jason Jones Final Report from Iran

Event though I've just made a post,; but after watching last night's dail show episode I really can't not share this .........

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Jason Jones: Behind the Veil - The Kids Are Allah Right
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Jason Jones in Iran

Summary only...

تعريفات ليبية

الزنين:نغمة مزعجة تصدر عن شخص مُلح تؤدى الي الاضطراب والقلق

الوجيج:تراكم للالتزامات والأمور المقلقة تؤدي الى الضجيج والفوضى

الشخشاب:حدثٌ طارئ يعكر الأجواء ويظل قائماً في انتظار الحل

التشحوير:هو طلب فجائى وغير متوقع و مستعجل لا يمكن تاجيله وفى الغالب يقتضى قطع مسافات بعيدة

التعليق :مواعيد مؤجلة وانتظار غير مجدي لأشخاص نعرف ضمناً أنهم لايلتزموا
بعهودهم

التفتيح:حالة يقظة وانتباه مع الوقت تؤدي الى التغميض المزمن

التخويط:مناورة لاقتناص الفرص السانحة وغالباُ ماتنطوى على نوايا سيئة

المقالبة:تجارة تبادلية تشمل الخردة واحيانا المشاعر والمواقف تمتاز بالسرعة وانعدام الضمانات

الكولسة:هي الخدمات المرجو اتمامها فى خلوة عن عيون الناس واذانهم وغالبا ما تكون هذه الخدمات غير شرعية الاجرات

الافارى:هو العرض او الفرصة اللتى تكون مرغوبة وغير متاحة ولا يمكن اتمامها الا بطرق لا تجيزها اللوائح والنضم المتبعة

الطياح:إقامة مفتوحة لممارسة التململ
الكساد:محاولة لملء الفراغ وايضاً فراغ لايشجع على المحاولة

الواشون:تضخم أسري يسفر الى تفاقم المصروفات والمسؤلية

الصبايا:جمع من النسوة بعد حذف المزايا والمقومات

الولية:زوجة في صيغة التعتـيم

الضنـا:هم الأبناء مع شرط القيام بما يتعب الوالدين ويضنيهم

السلف:مستحقات ملزمة للدفع تدور في حلقة مفرغة

اللمة:تجمع نسائي بغية الحديث دفعة واحدة وبشكل جماعي

الزردة:ممارسات فوضوية بقصد التنزه وعادة سنوية رديئة لايمكن التخلى عنها

السهرية:سهرة في مأتم ينقصها بعض الكماليات

الشتاوة:رسالة قصيرة ذات شحنة عالية غالباً لاتحتمل التخزين

الغناوة:ألحان تئن تحت وقع كلمات صلبة مفادها الحزن والكآبة

الكشك:حالة تصيب البدو بجفاف في الحلق مع احمرار في الأكف يؤدى الى تفريغ شحنات نفسية

الزغروتة:سلوك نسائى يتضمن تذبذب اللسان بشدة مع اصدار صوت مميز وعادتا تصدره النساء فى اوقات الفرح والسعادة

الشنة:غطاءٌ يوضع على رأس الرجل وأيضاً يُوضع على المصلحة العامة
الرنة:كلمة زائدة غالبا ما تعطف على الشنة
. التمتيع:صراخٌ في عرض الطريق غالبا ما يكون بواسطة سيارة بي ام قديمة وهو يقصد به نكاية في أكداس القوانين المعطلة .

الزعزاعة:حدث ٌ جلل وغير متوقع يخلط الاوراق ويقلب الطاولة والبركة ف الساعات

التزليط:سخونة مع احمرار في الوجه يُعبر عنه بحرف واااااو.

أعمال جارية:لشدة جريانها تقطع الطرقات والأرصفة أم الردم واعادة الترميم فالغالب لايكونان ضمن الأعمال الجارية بل ضمن الاعمال الزاحفة

تخفيضات هائلة:التخفيضات عائدة على الجودة أما الهول عائد على الصلاحية

مرفوع من الخدمة:إشهار ضمنى لمن يتصل بهذا الرقم أن صاحبه لايلتزم
بالسداد

الشرمولة:خلطة من الخضروات تقطع وتهرس باليد لتاكل وقد تستخدم الكلمة
للدلالة على عدم الانتضام فى عمل ما

الرفس:هو تعجين البازين مع الادام لياكل العيش ويقصد به ضمنيا خلط الامور

السكنان: هو عدم اعطاء فرصة للبال للراحة

التعشيش: هو اشد انواع السكنان

Summary only...

Do as we say not as we do !

U.S. Troops Kill Two Iraqi Protesters

by Arthur Max

BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. troops opened fire at former Iraqi soldiers demonstrating to demand back wages outside the American headquarters in Baghdad Wednesday, killing two protesters during a chaotic, rock-throwing melee. U.S. soldiers, right, prevent former Iraqi soldiers from trying to enter the American headquarters during a demonstration in Baghdad, Wednesday, June 18, 2003. A U.S. military spokesman confirmed that U.S. soldiers killed two Iraqis during the demonstration. (AP Photo/Victor R. Caivano) Military officers initially reported two people were wounded, while Iraqis at the scene said two were killed and one wounded. U.S. troops took two fallen Iraqis to an army aid station inside the compound, and U.S. Marine Corps Maj. Sean Gibson confirmed the two Iraqis had died. The shooting came one day after a human rights group accused U.S. troops of using excessive force during a protest in the town of Fallujah in April. Another military spokesman said the incident began when the demonstrators threw stones at a convoy of military police vehicles moving toward the arched gateway of the Republican Palace, Saddam Hussein's former presidential compound and now the headquarters of the U.S.-led administration. "A soldier did fire his weapon," in response to the stoning, said Capt. John Morgan, the spokesman. Iraqis who took part in the protest said the violence began when the crowd pressed against a vehicle moving slowly outside the gate and banged on it. A soldier fired into the air, apparently setting off a panic in the crowd. AP photographer Victor Caivano said the demonstrators threw stones at the soldiers and at reporters, who were forced to retreat. Raad Mohammed, a low-ranking former army officer who joined the protest to demand back wages, said his friend was shot in the right shoulder. Mohammed's checkered shirt was stained with what he said was his friend's blood. Mohammed said he and others were about to put the wounded man in a car when American troops approached and said, "We'll take care of him." He said they took the man inside the compound. There have been frequent demonstrations outside the Republican Palace, usually over the issue of unpaid wages to civil servants and the army. Wednesday's demonstration coincided with the birthday of Saddam's eldest son, Odai. On Tuesday, New York-based Human Rights Watch alleged that troops used excessive force in the town of Fallujah when they shot and killed 20 protesters and wounded nearly 90 in two incidents on April 28 and 30. The group said its investigators had found no evidence to support assertions by U.S. commanders who said their troops returned precision fire on gunmen in the crowd who fired on them. The military had no immediate comment on the report, but said it was conducting its own investigation. The demonstration occurred as U.S. troops intensified their searches in the capital for illegal weapons and supporters of Saddam's regime. Before dawn Wednesday, troops sealed several streets of the Karrada neighborhood and called residents from their beds to stand in the street as they searched their homes. One man was taken away with his hands bound behind his back. The military says about 400 people have been arrested since the latest operation, dubbed Desert Scorpion, began on Sunday. The searches have aroused widespread resentment. While struggling to restore order and crack down on pro-Saddam loyalists, U.S. authorities are also trying to build new, more democratic institutions in Iraq. They announced a broad revamping of Iraq's courts, suspending the death penalty and planning a new tribunal to speed up the trials of Saddam Hussein's loyalists. A new Central Criminal Court announced Tuesday, which could be operational within a month, is part of a program to replace a judicial system that was notoriously corrupt and which catered to Saddam's whims, including the execution of thousands of his political opponents. The objective "is to clean up Iraq's judiciary." said L. Paul Bremer, the top political administrator of Iraq. Criminals who aim to undermine Iraq's security and reconstruction "will be brought to justice without delay," said Bremer. Each of Iraq's 700 judges and 150 public prosecutors will be checked for his activity in the now-banned Baath party and for his reputation of integrity. The new court will have 10 judges chosen by a review committee, comprised of three Iraqis and three judicial experts from coalition countries. The task of rebuilding the courts also is physical. About 90 percent of the courtrooms in Baghdad were destroyed in the war. Efforts in the last month have brought the courts back to 20 percent capability, said coalition legal officials, in a briefing for reporters. Besides expediting trials, Bremer's administration has issued orders to the judges to suspend the death penalty. Recently discovered mass graves in Iraq support the coalition's contention that thousands of people every year were sentenced to death. Revisions of the Iraqi penal code also accord defendants more legal rights, such as the right to have a lawyer during the investigative stage of his case, and the right to remain silent without incriminating himself. Judges also were told that evidence obtained through torture or undue pressure is now inadmissible. While the new court will handle the most serious cases, it was unclear whether it would try the top leaders of Saddam's regime - or even Saddam himself, if he were to be captured alive. Bremer said Saddam's fate remained unknown. "I would much prefer that we had clear evidence that Saddam was dead or that we capture him alive." "Sooner or later, if he's alive, we will capture him," Bremer added.

Summary only...

Why Men don't talk about their feelings

click to enlarge
source

Summary only...

Libyan Doctors Forum

Recently found this website and given that we have so many doctors in the blogosphere I thought they might be interested in it.

Summary only...

Libyan's Backwardness

I usually get into arguments with expats, "westernised" Libyan's ( who aren't really ), and some colonial mentality suffering Libyans who have never been abroad over the source of some of our social problems and issues. Our social problems are usually regarded simple compared to those of other countries like, speeding, wearing seat belts and littering among many other things.
The aforementioned group usually take the easy way out of all the arguments, by attributing our problems to being backward, Muslim, brown and Libyan ! I can't really blame them I mean actually observing the social traits, analyzing them and trying to know the history of the problems can be tiring and painstaking, and if you're a racist with a set of racial stereotypes it becomes even harder; since you'll have to overcome your own mindset first.
At the end of our arguments I usually end up being accused of being an apologist, since I usually argue that there is no difference between Libyans and any other society except that our government chooses not to impose or apply certain laws and regulations and that if they did, things would change immediately.
The arguments sometimes escalate into me accusing them of being racists and them accusing me of being in denial. Recently though the Libyan government enacted a law requiring Libyans to wear seatbelts and in less than 2 weeks nearly everyone was wearing seatbelts.
So do you think that Libyans have suffered a mutation or were the people I was arguing with a bunch of racists ?

Summary only...

Initial Review of Obama's Speech

Obama Speech: Part Vapid and Part Sinister

I did not expect much. I mean, you know the routine by now. When presidents change, they merely change the Zionist Middle East "expert" at the White House who guides the president. Something happened in Middle East policy making in the White House in the Reagan administration. They no more trusted a real Middle East expert to guide policy making (this is party the obituary of the Arabists in Robert Kaplan's book by that name). You no more had a William Quandt at the White House: somebody who is a trained Middle East scholar who is truly balanced in his views of the Middle East. By the Reagan administration, that was killed. Reagan's White House had Geoffrey Kemp (who is now at the Nixon Center) and it went down hill from there. I met Kemp a few times and he is a nice guy but he is no William Quandt. Kemp looked at the Middle East from the standpoint of Cold War calculations and from the standpoint of what is best for American-Israeli relations. The George H.W. Bush's White House had Richard Haas he was no expert on the Middle East. Clinton selected Martin Indyk and that set the stage for the appointment of Zionist activists (with no Middle East expertise like Elliott Abrams) to take over Middle East policy making. This coincided--what a coincidence--with the change in Middle East programs at Washington, DC thank tanks. I mean, when I first came to the city, you could find non-Zionists at DC-based think tanks, including at the American Enterprise Institute. It is ironic that the political culture of the capital became more Zionist after the end of the Cold War when much of the support for Israel and its aggression was predicated--according to advocates--on Cold War arguments. So you can argue that Bill Clinton established a precedent of hiring (non-American) Zionist lobbyists/activists as Middle East advisers. So when I woke up and read the transcript of the speech I started thinking about the process of drafting the speech. It was compiled together from various different elements that were contained in speeches of US presidents before, including speeches by none other than George W. Bush. He begins the speech by attributing the reasons for Muslim hostility to the West to colonialism, Cold War and then modernity--kid you not. By the introduction, I knew that he is and will be missing the point. And his talk about Muslim dignity and the lack of incompatibility between Islam and human rights have been contained in speeches--many of them indeed--by George W. Bush. And these quotations from the Qur'an are really old: they started with Jimmy Carter and in order to justify US support for Camp David. Remember that this began even earlier in the declaration to the Egyptian people by Napoleon's expedition (and at least he had at his disposal real Orientalist, Silvestre de Sacy, and not Jeffrey Feltman or Daniel Shapiro: and there is very little on the latter. He works as the Middle East expert at the National Security Council of Obama's White House. He did not study the Middle East and worked on the staff of various Zionist members of congress including Diane Feinstein. His resume include bragging about his work on the hill: he spearheaded work to ban Al-Manar from the US and to push for the Syria Accountability Act, meaning he implemented orders from AIPAC--not more and no less). Obama is not a man of courage: if he was politically courageous, he would have said that Al-Azhar under the rule of Nasser was a force of progressive thought, enlightenment, state feminism support, and quasi-secularism. Under American puppets, Sadat and Mubarak, Al-Azhar became a force of obscurantism, fanaticism, misogyny, religious intolerance, and violence. Al-Azhar does not deserve any praise whatsoever. The Copts, Freethinkers, and women all sufferes because of rulings from Al-Azhar. Ideas of Al-Qa`idah and religious fanaticism's in general should be blamed on that obsolete institution which serves as a tool of the dictators in Egypt. His reference to the early roots of Islam in America is so disingenuous: he has one bland quote from John Adams and leave out various expressions of bigotry against Muslims by founding fathers. And he then condemns (unspecified) Western stereotypes of Muslims and then matches them with what he calls Muslim stereotypes of America as empire. But those two are not symmetrical: American stereotypes of Muslims are racist and essentialist, and the notion that the US is a war mongering Empire is shared by none Muslims and Muslims alike around the world. The literature about the US as Empire is written largely by Westerners. So Obama is asking for a bargain: to end Western racism (but not wars) against Muslims, Muslims need to stop attacking US foreign policy and wars. This is chicanery--don't you like those old fashioned words? He talks about the US as a force of "progress." How untrue for Obama's audience: the US has consistently opposed forces of progress and advancement in the Middle East: in every conflict between an oil Sheikh or a polygamous prince against progressive socialists or Arab nationalist secularists, the US has always sided with the polygamous princes who have been in alliance with religious kooks and advocates of "holy wars." Hell, he just came from Saudi Arabia where he praised the wisdom of the Saudi king and he wants to talk to me about "force of progress"? Maybe if you can bring up the issue of Wahhabi fanaticism I would believe you. He said that his personal story as an African American (with an African Muslim name) who was elected president is not unique. Yes, it is: and it was not easy: and his name was mocked during his campaign, and he made his best to distance himself from anything Muslims. So here, Obama is assuming that his Cairo audience are a bunch of idiots who did not follow his campaign and the reactions that it generated. He adds that Muslims in America enjoy education and income above average Americans. Yes, that is true, and I hate when people say that: the reasons is due to the racist/cl assist rules for the immigrants from Muslims/Middle East countries: only those who high degrees are allowed into the country, while poor people from other countries are allowed. If you are in the Middle East, your chances of being allowed into the US are related to the high degrees you hold. He said that there are mosques in the US but does not mention that many communities fight tooth and nail against those mosques. His references to Iraq and Afghanistan are largely apologetic: and he does not mention that his past critiques of the invasion of Iraq was asking to the criticisms of the Israeli occupation of West Bank and Gaza in Tikkun: that it is based on what is good or bad for Israel, and not for what it does to the victims. He talks about Taliban and Al-Qa`idah's killing of Muslims (and Muslims know that they have killed Muslims) but he does not mention that Bush administration and Obama administration have also been killing innocent Muslims: if anything, the rate of bombing from the air may have increased over Afghanistan under Obama: the advocate of the surge in Afghanistan versus Bush, the advocate of surge in Iraq. What a difference. I was offended by his lecturing to Muslims about Jewish suffering: as if the audience is entirely anti-Semitic. There are anti-Semites in the US and he does not lecture to them. He spoke about the repugnant practice of Holocaust denial but did not mention that the literature is entirely Western in that regard. And he then moves from a discussion of the Nazism to the Arab-Israeli conflict. What is his point here: that because of Nazi crimes, the Palestinians need to accommodate Zionist crimes on their lands? This is the most offensive section of course: he talks about the Palestinians without identifying who was doing those bad things to them. Look at this sentence: "have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation." So their suffering is due to their pursuit of a homeland: so they should stop the pursuit and the suffering will go away. He then mention the "pain of dislocation." What is that o Obama? Is that like a shoulder dislocation? He refers to Palestinian reference to "for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding" but never mentions Israeli wars, attacks, and invasions and yet he makes specific references to Palestinian violence thereby making it clear that adheres to White Man standards: that only Israeli lives matter. I mean, if you compare the killing and terrorism between the two sides, the Israeli side clearly comes out on top in terrorism, wars, and aggression. He then lectures the Palestinians: "Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed." I read that and thought: wait. Did you not in the early part of the speech bragged about how the US fought (non-violently, I may add) against British Empire? I should lecture Obama here: why didn't the US resort to non-violent resistance against the British Empire? How could he speak about nuclear weapons without even mentioning the Israeli arsenal? That was another insult to the intelligence of the audience: maybe Jeffrey Feltman and Daniel Shapiro told him that Arabs don't know that Israel has nuclear weapons. His words about democracy are just as empty as they were under Bush: he just returned from Saudi Arabia, for potato's sake, and he has just refused to label Egyptian dictator as...autocrat. One of the most offensive part of the speech was his reference to religious freedom: he concludes that section by praising the Saudi imitative for inter-faith dialogue. So Obama takes Wahhabi doctrine as the model for religious freedoms. I understand you, now Obama. I understand you very well.

Summary only...

Technical Evolution

Check the difference between a 1 GB hard disk from 20 years ago and 1 GB flash memory today, can you imagine carrying that in your pocket ?

Summary only...