LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
June 11/2018
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.june11.18.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006

Iran Escalates, Europe Defends
Salman Al-dossary/Asharq Al Awsat/June 10/18
While defying the international community by announcing its readiness to resume enriching uranium, Iran is left entangled in emerging evidence linking its cleric-led regime to the infamous September 11 attacks. Recognizing Tehran involvement in terror attacks, international affairs assistant in the Iranian judiciary Mohammad-Javad Larijani confessed in unprecedented remarks that Iran facilitated the passage of al-Qaeda members who carried out the September 11, 2001, terror attacks in New York.
Rebooting its uranium enrichment program and declaring affiliation to Qaeda terror attacks are enough to silence Europeans adamant on salvaging a long-dead Iranian nuclear deal.
Pulling the US out the deal, President Donald Trump said that economic sanctions against Tehran will be reinstated—a move which will substantially debunk economic aspirations on which the deal is founded.
Despite Iran saying its going back to enriching uranium was supposed to bring out resentment among Europeans trying to save the agreement and protect their companies from US sanctions, they turned a blind eye as if nothing had happened.
British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said that his country believes alongside France and Germany that Iran's nuclear deal is the best way to ensure the future of regional security and stability.
Such a testament validates an allegedly “well-behaved” Iran to pursue sabotage under international watch.
More so, Larijani’s serious remarks recognizing behavior qualifying Tehran as a state-sponsor of terrorism stands to discredit poor arguments made by the deal’s five signatories who chose to continue with adhering to the nuclear agreement.
However, they insist that what Iran does outside the agreement does not justify the need to abolish it.
But such a disastrous confession presents a great contradiction and compromise to the foreign policy credibility of any state which chooses to continue defending the nuclear deal.
The largest terrorist event of the 21st century—responsible for two major wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that cost an astronomical $6 trillion dollars—being linked to a country defended by claims of it one day becoming a moderate state seeking security and stability of the region is self-defeating.
No stability can be fostered with a system that recognizes September 11 attackers’ presence and movements on its soil under full intelligence surveillance.
It must be noted that Larijani’s official recognition is in line with documents presented to the judge of the New York Federal Court on Tehran facilitating the transfer of al-Qaeda operatives to training camps in Afghanistan, a move which was vital for the success of the 9/11 attack.
Documents also showed that Hezbollah’s militant chief Imad Mughniyah visited the perpetrators in October 2000 and arranged for their travel to Iran with newly forged passports, assuring their security before operations were carried out.
Even more, documents proved that the Iranian government issued orders to border guards not to stamp passports of passing perpetrators, making their travel all the more easy.
With such prevailing evidence, it is hard to ignore state terror exacted by the Iranian regime.
Although intransigence brands Iran’s regime and serious and conclusive evidence emerging on terror-related activity, Europeans still rule out such revelations as a harmless muddling of the overall picture.
It is clear that European capitals, unlike what they claim, do not closely care about the possibility of nuclear arms falling in Iranian hands as much as they do about an imaginary scenario of greater regional chaos in the aftermath of scrapping the Iran deal.
Europe therefore is the first vulnerable target of any potential refugee crisis or terrorist operations.
Iran successfully enriching uranium and weaponizing nuclear energy does not seem as threatening to European capitals--even if Iran recognizes terror activity time and time again, it is not a concern to Europeans who believe they enjoy safety at a distance.

Companies Really Can ‘Do More With Less’
Conor Sen/Asharq Al Awsat/June 10/18
With the unemployment rate at generational lows, companies are increasingly trying to squeeze more economic growth out of their current workforces, rather than hiring. That may prove counterproductive, as shown in labor trends in fields where performance is closely monitored. While more difficult culturally, a better change would be to have more workers laboring for fewer hours each. "Do more with less" is the typical corporate response whenever labor is scarce or revenue is pinched. If an employer downsizes, that means remaining workers take on more responsibilities. Businesses, which presumably are performance-driven, are doing the opposite of what's occurring in fields where employee performance is intensively measured. Take pitchers in Major League Baseball. Monitoring pitch counts has been standard operating procedure in baseball for years, with starting pitchers rarely allowed to throw much beyond 100 pitches in a game anymore. Higher pitch counts are believed to lead to decreased effectiveness and greater risk of injury. Added to that is the somewhat newer notion of a "third time through the batting order" penalty, the theory that when batters see a pitcher for the third time in a game they're more successful. Beyond sports, it's well-documented that in health care, providers make worse decisions the longer they've been on shifts. There's not much cognitive difference between a physician who's been awake for 24 hours and one who's drunk. This leads to higher costs and worse patient outcomes.
Aaron Edelheit made a similar argument in his recently published book, "The Hard Break," where he argues white-collar professionals toiling in an always-on smartphone culture should take a digital sabbath one day a week. He's been doing it for over a decade, and has found that it improves his mood and gives him time to be fully present with his family, and that consistent, predictable rest helps his creativity and productivity.
No matter how much evidence we have that there are diminishing returns to hours worked and clear benefits to rest and time off, businesses are always going to tend to think that hours worked equals productivity, and that time off equals lost production. But perhaps like the Golden Knights with little other choice, a constrained labor market may prompt employers to court workers – which could inadvertently help productivity. With more employment alternatives, workers are likely to choose employers that offer more time off and compensation tied to performance rather than the willingness to sit in an office for 60 hours a week. Employers focused on finding workers willing to commit to grueling schedules are going to find it harder to attract and retain talent. And from a broader economic standpoint, while the unemployment rate is at generational lows, labor-force participation is still below what it's been at prior economic peaks. There are probably more people we could induce to join the workforce in a part-time, productive fashion, if only employers would get a little more creative in how they operate. If companies don't figure this out, they're going to pay the price in lost productivity and output – one way or the other.

Pay Attention to What is Happening between the US and its Traditional Allies
Robert Ford/Asharq Al Awsat/June 10/18
It is easy to understand why readers of this newspaper pay very close attention to the many crises in the Middle East such as in Yemen and Syria. I hope the readers will forgive me therefore if I offer some advice. Don’t forget to watch what is happening between the United States and its traditional political and economic allies in Europe and Japan. In my 40 years as a diplomat and university professor, I have never seen the relations between the United States and its traditional allies with such big problems. And in my experience, it is impossible to have a dependable political alliance if the members of the alliance are in the middle of an economic war. Here is the first event to watch. On June 7 and 8 a meeting of defense ministers of the NATO alliance was held in Brussels. The discussions were supposed to focus on military spending and military capabilities. All the NATO members had confidence in US Defense Secretary James Mattis. However, trade issues entered the NATO agenda. The defense minister of Canada, Harjit Sejjan, told Canadian media he would talk a lot at the NATO meeting about the new trade restrictions the United States is imposing on Canada. The Trump administration acknowledged it has imposed new taxes on Canadian steel imports to protect American national security. The Canadians say it is ridiculous to call Canada a national security threat to the United States. Some of the European members of NATO have said that they also wanted to discuss new American taxes on European steel and aluminum exports on the margins of the NATO meeting. The Secretary General of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, told the media on June 5 that these economic disputes are causing serious divisions inside the Atlantic Alliance and he has to try to “reduce and limit the negative consequences for NATO.”
The next event to watch is the summit of the leaders of the 7 major economies, the G7, in Canada that kicked off on Friday. At a meeting last week to prepare for the summit, the finance ministers of the seven countries could not agree on a joint communique. There were big disagreements about trade, about environment policy and, of course, about the American withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal. It is extremely unusual for the seven countries – who have been close allies for 60 years – not to agree on a joint communique. A Japanese official told the media that he has participated for 20 years preparing these summits and he had never seen the United States isolated like it is now.
French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Theresa May have talked to Trump this week, but the conversations were terrible according to media reports. The strongest criticisms of America came from Canada, perhaps America’s closest ally. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, angry about the new American taxes on Canadian steel and aluminum exports, executed new taxes against some American products in retaliation. He said the American trade actions are “insulting” to Canada which had fought in wars alongside American soldiers. A woman in the Canadian city of Hamilton, where there is a big steel factory, told the New York Times on June 1 the American tax is a “slap in the face of Canadians.”
Meanwhile, President Trump last week ordered his administration to stop sanctions against a large Chinese telecommunications company, ZTE, that had been doing business with Iran and North Korea. The business deals were illegal under American sanctions. The American legal penalties were going to be severe, but the President in a tweet said that he wanted to help save Chinese jobs. The administration has not been able to explain why the president is worried about jobs in China, which is not an American ally, but not so worried about deteriorating economic relations with NATO countries and Japan.
Perhaps this is part of Trump’s negotiating strategy. Perhaps he will change his mind. NATO will not collapse next week. Unlike America’s trading partners in Canada and Mexico, the European countries and Japan have not implemented their threats to retaliate and launch a trade war. NATO had a crisis in 1956 about Suez and a crisis in 2003 about Iraq. We should also remember that 1956 and 2003 didn’t involve business relations and the health of alliance members’ economies. A former American ambassador to NATO, Ivo Daalder, told the American media this week that alliances like NATO depend on trust. What we are watching is a Trump administration acid eroding before our eyes the key western alliances that American presidents since Franklin Roosevelt were building. If this doesn’t change, international geopolitics in less than 20 years will be extremely different.

Trade Tensions Risk Undermining the G-7
Mohamed El-Erian/Asharq Al Awsat/June 10/18
Pity the participants in the Group of Seven meeting. The summit, which has been a collaborative gathering for like-minded countries for years, risks being dominated more by its divisions than by achievements.
The leaders gathering in Canada face a stark choice in organizing their discussions. Should they focus on the trade issues that are central to the health of the global economy, even though that topic would most likely pit the US against the six other countries? That, in turn, could undermine progress on other key global challenges. Or should the US's partners aim for progress on those other issues by accommodating America’s unilateral approach to making international trade fairer?
It's not an easy choice.
The risk of a steady slide toward a global trade war, accelerated by the recent US tariffs and retaliatory steps by others, could undermine a pickup in global growth that is already being challenged by a growing set of domestic factors. One consequence is to expose underlying domestic economic and financial vulnerabilities, and the threat of capital outflows (Brazil). Governments, companies and investors are increasingly forced to play a game of whack-a-mole in response to disruptions including Italy's near financial meltdown and currency breakdowns in several emerging countries.
The re-establishment of a more collaborative approach to trade negotiations would be an important step in reducing the risks to global economic growth and prosperity. That is why it would be short-sighted of G-7 leaders to set aside trade for the sake of a more harmonious summit. Moreover, the gathering provides a particularly good forum for putting in place a cooperative process. After all, every member has a legitimate concern about China’s continued use of non-tariff barriers such as joint-venture requirements and with its treatment of intellectual property.
A collaborative strategy for trade negotiations could also provide the foundation for much-needed global efforts to modernize existing agreements. Many of the pacts were reached when domestic and global economies were functioning very differently than they are today. These agreements haven't fully adjusted to domestic structural changes, the impact of technology and global economic and financial realignments. At the same time, maintaining trade as a central part of the agenda carries considerable risks. If the topic isn't handled skillfully, the US could find itself isolated and aggravated, which would undermine the summit’s overall progress. Besides, there are a lot of other issues to discuss, including the US-North Korea meeting in Singapore next week, the consequences of America's withdrawal from the Iran deal, the situation in the Middle East, migration and the plight of refugees, and the need for a more coordinated approach to the growing impact of Big Tech (especially when it comes to data-privacy issues and artificial intelligence). And that is far from a complete list.
The mishandling of trade could easily tip the G-7 into a blame game, instead of making the summit a forum for productive discussion of the issues cited above. Finger-pointing at US protectionism would be countered by complaints that the six other countries are not doing enough to promote economic growth at home. The US almost certainly has at the ready a list of structural impediments to growth in Europe and Japan that can and should be alleviated by sustained policy implementation.
Not long ago the major challenge facing a united G-7 was the erosion in its ability to inform, influence and deliver superior global economic outcomes. Then, it was surpassed in importance and attention by the Group of 20. Now, the G-7 faces the added challenge of maintaining the operational coherence to deal with issues that are mainly under its preview.

Marching for Terrorism in London? No Problem
Judith Bergman/Gatestone Institute/June 10/2018
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12483/london-al-quds-terrorism
The leader of last year's London Al Quds Day rally, Nazim Ali – director of the "Islamic Human Rights Commission", which organizes the annual march – called for the annihilation of Israel. They also carried banners that said, "We are all Hezbollah," (what a comforting thought for the British). If, however, like the scholar Robert Spencer, one reports on these activities, one is barred from entering England.An afternoon of racism is in store for Londoners on Sunday, but as long as the hate is directed against Jews by Muslims, British authorities apparently have no problem with it.
On Sunday June 10 in London, the yearly so-called Al Quds Day march -- Al Quds is the Arabic name for both Jerusalem and for the day, invented by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who led Iran's 1979 revolution that overthrew the Shah -- will take place. The march is, basically, a call for the destruction of Israel, sometimes also Jews in general. Many other cities, among them Toronto, Berlin and Tehran, will also be "celebrating" the day.
Last year in London, around 1000 people waved countless Hezbollah flags, in honor of Iran's proxy terrorist organization, while chanting slogans such as "Zionists/ISIS are the same, only difference is the name" and "From the river to the sea - Palestine will be free". They also carried banners that said, "We are all Hezbollah," (what a comforting thought for the British).
The leader of last year's London Al Quds rally, Nazim Ali – director of the "Islamic Human Rights Commission", which organizes the annual march – called for the annihilation of Israel and accused British Jews -- falsely -- of being behind the 2017 fire in London's Grenfell Towers apartment complex. "This demonstration calls on justice for Grenfell. Some of the biggest supporters of the Conservative Party are Zionists. They are responsible for the murder of the people in Grenfell". He also made it known to the crowd that he thought the UK should effectively become free of Jews: "We are fed up of the Zionists. We are fed up of their rabbis. We are fed up of their synagogues. We are fed up of their supporters.""It's just an opinion," a female police officer said.
After complaints about Ali's statements, the Metropolitan Police investigated, but the Crown Prosecution Service declared in December 2017 that he would not face prosecution:
"We considered whether offences of inciting racial or religious hatred or a public order offence had been committed, in line with the tests set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. We concluded that the evidential test in the Code was not met and therefore no charges have been authorised."
In the UK, calling for the annihilation of an entire people – the Jews – as well as blood libeling and inciting against British Jews is not considered "inciting racial or religious hatred" and apparently does not even lead to charges. British authorities apparently consider marching with terrorist flags while calling for the death of Jews a legitimate activity.
If, however, like the scholar Robert Spencer, one reports on these activities, one is barred from entering England. Not only was Nazim Ali never charged, but he will have ample opportunity to have another go on Sunday.
Last year, the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, wrote to then Home Secretary Amber Rudd asking her to close the legal loophole that makes it legitimate for terrorist supporters to fly Hezbollah flags on the streets of London. The loophole is the fact that the "political wing" of Hezbollah is not proscribed in the UK. In response to Khan, Amber Rudd wrote:
"The group that reportedly organised the parade, the Islamic Human Rights Commission, is not a proscribed terrorist organisation. This means they can express their views and demonstrate, provided that they do so within the law. The flag for the organisation's military wing is the same as the flag for its political wing. Therefore, for it to be an offence under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000, for an individual to display the Hizballah flag, the context and manner in which the flag is displayed must demonstrate that it is specifically in support of the proscribed elements of the group".
In other words, showing support for the terrorist group Hezbollah in the UK is legitimate, because the authorities make believe that the support is for the "political wing". As someone once said, "If the Salvation Army had a wing called Murder Inc. that would be fine."
This year, Khan has again written to the Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, but it is unlikely that the letter will yield a different response from last year's. According to the mayor's spokesperson:
"Anti-Semitism or hate crime of any kind has no place in our city or in our society. Sadiq has written to the Home Secretary to raise his deep concerns about the support shown for Hezbollah at the annual Al Quds Day march. He has called on him to urgently reconsider his predecessor's decision not to take action to stop this."
This year, the vicar Stephen Sizer, who has suggested that Israel was behind 9/11 and was banned from social media by Church of England authorities for six months for sharing "clearly anti-Semitic" material, will be one of the main speakers at the Al Quds march. Sizer has also apparently met top Hezbollah officials in Lebanon and participated in a 2014 conference in Iran where he was to deliver a speech on the "Israeli lobby". The conference was reportedly attended by several Holocaust deniers; it was intended to "unveil the secrets behind the dominance of the Zionist lobby over US and EU politics". Jeremy Corbyn defended the vicar at the time, claiming that he had been condemned because he had "dared to speak out against Zionism".
Mick Napier, of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign, will also be speaking at the march. An activist who promotes isolating Israel to destroy it economically, Napier was convicted of aggravated trespass against an Israeli cosmetics store in 2014 and of failing to follow police orders to leave the store. An afternoon of racism is in store for Londoners on Sunday, but as long as the hate is directed against Jews by Muslims, British authorities apparently have no problem with it.
*Judith Bergman is a columnist, lawyer and political analyst.
© 2018 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

The Closing of the Cultural Mind?
Giulio Meotti/Gatestone Institute/June 10/2018
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12373/arab-culture-literature
In France, recently, a group of intellectuals published a manifesto asking the Islamic world to eliminate anti-Semitic verses from the Koran. The initiative followed the murder of an 85-year-old Holocaust survivor, Mireille Knoll.
The Turkish Council of Higher Education responded with a moratorium on establishing additional departments of French studies in Turkey.
There are no guarantees that curiosity, self-doubt and free speech will create a more liberal society. But closed-mindedness and censorship, in the Middle East, Europe or anywhere, are not likely to, either.In the West, books and documentaries have been cancelled. In France, recently, a group of intellectuals published a manifesto asking the Islamic world to eliminate anti-Semitic verses from the Koran. The initiative followed the murder of an 85-year-old Holocaust survivor, Mireille Knoll. The Turkish Council of Higher Education responded with a moratorium on establishing additional departments of French studies in Turkey. For years, under the presidency of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkish culture has been closing in on itself. "Going into a Turkish bookstore is like walking into a psychiatric ward," according to the British journalist Gareth Jenkins in The New Yorker. Turkey sentenced journalists and writers to prison, and put publishers of foreign novels, such as its most famous translator, Necmiye Alpay, on trial. The problem, however, may not be just Turkish, but, as the author Robert R. Reilly called it, "the closing of the Muslim mind".
A new report for the Atlantic Council written by Hossam Abouzahr, the founder of the Living Arabic Project, details the dramatic cultural change in the Arab world:
"The Arab world is now publishing only between 15,000 and 18,000 books annually, as many as Penguin Random House produces on its own. Egypt was once the largest producer of books with an output between 7,000 and 9,000 per year. Although its output was previously on the rise, it dropped by a whopping 70 percent after the 2011 revolution, and as of 2016 was only 'showing signs of recovery'. Greece translates five times as many books into Greek as all 22 Arab nations combined".
According to a report given at the Frankfurt Book Fair, "the Arab world, with its population of over 362 million people in 2012" produced about the same "number of books produced in countries like Romania (with a population of 21.3 million in 2012) and Ukraine (population 45.6 million) in 2012". Another report by the RAND center also notes that "the number of public libraries in Egypt is about a tenth of those in Germany, which has a comparable population". The Economist noted that Arab publishing industry is in "troubled".
Many great writers in Islam are now foreigners at home. Salman Rushdie, targeted by an Iranian fatwa, has become "the disappeared". At the age of 82, Naguib Mahfouz, the only Egyptian Nobel Laureate for Literature, was stabbed nearly to death by an Islamist. The Syrian poet Adonis exiled himself to Paris. The most celebrated Algerian writers, such as Kamel Daoud and Boualem Sansal, are treated as pariahs and threatened. Orhan Pamuk, the greatest Turkish writer, was also persecuted. The Lebanese Nobel laureate Amin Maalouf lives in France. And many writers in Bangladesh have been hacked to death. Iran is experiencing a devastating "brain drain" to the West. And images of book-burnings have become sadly popular in the Muslim world, from the historic books burned at the Cairo Institute to ISIS's destruction at the Mosul library.
At the age of 82, Naguib Mahfouz, the only Egyptian Nobel Laureate for Literature, was stabbed nearly to death by an Islamist. (Image source: Alaraby/Wikimedia Commons)
Unfortunately, Islam's cultural changes -- as attested to by the lack of producing books and translations -- may have severe consequences for the radicalization of the new generations. There are no guarantees that curiosity, self-doubt and freedom of speech will create a more liberal society. But closed-mindedness and censorship, in the Middle East, Europe or anywhere, are not likely to, either. There is an Arabic saying: "Books are written in Cairo, printed in Beirut and read in Baghdad". Is this same cultural malaise being adopted by the West?
*Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.
© 2018 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Murdoch Gets What He Wants Out of Brexit Britain
Chris Hughes/Bloomberg/Asharq Al Awsat/June 10/18
The U.K. government has all but approved Rupert Murdoch's bid to take full control of Sky Plc. That's good news for the satellite broadcaster's shareholders. It's also a sign that even the most controversial foreign offers for British companies have a fighting chance of success. U.K. Culture Secretary Matt Hancock said Tuesday he will clear the bid by Murdoch's 21st Century Fox Inc. if the company can find a long-term steward for Sky's news operation -- most likely Walt Disney Co., which has already offered to take the unit on. There's a two-week deadline for hammering out the details. Underwriting Sky News will be expensive. But Disney has a vested interest in helping Fox get over the line here: the US entertainment giant has a separate deal to buy most of Fox's assets, including its 39 percent stake in Sky — which would become a controlling position if Fox's bid for the rest of the shares succeeds. Meanwhile, Murdoch himself will want to finish the job of buying Sky even though he's selling up to Disney — an insurance policy if for any reason the deal to sell up to Mickey Mouse’s parent falls through. Sky's shares climbed slightly to 13.54 pounds on Tuesday, a sign investors anticipate a bidding war that will push Fox and rival bidder Comcast Corp. to the pain barrier. Assume Sky absent a deal is worth between 9.50 pounds and 10 pounds a share and the synergies from the deal are worth more than 4 pounds a share, as UBS analysts reckon, and the current stock price makes sense. The main risk to an auction now is that Fox teams up with Comcast — which also covets Murdoch’s assets — and Disney decides not to bid for Sky either. It's been a long slog for Murdoch. The goal has always been to make this battle about financial power only. That point has nearly arrived. Nearly. Disney needs to convince Hancock it will be a committed owner of Sky News even if its deal for the Fox assets fails, leaving it with a U.K. News operation it would never have bid for otherwise. As for other overseas bidders, the British government is taking care to be seen to scrutinize high-profile deals thoroughly while also laying out achievable hurdles to let them proceed. Even in the current fraught political climate, both foreign and hostile deals aren't impossible.

Hezbollah helping Hamas establishing militarily in Lebanon
حزب الله يساعد حماس عسكريا في لبنان
Netanyahu: Removing Iranian forces from Syria 'is a process'
نتنياهو: إزالة القوات الإيرانية من سوريا عملية متكاملة
Assad: Israel, Russia not coordinating on Iranian pullout from south Syria
الأسد: روسيا وإيران لا ينسقان للإنسحاب الإيراني من الجنوب السوري
IDF launches surprise exercise in Golan Heights
مناورات عسكرية للجيش الإسرائيلي في الجولان
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/65251/ynetnews-hezbollah-helping-hamas-establishing-militarily-in-lebanon-%D8%AD%D8%B2%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87-%D9%8A%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%AF-%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B3-%D8%B9%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B1%D9%8A/