A Tribute to a Courageous Iranian "Ordinary Face": Dr. Sadegh Zibakalam

Our team picked up this courtesy of the team at MEMRI earlier this morning as we received this at our Virtual Studios.    Dr. Zibakalam, who serves as a Professor at the University of Tehran, is one of the most prominent dissidents and has been extremely vocal in speaking out against the policies of the Islamic Republic.    What he underscores here is what is shared by a majority of Iranians that must be underscored as the rapprochement with the West has continued under the current President, Hassan Rouhani--it is quite telling and in our view, took courage by him to be as vocal as he was--A true courageous "ordinary face" 

Special Dispatch | 6682 | November 18, 2016       Prominent Iranian Dissident Zibakalam Defies Iranian Regime's 'Mission' To Destroy Israel, Refuses To Step On American, Israeli Flags

Prominent Iranian dissident and Tehran University professor Sadegh Zibalakam, who in 2014 was sentenced to 18 months in prison for criticizing the regime's nuclear policy and for his reformist and pro-U.S. opinions, is a prominent voice in the conflict in Iran between the ideological camp and the pragmatic camp. MEMRI has published many translations of his statements.[1] The following are two recent MEMRI TV clips of Zibakalam's statements. Zibakalam Refuses To Step on American, Israeli Flags On November 5, 2016, footage was posted online showing Zibakalam refusing to step on the American and Israeli flags and pushing away students who were trying to force him to do so. Prof. Zibakalam later explained on a television show, on November 10, that stepping on the flag of any nation was a sign of disrespect toward that nation. The footage of the incidents and the interview were posted on Zibakalam's Facebook page in November. To view this clip, click here or below   Zibakalam said in the interview: "It is a mistake to burn the flag of any nation. It is a sign of disrespect toward that nation. Placing the flag of a country on the ground and stepping on it is an error, a sign of disrespect toward that nation. You do this kind of thing, and then some London-based [Iranian] complains that when traveling to the US, he was thoroughly checked at the airport. Even his eyes were scanned. This is an act of disrespect." Zibakalam Defies Iranian Regime's "Mission" To Destroy Israel In an interview conducted by the Iranian Ministry of Islamic Culture, Zibakalam criticized the Iranian regime over its stance on Israel, saying that by promoting calls for the destruction of Israel, Iran was acting in violation of the U.N. Charter. He further criticized Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's idea of a referendum on the future of Israel, saying that it was unrealistic and, furthermore, none of Iran's business, and pointing out that Iran's commitment to destroy Israel was evident in its parading of long-range missiles with slogans in Hebrew pronouncing that "Israel must be destroyed." The interview was posted on the ministry's official YouTube account on November 13, 2016. To view this clip, click here or below  The following is the transcript of the interview: Zibakalam: "The UN officially recognized Israel, and Iran is a member state. According to Article 1 of the UN charter, the UN member states must not conduct acts of aggression against one another, and must not wish death and destruction upon another nation. [...] "Iran should first withdraw from the UN before it may chant: 'Death to Israel' and 'Israel must be destroyed.' [...] "What Palestinian political movement calls for the destruction of Israel?" Interviewer: "The Islamic Jihad and Hamas..." Zibakalam: "Absolutely not. Hamas calls for a Palestinian state. Where does it call for Israel's destruction? [...] "Most of the Palestinians who became refugees in 1948, almost 70 years ago, are already dead, and some of them emigrated to Jordan, Armenia, or Ethiopia. There are already second- and third-generation (Palestinians) there. Are you really suggesting holding a referendum to determine if they should return to Palestine or not? How would they even identify them? [...] "Let's say that a referendum is held tomorrow, and the Jews return to where they lived 70 years ago, and the Palestinians return to where they lived 70 years ago... Let's assume that this were possible." Interviewer: "Are you saying that we shouldn't care about this?" Zibakalam: "No that's not what I'm saying. I'm talking about Iran's mission to destroy Israel, and about our declarations that we must destroy Israel..."   Interviewer: "We are not talking about destroying Israel with an atom bomb..."   Zibakalam: "Mr. Dehbashi, don't argue with me. Don't say: 'We're talking about a referendum, not about the destruction [of Israel]. When you write on your missiles 'Israel must be destroyed,' it's no joke. These missiles have a range of 2,000-3,000 kilometers, so if you launch them from here, they will definitely hit Tel Aviv. You write 'Israel must be destroyed' on the missiles in Hebrew, in order to dispel any doubts [about our intentions]. Is this really talking about human rights? Who entrusted Iran with this mission? The Arabs? Did the Arabs say: 'Oh Iran, we are incapable of destroying Israel, and, you know, we Arabs love you very much, so please come and do this for us'?! Did the Palestinians say this? Did Hamas? Did the PLO? Did the Palestinian parliament in exile say this? Is this written in our constitut [...] "They know that if they ask me, I will comply in full – so what's the point in arresting me? After the [demonstrations of] September 18, 2009, they called me, and said: 'Mr. Zibakalam'... That was when the [Farsi] BBC was launched. 'Don't talk to the BBC anymore," they said. I said: 'Fine.' They called and said: 'Mr. Zibakalam, don't talk to Radio Farda.' I said: 'Fine.' Another telephone call: 'Don't talk to VOA. I said: 'Fine.' Why should we arrest him if he complies every time we tell him what to do?"  ion? Was there a poll in which the Iranian people said that Israel must be destroyed? Does Islam say this? Who said that we must destroy Israel?! [...] "There is a practical reason why they do not arrest me. They say to themselves: Why arrest him? We can just call him and tell him to shut up, and he won't utter another word.

On This Thanksgiving 2016

• Credit: Jean Leon Gerome Ferris / Public domain Other
  

As America celebrates Thanksgiving 2016, our team picked up these brief "tidbits" on Thanksgiving that we hope all enjoy!!   

Happy Thanksgiving to all!!!

When was the first Thanksgiving celebrated?

• What is a fun fact about Thanksgiving? 

FULL ANSWER

The feast lasted for several days, and the tradition was repeated at harvest time in the following years. The event was not originally called Thanksgiving because to the Pilgrims, thanksgiving was purely religious. The first recorded day of thanksgiving was held in 1623 in response to a much-needed rainfall. It was much later that the two events were combined to what is now known as Thanksgiving Day, which President Abraham Lincoln made an official holiday in 1863.

The Plymouth colonists built successful relationships with the neighboring Indians who taught them farming techniques. This success was due in part to Squanto, a local Indian who had been kidnapped and taken to England a decade before. Squanto was able to act as an interpreter between the colonists and the local Indians.

Massasoit, chief of the Wampanoags, signed a treaty of alliance with the Pilgrims. The Pilgrims would provide assistance with defense against a neighboring tribe, and the Wampanoags would provide food and teach the Pilgrims how to farm. It was this successful partnership, along with the leadership of colony governor William Bradford, that led to the first harvest festival, or thanksgiving.

View of the Week (Special Edition) : On Changes in our World as @realDonaldTrump assembles his Government

The pace of change and the backlash is never ending.     As the World awaits the transition to the Trump Presidency, America's apparent "Brexit" is of concern--especially as a potential trade war with China looms.   The broadcast by the Mexican Foreign Ministry trying to assure Mexicans in the United States also underscores the level of unease around the World.

What Geoff Colvin underscored in his note underscores the level of anxiety and concern--our team found it interesting how he deemed Brexit a "fluke" even though it is part of the trend around the World for a rejection of globalization on a massive scale:

NOVEMBER 17, 2016 Brexit could be regarded as a fluke. Brexit plus Trump starts to look like a trend. A large question for all leaders now is whether the trend becomes self-reinforcing, an accelerating spiral of nations rejecting the open global order built over the past 70 years. Leaders will want to monitor several indicators that will answer that question in coming months. A lesson of history is that openness has to be fought for. Free movement of goods, capital, and people always confronts powerful opponents. Today’s globalism strikes us as a remarkable achievement, but remember that we’ve been here before. In the decades before World War I, people traveled across Europe and over most of the world without passports. Migrant workers crossed borders with few restrictions. And trade was increasingly free, accounting for a rising proportion of GDP in many economies. The war quickly reversed all that progress, and not until after World War II could nations begin the great project of returning to a more global order, which has since lifted billions of people out of poverty. It has taken decades because every step has been a fight. Are we about to reverse all that progress again? Could be. Brexit is an obvious reversal of the trend toward a more open Europe. Donald Trump’s promises to impose heavy tariffs on Chinese and Mexican imports, if he keeps them, would spark retaliation and a plunge in global trade. Exiting Nafta and the World Trade Organization, as he has also threatened to do, would cancel decades of work to widen free trade. Such actions by Trump would be especially dramatic steps toward a new cycle of global closing after a long cycle of opening, but other indicators also bear watching. Results of a national referendum in Italy on Dec. 4 could signal support for the explicitly anti-globalist 5 Star Movement. On that same day, Austria will hold the second round of its presidential election, in which Freedom Party candidate Norbert Hofer will probably do well and may win; his party is anti-establishment and anti-immigrant. And France’s presidential election in April and May now seems likely to be the strongest showing yet for Marine Le Pen, leader of the protectionist, anti-immigrant National Front. Finally, Germany will hold a federal election sometime in next year’s second half; the most striking trend in recent local and regional elections has been the weakening popularity of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s party and the strong rise of Alternative for Germany, which is anti-immigrant, anti-euro, and opposed to further European integration. Populists in those countries and others, notably Hungary and the Netherlands, which also hold elections next year, cheered Trump’s win. They’re celebrating it as another step, after Brexit, toward an accelerating reversal of today’s open world order. Which it may be. Closing, which is economically destructive, begets more closing as self-defense or retaliation; it’s self-reinforcing. Opening, which is economically constructive, isn’t; it has to be fought for. We’ll know soon enough which way the world is heading. For better or worse, the consequences will be momentous.