who risk their lives, and use tiny video cameras to film the scattered body parts in the alleys, the premature babies who suffocated in hospitals and the bodies of those killed. They transfer the images to a distribution center in Lebanon, and from there they are spread around the globe.
No one – except for neighbors, friends and loved ones – knows their name. But their daily work is what drives – albeit slowly – the international institutions, the White House and even the Arab League into action. None of them are journalists. Each one of them knows compassion is not the name of the game in Homs or in Idlib, in Daraa or in Hama. None of them are looking for a byline, and all of them know that if they die – it will be an anonymous death. Only their family and friends will lay flowers on their graves, if it's at all possible to have them buried. The lifespan of a celebrity Syrian journalist is short. Dozens of Iraqi journalists who were killed knew this, as did Turkish journalists who were incarcerated or are standing trial.
Why is the darkness of anonymity suddenly illuminated by the death of two Western journalists that was featured in the main headlines of Western papers? Why them and not al-Sayed? How come France blamed Syria for Remi Ochlik's death, yet it is almost certain that no French or British journalist is able to correctly pronounce al-Sayed's name, or the names of some of the cities that were bombed?
There is nothing new here, nothing we did not know already. When one of "ours" is killed – a Westerner, a white person, a woman – all hell breaks loose. Suddenly it becomes "our war," the Syrian regime is firing "at us," Assad's forces kill "us." All of a sudden it becomes important for us to listen to the victim's last words once again, to touch those who knew him or her intimately. They are us. She is more important than him, naturally, because she is a woman with an eye patch. She is our Moshe Dayan. He, in a day or two, will be "the French photographer," and in less than a week they will be part of the statistics published by Reporters Without Borders. Meanwhile, the Syrian al-Sayeds will continue to do their work. After all, they will lose nothing – no one knew their before their death, and no one will know them after they are killed. It's their war. We're here for the thrill.

Netanyahu: UN report proves Iran's nuclear program advancing 'uninterrupted'
By Barak Ravid /Haaretz
IAEA document says Tehran tripled its capacity to enrich uranium to elevated levels; PM: Report indicates Israel's estimates had been accurate.A United Nations report on Iran's nuclear program proves that Israeli estimates concerning Tehran's progress were accurate, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Saturday, adding that Iran was continuing to advance their efforts "uninterrupted."
Netanyahu's comments came following a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) leaked Friday, which indicated that Iran has tripled its capacity to enrich uranium to elevated levels. Iran's enrichment of uranium up to 20 per cent has caused concern in the West because it is theoretically much easier to turn such material into bomb-grade material than uranium enriched at below five percent.
Iran has doubled the number of centrifuges for enriching to 20 percent at its fortified underground site at Fordo, according to a copy of the report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) obtained by DPA.Iran has now made more than 100 kilograms of higher-enriched material, less than half the amount needed for a nuclear warhead, the document said. Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon.
In the first official Israeli response to the report, the Prime Minister's Office released a statement on Saturday, saying that the IAEA document "served as further proof that Israel's estimates are accurate."
"Iran is continuing its nuclear program uninterrupted. It is enriching uranium to levels higher than 20 percent, in blatant disregard to the demands of the international community," Netanyahu's statement added.
However, following the report's release, Tehran's envoy to the UN nuclear watchdog, Ali-Asqar Soltanieh, said on Friday said the document proves Iran's nuclear program is of a peaceful nature.
"The latest IAEA report again showed the peaceful nature of the Iranian nuclear program and further reflected the progress Iran achieved in nuclear technology," Soltanieh was quoted as saying by the Fars news agency.

What is really happening in Iran?
26 Feb 2012/ By: Pepe Escobar
Khamenei's reportedly fears a coalition of 'purists' will rise up and get rid of him [REUTERS]
Hong Kong - The supreme war-or-peace question regarding the Iran psychodrama has got to be: What game is Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei really playing?
Sharp wits among the lively Iranian global diaspora maintain that the Supreme Leader is the perfect US/Israel asset - as he incarnates Iran as "the enemy" (although in most cases in a much less strident way than Ahmadinejad).
In parallel, the military dictatorship of the mullahtariat in Tehran also needs "the enemy" - as in "the Great Satan" and assorted Zionists - to justify its monopoly of power.
Drums of war:
The US media and the 'Iranian threat'
The ultimate loser, voices of the diaspora sustain, is true Iranian democracy - as in the foundation for the country's ability to resist empire. Especially now, after the immensely dodgy 2009 presidential election and the repression of the Green movement. Even former supporters swear the Islamic Republic is now neither a "republic" - nor "Islamic".
For their part, another current of informed Iranian - and Western - critics of empire swear that the belligerent Likud-majority government of Israel is in fact the perfect Iranian asset. After all, Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and former Moldova bouncer turned Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman's non-stop warmongering tends to rally Iranians of all persuasions - always proudly nationalistic - behind the flag.
The absolute majority of Iranians knows and feels they are targeted by a heavily weaponised foreign power - US/Israel. The leadership in Tehran has been wily enough to instrumentalise this foreign threat, and at the same time further smash the Green movement.
Your bombs are no good here
Parliamentary elections in Iran are only a few days away, on March 3. These are the first elections after the 2009 drama. In The Ayatollahs' Democracy: An Iranian Challenge (Penguin Books), Hooman Majd makes a very strong case to detail how the election was "stolen". And that's the heart of the matter; millions of Iranians don't believe in their Islamic democracy anymore.
Gholam Reza Moghaddam, a cleric, and the head of the Majlis (parliament) commission that is conducting an extremely delicate move in the middle of an economic crisis - to end government subsidies on basic food items and energy - recently admitted that the Ahmadinejad government is, by all practical purposes, bribing the population "to encourage them to vote in the Majlis elections".
Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi - a senior military adviser to Khamenei and, crucially, former chief of the 125,000-strong Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) - asked Iranians to "take the elections seriously, and, by voting in maximum numbers, create another epic event". The Supreme Leader himself believes - or hopes - turnout at the "epic event" will be around 60 per cent.
"We believe that using nuclear weapons is haram and prohibited, and that it is everybody’s duty to make efforts to protect humanity against this great disaster."
They may be in for a rude shock. Word in Iran is that the election appeal at universities is close to zero. No wonder, Green movement leader Mir Hossein Mousavi has been under house arrest for a full year. According to Kaleme, a website close to Mousavi and his wife, Dr Zahra Rahnavard, a few days ago they were allowed to speak only briefly, by phone, with their three daughters.
So far, Khamenei's attention seems to have been concentrated more on external pressure than the internal dynamic. Once again, last Wednesday, he went public to renew his vow that nuclear weapons are anti-Islamic. His words should - but they won't - be carefully scrutinised in the West:
We believe that using nuclear weapons is haram and prohibited, and that it is everybody’s duty to make efforts to protect humanity against this great disaster. We believe that besides nuclear weapons, other types of weapons of mass destruction such as chemical and biological weapons also pose a serious threat to humanity. The Iranian nation, which is itself a victim of chemical weapons, feels more than any other nation the danger that is caused by the production and stockpiling of such weapons and is prepared to make use of all its facilities to counter such threats.
To see the Supreme Leader's "nuclear" views, US and Israeli warmongers could do worse than to consult his website. Of course, they won't.
What's certain is that Khamenei seems to be digging in for the long haul. Retired Major General Mohsen Rezaei, the secretary-general of the Expediency Council, said it in so many words. Western sanctions will go on for at least another five years, and are much tougher than those imposed during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.
Rezai also said that, for 16 years, when Rafsanjani and then Khatami served as presidents, Iran tried to reach some sort of deal with the US, but "because the gap [between the two] was too deep, a compromise was not possible ... We allowed them to inspect Natanz, we reduced the number of centrifuges, we suspended the Isfahan [uranium conversion facility], and our president [Khatami] began the 'dialogue among civilisations'. But Bush declared that Iran, Iraq and North Korea constituted the 'axis of evil' and began a confrontation with us." (Here's the original text, in Farsi.)
A former spokesman for the Iranian nuclear negotiation team, Ambassador Hossein Mousavian, brought this confrontational mood up to date - to the IAEA team visit to Iran last October, led by Deputy Director General Herman Nackaerts - the same Nackaerts who was back in Iran last week.
According to Mousavian, "during the visit, Fereydoon Abbasi-Davani, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, offered a blank cheque to the IAEA, granting full transparency, openness to inspections and co-operation with the IAEA. He also informed Nackaerts of Iran's receptiveness to putting the country's nuclear programme under 'full IAEA supervision', including implementing the Additional Protocol for five years, provided that sanctions against Iran were lifted".
Washington's reaction was predictable: instead of diplomacy, more belligerence. The next steps are well-known; the Fast-and-Furious plot trying to frame Tehran for the assassination attempt on the Saudi ambassador to the US; the pressure to divert the IAEA's November 2011 report on Iran by adding a spin on a "possible" military angle to the nuclear programme; the oil embargo; the sponsoring of a UN resolution against Iran on terrorism; and the list goes on. A new report by the International Crisis Group (ICG), based in Brussels, virtually endorses Iran's approach as outlined by Mousavian. The result would be the recognition of Iran's right to enrich uranium up to five per cent, and the lifting of existing sanctions - in stages. The report recommends the US and the EU follow Turkey's diplomatic way of dealing with Iran. Instead of sanctions, sabotage and non-stop threats of war, the report stresses that "economic pressure is at best futile, at worse counter-productive", and that Tehran "ought to be presented with a realistic proposal". This is exactly what the BRICS group of emerging powers, plus Turkey, has been advocating all along.
Show me the path of the Imam
In all matters external and internal, in Iran the buck stops with Khamenei - and not with end-of-mandate Ahmadinejad. If the Supreme Leader seems to have his pulse firmly on the nuclear dossier, home matters are infinitely more complicated. Khamenei may take comfort that, outside the big cities, he remains quite popular - as government loans in rural areas remain generous, at least while the new Western sanctions have yet to bite.
But high-ranking clerics in Qom are now openly calling for legal mechanisms to oversee - and criticise - him; his response - hardly a secret in Tehran - was to order all their offices and homes to be bugged.
Khamenei has vehemently rejected any sort of oversight by the Council of Experts - the Iranian body that appoints the Supreme Leader, monitors his performance, and can even topple him.
According to Seyyed Abbas Nabavi, the head of the Organisation for Islamic Civilisation and Development, Khamenei told the experts: "I do not accept the assembly can say that the Supreme Leader is still qualified, but then question why such and such official was directed in a certain direction, or why I allowed a certain official [to do certain things]." (Here's the original text, in Farsi.)
In 2011, I heard from exiled Iranian film director Mohsen Makhmalbaf that, "we actually started the Arab Spring, in 2009, with the Green movement in the streets". Following the outbursts of outrage after the election result - when for the first time Iranians openly called for the downfall of the Supreme Leader - revolt steadily marches on, with urban, highly educated professionals deriding Khamenei as stubborn, jealous and vindictive, and holding a monster grudge against those millions who never swallowed his endorsement of Ahmadinejad in 2009 (he always calls them "seditionists").
For instance, even the daughter of a well-known ayatollah has gone public, saying that Khamenei "holds a grudge in his heart" against Rafsanjani and former presidential candidates Mousavi and Karoubi "because of the Imam's [Khomeini's] love and support for them - and also because, in comparison to these three, in particular Hashemi [Rafsanjani] and Mousavi, he is clearly a second-rate individual".
Khamenei is now being widely blamed for anything from Iran's falling production capacity to mounting inflation and widespread corruption.
And that leads us to another key question: What about the IRGC's support for the Supreme Leader?
"The cream of the IRGC is engaged in a sort of economic war against the bazaaris - the traditionally very conservative Persian merchants."
The Iranian diaspora largely considers this support to be pure propaganda. Yet the fact is that the IRGC is not only an army, but a monster conglomerate with myriad military-industrial, economic and financial interests. Top managers - and the array of enterprises they control - are bound to the ethos of antagonising the West, the same West from whose sanctions they handsomely profit. So, for them, the status quo is nice and dandy - even with the everyday possibility of a miscalculation, or a false-flag operation, leading to war.
At the same time, the IRGC may count on the key strategic/political support of BRICS members - Russia and China - and is certain that the country will be able to dribble the embargo and keep selling oil mostly to Asian clients (currently 62 per cent of exports, and rising).
But what's really juicy, in terms of Iran's internal dynamic, is the fact that the cream of the IRGC is engaged in a sort of economic war against the bazaaris - the traditionally very conservative Persian merchants. It's crucial to remember that these bazaaris financed the so-called "Path of the Imam" Islamic Revolution. They were - and remain - radically anti-colonialist (especially as practiced by the Brits and then the US); but this does not mean they are anti-Western (something that most in the West still don’t understand).
Once again, as top Iranian analysts have been ceaselessly pointing out, one must remember that the Islamic Revolution's original motto was "Neither East nor West"; what mattered was a sort of curiously Buddhist "middle of the road" - exactly that "Path of the Imam" which would guarantee Islamic Iran as a sovereign, non-aligned country.
And guess who was part of this original "Path of the Imam" coalition of the willing? Exactly: Khamenei (and Ahmadinejad) foes Mousavi, Khatami, Karoubi and Rafsanjani, not to mention a moderate faction of the IRGC, graphically symbolised by former IRGC commander and former presidential candidate, Mohsen Rezai.
So what the "Path of the Imam" coalition is essentially saying is that Khamenei is a traitor of the principles of the revolution; they accuse him of trying to become a sort of Shia Caliph - an absolute ruler. This message is increasingly getting public resonance among millions of Iranians who believe in certainly an "Islamic", but most of all a "true" "Republic".
And that leads us to the Supreme Leader's supreme fear, that a coalition of purists - including influential Qom clerics and powerful IRGC commanders or former commanders, with widespread urban support - may eventually rise up, get rid of him, and finally implement their dream of a true Islamic Republic. Only this is certain: The one thing they won't get rid of is Iran's civilian nuclear programme.
**Pepe Escobar is the roving correspondent for Asia Times. His latest book is named Obama Does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

Homs and Achrafieh
Tony Badran, Now Lebanon
February 25, 2012
Free Syrian Army soldiers with their weapons. The FSA is resisting a sustained bombardment by Syrian army troops in numerous cities. (AFP photo)
Since February 3, the city of Homs has been under a sustained, and increasingly heavy, bombardment by the Assad regime’s forces. According to reports in the last couple of days, the regime has sent armored reinforcements, and residents are expecting an imminent ground assault.
However, that Assad loyalists had to bombard the city for nearly a month without sending in ground troops tells us something about the state of the Syrian Armed Forces as well as about its performance in operations against militias in built-up areas. To that end, there’s much that could be learned from the Assad regime’s 1978 campaign against Christian urban strongholds in Lebanon—a battle known as the 100-days war.
Unlike its previous assaults on Daraa, Hama, Zabadani and Deir al-Zour, at various points over the last several months, the regime’s forces have not been able to enter and hold Homs, even temporarily. Instead, Assad’s troops have laid siege to the city and have been shelling it from the outskirts for three weeks straight.
The regime’s tactics in Homs bear resemblance to the ones it used in East Beirut—especially Achrafieh—in the summer and fall of 1978. Back then, much like today, the forces of Bashar al-Assad’s father, Hafez, employed field artillery, tanks, heavy mortars (including 240mm mortars, also used today in Homs), and multiple rocket launchers, deployed around the city, to savagely bombard civilian neighborhoods in an attempt to break the will of the Christian militias and punish their supporters.
However, despite its brutal bombardment, and despite vastly outnumbering the Christian militias in East Beirut—15,000 to 20,000 Syrians to several hundred Christian militiamen defending their neighborhood—the Syrian Arab Army was unable to enter and take the city. The reasons for this failure are instructive.
Its numerical superiority notwithstanding, the Syrian army was not prepared to risk high casualties. In fact, reports from the period indicate that the Syrians had estimated a potential loss in excess of 3,000 men had they pressed ahead with a full invasion of Achrafieh. Already, following several engagements with the militias, the Syrians had sustained more casualties than they were willing to accept.
The militias were able to inflict such damage partially due to the employment of certain weapons, especially anti-tank systems and anti-aircraft guns converted for anti-personnel use. By contrast, despite the heavy shelling and the siege of the city, leaving them with limited amounts of ammunition, the militias sustained low casualties, and were able to maintain mobility through the use of tunneling.
Despite various dissimilarities between the Christian militias and the local Syrian opposition militias in terms of training and military support from a neighboring state, the experience of the former says much about how an urban setting can serve as a force multiplier for a small force with the right training and equipment.
Indeed, despite a severe shortage in ammunition and lack of access to proper weapons systems, the Free Syrian Army (FSA) has managed to present the Syrian regime with many of the same challenges it faced more than three decades ago in Beirut.
For instance, YouTube footage has surfaced showing the FSA using Russian-made anti-tank systems against fixed positions, on top of the good use it has made so far of RPGs against armored units. If the US and its regional allies were to provide it with better systems, advice and training, the FSA’s capabilities would multiply significantly. As it is, with their very modest means, the defectors have managed to impose severe constraints on the abilities of the regime’s forces.
The regime has relied on loyal Alawite brigades (such as the 4th Division) for its ground assault operations. On the one hand, this denies the regime the ability to launch multiple simultaneous operations. On the other hand, it means that the number of reliable units is rather limited, which makes the regime, much like in Achrafieh in 1978, very wary about inordinate casualty levels. An additional dilemma facing the regime today includes an overstretched, poorly trained military constantly threatened by defections among rank-and-file Sunnis, and, thus, reluctant to enter in direct battles in the streets of cities like Homs.
For instance, Jonathan Littell, who was in Homs reporting for Le Monde, has noted how “the Army seems afraid to attempt to enter neighborhoods.” Littell added that while the heavy bombardment has killed many civilians, its impact on the capacities of the FSA has been limited—much like what happened with the Christian militias in Achrafieh in 1978. In addition, as Littell observed, the FSA believes that direct engagement with infantry units would result in even more soldiers defecting to the rebel side.
We will soon find out if Assad intends to follow his barrage with a ground incursion, and what will ensue as a result. However, even if the regime manages to enter Homs, the FSA is likely to slip out and reemerge in other cities. Take, for instance, how the regime has entered and reentered Daraa several times already. And yet, resistance continues to resurface there, forcing the regime to redeploy its already strained and stretched military. There are simply too many hotspots to deploy to, and, as Littell observed, defections are increasing with every passing day. Furthermore, as Jonathan Spyer has reported, there are a number of areas in the northern Idlib province that are virtually regime-free.
Ultimately, there’s one fundamental thing in common between Hafez al-Assad’s failure in 1978 and his son’s failure today. Thirty-four years ago, when his vicious assault on East Beirut was over, Assad had neither broken the will of the militias, nor inflicted heavy casualties upon them. Likewise today, despite the unspeakable horror unleashed on Homs, its people continue to come out in defiant protests – inspiring their compatriots to do the same in virtually every town and city in Syria.
*Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He tweets @AcrossTheBay.

The Jihad against Bengali
By Janet Levy?American Thinker
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/02/m-the_jihad_against_bengali.html
Every February 21, a little-known observance occurs: International Mother Language Day. Created in 2000 to promote and encourage the diversity of language, this benign and idealistic-sounding commemoration actually marks a bloody day in 1952 when an Islamic minority shot and killed university students protesting the imposition of an Islamic language, Urdu, on a Bengali-speaking majority in Pakistan.
The students who died that day understood that forced reconfiguration of a language can have cataclysmic and devastating effects on a society. Community identification can be shifted, populations and their practices repressed, and the established rhythm of daily life disrupted.
In the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent, Muslims have for centuries used Arabic languages as part of their jihad against Christians and Hindus. A blatant example of this phenomenon occurred in 8th century Coptic-speaking Egypt when Muslims conquered the Christian nation and designated Arabic as the sole administrative language. Coptic, which had flourished as a literary and liturgical language, was purposely denigrated by the Muslim conquerors and eventually prohibited in favor of Arabic, the language of Mohammed. Today, Copts continue to be besieged by the Muslim majority in Egypt, and only a few hundred people speak the Coptic language.
A similar struggle occurs with the Bengali language. Although the student deaths of 1952 sparked a successful movement to create an independent Bangladesh, the majority Muslim population in that country persecutes Hindus and is Islamizing the Bengali language itself as a sort of linguistic Muslim jihad which has been going on for centuries.
History - Urdu vs. Bengali
Beginning almost 900 years ago, Urdu, a language associated with Muslims in India and Pakistan, was appropriated from Sanskrit-based Hindi over centuries of conquests by Persian, Arabic, and Turkic Muslims. To create Urdu, the Muslim conquerors took Hindi and Islamicized it by injecting new words, changing existing words, and writing the language in Arabic script. By de-Sanskritizing Hindi to develop Urdu, Muslim rulers de-Hinduized the language as a way of diminishing the infidel faith. As Latin is to Christianity, Sanskrit defines Hinduism and is the language of Hindu clerics and scriptures.
In 1948, shortly after Pakistan gained independence from the British government, the newly installed Islamic government declared Urdu the official language of West and East Pakistan, now Bangladesh. At the time, Sanskrit-based Bengali was the language of the vast majority of Bengalis, the inhabitants of East Pakistan, both Hindus and Muslims.
The Urdu language edict created great hardship for Hindus and Bengali-speaking Muslims who were not particularly proficient in Urdu. Although Bengalis were a majority linguistic group, under the Urdu language requirement they faced discrimination and experienced alienation from mainstream Pakistani society. Both Bengali Hindus and Muslims had difficulty finding employment and were discouraged from joining the Army, an important affiliation conferring social standing in Pakistan.
Bengali Language Movement
At the time when the Urdu language mandate was introduced, Muslims in Bangladesh were being pressured to become more Muslim in practice, to Islamicize the region, and to join Urdu Islamic political parties in Pakistan. Bengali Muslims resisted, as they had a cultural affinity to Bengali and felt they were not getting their fair share of power in Pakistani politics relative to their numbers. Out of the six major linguistic groups -- Bengali, Urdu, Sindi, Punjabi, Pastho, and Baloch -- Bengali was the largest in Pakistan. Bengali Muslims came from a distinctly different cultural background from the Muslims in West Pakistan and had little in common with the other groups except Islam. To thwart Bengali domination, the other linguistic groups banded together to reduce the influence of the Muslims of East Pakistan, thus isolating the Bengali Muslims.
After the declaration of Urdu as the official language, extensive protests erupted amongst the Bengali-speaking majority of East Pakistan, both Hindu and Muslim. Due to the rising tensions and demonstrations against the new law, the government outlawed all public meetings and rallies.
On February 21, 1952, students protested the language edict and called for a general strike. Amidst peaceful protests, the police fired on protesters and killed several students. In 1956 following numerous protests over the years, the government relented and granted official status to the Bengali language.
The Bengali Language Movement strengthened the national identity of Bengalis living in Pakistan and eventually led to Bangladesh's war for independence from Pakistan in 1971. Suffering greatly from Muslim persecution, at least 20 million Hindus fled to India from East Pakistan from 1947-1971. About one million Hindus were killed. In the fight for independence in 1971, Muslims killed an additional 2.5 million Hindus. Also during the conflict, the Pakistan Army bulldozed one of the most famous Hindu temples in the Indian subcontinent, believed to be over 1,000 years old.
In 1971, Hindus were declared enemies of the state of Pakistan and the government instituted the Enemy Property Act. False allegations were made by the Muslim government that Hindus were spies for India, and their property was confiscated. Following the independence of Bangladesh, the newly installed Muslim government retained the Pakistani law, merely changing its name to the Vested Property Act. Approximately 75% of Hindu land in the area has been confiscated over time.
The Jihad against Bengali
Today, Hindus in Bangladesh and throughout the Indian subcontinent are reluctant to make demands in a majority Muslim country. They typically remain silent about grievances, as they have little hope of equitable resolutions under Muslim control. Their activities are limited, and they regularly face discrimination. They are accountable to their Muslim masters, have fewer rights, and their movements are restricted. It is not uncommon for a Muslim to stop and question a Hindu in transit, inquire of his travel plans, and demand to see his documents as well as the money he is carrying, which can be extorted with impunity.
Yet, ironically, the Bengali Language Movement is commemorated each year in Bangladesh on February 21 primarily by Bengali Muslims, who hold rallies across the country. This same Muslim majority which allows the oppression of Hindus in Bangladesh is also Islamizing the Bengali language. They have de-Hinduized certain words in their ongoing attempt to eradicate infidel Hindu culture. For example, the Bengali word for "deity" has been replaced by a word that means "Allah" in Farsi, and the word for "water" has been substituted with an Urdu word. An indigenous flowering tree named "Krishnachura," referring to a flower worn in the headdress of the Hindu deity, has been renamed by Muslims to "Mohammed Chura."
For Bengali Hindus, the battle to preserve their language and culture appears to have been a pyrrhic victory, and a temporary one at that. With constant attacks on their businesses, homes, and temples sanctioned by the Vested Property Act, their numbers have diminished from one-third of the population at the time of partition to fewer than 10% today. Ultimately, their language has become less representative of their culture and religious beliefs, they cower to the demands of the Muslim majority, and they continue to face grave threats to their survival. The Bengali jihad may ultimately reduce the Hindus to the fate of the Copts, and the celebration of Mother Language Day may actually finally honor a language far removed from its Hindu and Sanskrit roots and now, instead, symbolic of Muslim expansionism.

Among my most prized possessions are words that I have never spoken." --Orson Rega Card

After All Is Said and Done, More Is Said Than Done
Farid Ghadry Blog
Now that Hamas knows for certain Assad will not survive, Ismail Hanieyh, upon a visit to the al-Azhar Mosque in Cairo, cited for the first time in almost one year the "..heroic people of Syria who are striving for freedom, democracy and reform".
The importance of Hamas announcement does not lie in the organization's sudden change of heart but because it confirms the secret everyone knows: The region is ripe and heading for a Sunni-Shia war.
But that is for another day to analyze. Let's stick to Hamas position with regard to Syria and its people.
While Assad killed and bombed with heavy artillery our women and children, Hamas was totally and utterly silent for a whole year for one reason only: It hoped Assad survived for the Syrian al-Mukawama to continue favoring its cause at the expense of the Syrian people future and prosperity.
All 23 million Syrians were and remain a tool for the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood the same way they were for the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood when 200 of its Al-Taliyeh al-Mukatala fighters led to the Hama massacre in 1982. Blame falls on the Assad family for the massacre but it falls squarely on the MB for triggering it.
In the New Syria, the silence of Hamas should not be missed as an opportunity for our people to distance themselves from its cause. We all love the Palestinian people but their cause is not ours and will never be. Personally, as a Syrian-American, my plate is full trying to protect against terror, Islamic extremism, and the prosperity of my people in Syria.
The last thing Syrians should be looking for is cleaning someone else's home when theirs is reeking of mildew. The last thing Syrians would want is the same Arab League ploy to divert our attention from the miseries at home towards hate for another people or countries. No more.
But what one wishes for is not what one gets sometimes. What I fear the most are the tactics used by Hamas to wage a war against its Palestinian rivals, something I am certain will be expanded upon by the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood should al-Mukawama be off the Syrian plate.
Hamas stood by Assad while the Syrian people were getting slaughtered and no excuse, including the one Hamas will probably claim that it was under Assad's mercy, will be enough for Syrians to accept this organization abusing all Arabs to fight for its own lost cause (After 64 years with little success, it qualifies for that label).
In fact, this is an opportunity to keep Hamas at a comfortable distance from Syrian politics. If it will claim that Assad's sword was against its neck as an excuse for keeping mum when thousands of Syrians were dying with the same sword, we can end Hamas in Syria or its influence peddling. Their excuse will be suicidal.
The worst part about the Hamas statement is that not one Arabic TV station, including al-Jazeera, al-Arabiya, or al-Hurra questioned any of Hamas leaders on this delay in supporting the Syrian people. Not one. They all want to burry this hatchet by giving Hamas a free pass. After all, they still need terror against others to promote tyranny.
This leads me to believe that what the Arab League has in store for the Syrian people is exactly what Assad had in store for us. Who should we thank for this blunder?