LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
August 29/15

Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani
http://www.eliasbejjaninews.com/newsbulletins05/english.august29.15.htm

Bible Quotation For Today/King Herod beheads John The Baptist on the request of the daughter of his Wife Herodias
Mark0 6/14-29: "King Herod heard of it, for Jesus’ name had become known. Some were saying, ‘John the baptizer has been raised from the dead; and for this reason these powers are at work in him.’ But others said, ‘It is Elijah.’ And others said, ‘It is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.’ But when Herod heard of it, he said, ‘John, whom I beheaded, has been raised.’ For Herod himself had sent men who arrested John, bound him, and put him in prison on account of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, because Herod had married her.
For John had been telling Herod, ‘It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.’ And Herodias had a grudge against him, and wanted to kill him. But she could not, for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and he protected him. When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed; and yet he liked to listen to him. But an opportunity came when Herod on his birthday gave a banquet for his courtiers and officers and for the leaders of Galilee. When Herodias daughter came in and danced, she pleased Herod and his guests; and the king said to the girl, ‘Ask me for whatever you wish, and I will give it.’ And he solemnly swore to her, ‘Whatever you ask me, I will give you, even half of my kingdom.’ She went out and said to her mother, ‘What should I ask for?’ She replied, ‘The head of John the baptizer.’ Immediately she rushed back to the king and requested, ‘I want you to give me at once the head of John the Baptist on a platter. ’The king was deeply grieved; yet out of regard for his oaths and for the guests, he did not want to refuse her.
Immediately the king sent a soldier of the guard with orders to bring John’s head. He went and beheaded him in the prison, brought his head on a platter, and gave it to the girl. Then the girl gave it to her mother. When his disciples heard about it, they came and took his body, and laid it in a tomb."

Bible Quotation For Today/ Though they were commended for their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better so that they would not, without us, be made perfect.".
Letter to the Hebrews 11/32-40: "And what more should I say? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, obtained promises, shut the mouths of lions, quenched raging fire, escaped the edge of the sword, won strength out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight. Women received their dead by resurrection. Others were tortured, refusing to accept release, in order to obtain a better resurrection. Others suffered mocking and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. They were stoned to death, they were sawn in two, they were killed by the sword; they went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, persecuted, tormented of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. Yet all these, though they were commended for their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better so that they would not, without us, be made perfect.".

LCCC Latest analysis, editorials from miscellaneous sources published on August 28-29/15
My brother, my enemy/Michael Young/Now Lebanon/August/15
It’s time for Lebanon to recover its lost dreams/Nayla Tueni/Al Arabiya/August 28/15/
Egypt bids for two advanced French helicopter carriers - counterweight to the Iranian navy/DEBKAfile/August 28/15
10 Questions for President Obama About Iran/Jeffrey Goldberg with Robert Satloff/The Atlantic/August 28/15
Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan, and Obama’s Illusions/Amir Taheri/Asharq Al Awsat/August 28/15
Egyptian Writer, Yasmin Al-Khatib Muslim: History Is Rife With ISIS-Style Executions; Adopting Enlightenment Is The Only Weapon Against Such Brutality/MEMRI/August 28/15
Khamenei’s private and public views on the U.S/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya/August 28/15
Islamic climate change declaration could be a game-changer/Vicente Lopez-Ibor Mayor/Al Arabiya/August 28/15

LCCC Bulletin titles for the Lebanese Related News published on August 28-29/15
My brother, my enemy
It’s time for Lebanon to recover its lost dreams
Mughassil was arrested by Lebanese authorities at Beirut airport: report
Naameh Municipal Council Unanimously Rejects Reopening of Landfill
Matar Says Bkirki Spiritual Summit to Focus on Baabda Vacuum
Salam Requests Turkey's Help in Resolving Trash Crisis'
Berri Says he is Trying to Give Reconciliation a Chance
Jumblat Rejects Aoun's Exclusion over Cabinet Decrees
Nouhad Mashnouq Acknowledges 'Excessive Use of Force' in Saturday Protests, Vows Restraint
Aoun Holds onto President's Election by the People, Calls for Demo Next Friday
'You Stink' Campaign Rallies Saturday to Demand Environment Minister's Resignation
It’s time for Lebanon to recover its lost dreams
Nayla Tueni/Al Arabiya/August 28/15/

LCCC Bulletin Miscellaneous Reports And News published on August 28-29/15
Qaida-Led Forces Advance on Syria Airbase
Sunni Muslim clerics furious over upcoming Iranian film about Muhammad
Four Arrested over Austria Truck Tragedy
Thousands Protest against Corruption in Iraq Capital
U.N. Moves Forward with Plans for Syria Chemical Weapons Probe
U.S. Envoy to Syria Visits Moscow amid Fresh Diplomatic Push
US State Department clarifies description of Parchin as nuclear site
Iranian boy, 14, ‘marries’ 10-year-old girl
Obama to speak with Jewish groups on Iran deal
Erdogan approves new Turkish interim govt
U.S. urges Iran to release Hekmati from ‘unjust detention’
U.N. urged to end Syrian ‘suffering’
British hacker for ISIS killed in US drone strike in Syria: sources
Wooing the worriers: US treasury official to visit Israel over Iran Deal

Links From Jihad Watch Web site For Today
Egypt: Christian soldier murdered in his army unit
Miami: Muslim gets 15 years for conspiring to support jihad mass murderers
Muslim accused of running Islamic State network that wanted to “carry out massacres & create climate of mass panic” in Spain
Virginia Muslim gets 11 years for aiding the Islamic State
Arizona Muslim charged with supporting the Islamic State
Muslim leader says Muhammad protected rights of Christians, ignores his persecution of them
Spanish authorities warned French about train jihadi in 2014; he also attended mosque known for “radical preaching”
Israeli professor explains why the Islamic State is “the anti-Islam”

Mughassil was arrested by Lebanese authorities at Beirut airport: report
Dammam, Asharq Al-Awsat—Ahmed Al-Mughassil, the suspected mastermind of the 1996 Kohbar Towers bombing, was arrested at Beirut’s airport by the Lebanese authorities three weeks ago, Agence France-Presse (AFP) said on Thursday, quoting a senior Lebanese security official. “Internal Security Forces (ISF) arrested Al-Mughassil at Beirut airport on August 8 after he arrived from Iran on a forged passport,” the security official told AFP. The next day he was handed over to Saudi authorities who filed an extradition request, he said. Saudi officials told Asharq Al-Awsat on Tuesday Mughassil was in the Kingdom’s custody after almost 19 years on the run.The 48-year-old leader of Hezbollah Al-Hejaz, an Iran-allied group, arrived in Beirut on board an Iranian plane, sources close to the Lebanese security told Asharq Al-Awsat. Mughassil, who is believed to be married to a Lebanese woman, was traveling to Lebanon to attend his son’s wedding that was set to be held in Beirut’s Dahieh district, a Hezbollah stronghold. The official did not elaborate on how the Information Branch of the IFS learned of his arrival to Beirut airport. In 2006 a US court indicted Mughassil for planning the truck bombing that killed 19 US airmen and injured hundreds at the Khobar Towers apartment complex near a US military base in Saudi Arabia a decade earlier. There has been no official word from Saudi Arabia on Mughassil’s arrest and the whole episode remains shrouded in mystery.
With the arrest of Mughassil, three out of the 13 suspects remain at large.

Naameh Municipal Council Unanimously Rejects Reopening of Landfill
Naharnet/August 28/15/The municipality of Naameh that lies south of Beirut rejected outright on Friday the reopening of the landfill, saying it hoped that the issue won't be discussed by politicians. “Our town suffered for 18 years from the dangers of the landfill and its negative health, environmental and social effects,” said a statement issued by the municipal council. “The roads of our town, which has been a passage for garbage trucks, are in a very bad condition and require huge sums of money to fix them,” it said.Given these conditions, “the town's council unanimously agreed to reject the reopening of the landfill even for a single hour,” the statement added. The conferees hoped that Environment Minister Mohammed al-Mashnouq would not make such a proposal to resolve the country's growing waste crisis. The Naameh landfill opened in 1997. It was meant to receive trash from Beirut and the heavily-populated Mount Lebanon area for only a few years until a comprehensive solution was devised. But that plan never came to fruition, as efforts to pass waste legislation withered. As 18 years ticked by, the valley that was originally expected to receive only two million tons of waste swelled into a trash mountain of over 15 million tons. But the landfill was closed last month, causing a garbage crisis that led to anti-government street protests, which have turned violent. On Tuesday, the cabinet failed to resolve the problem after it decided to reject a list of tenders for waste management contracts across Lebanon and refer the problem to a ministerial committee over their high costs.

Matar Says Bkirki Spiritual Summit to Focus on Baabda Vacuum
Naharnet/August 28/15/The Maronite bishop of Beirut, Boulos Matar, said Friday that a Christian-Muslim summit scheduled to be held in Bkirki next week is aimed at stressing the importance of swiftly electing a president and discussing the demands of anti-government demonstrators. Matar told al-Joumhouria newspaper that the summit which will be held on Monday will focus on two main issues – the election of a head of state as soon as possible and the demands of the people. The bishop said all spiritual leaders have been invited to the summit “particularly that the security situation and street protests require a quick solution to the crisis.”Matar hoped that the meeting would limit tension “because we can no longer stand idle to the clashes (taking place) in downtown Beirut.” Several anti-government demonstrations have shaken the Lebanese capital, with protesters expressing their anger at the authorities for failing to find a solution to the waste crisis, which erupted when Lebanon's main landfill in Naameh, south of Beirut, shut down last month. The “You Stink” movement is planning another protest on Saturday. The grouping is a reflection of the growing frustration with an aging and corrupt political class that has failed to show concern for people's woes. In his remarks to al-Joumhouria, Matar said Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi continues to exert efforts to resolve the presidential crisis “because all crises in Lebanon are the result of the absence of a head of state.” He also revealed that France and the Vatican are mediating to pressure the rival parties to fill the vacuum at Baabda Palace following the end of President Michel Suleiman's tenure in May last year. Monday's spiritual summit in Bkirki will be preceded by a consultative meeting that will be held in Dar al-Fatwa on Sunday. Al-Joumhouria quoted Dar al-Fatwa sources as saying that Grand Mufti Abdul Latif Daryan and Patriarch al-Rahi continue to hold consultations to come up with a united stance against the turmoil in the country.

Salam Requests Turkey's Help in Resolving Trash Crisis
Naharnet/August 28/15/ Prime Minister Tammam Salam contacted on Friday his Turkish counterpart to request Ankara's assistance in helping Lebanon resolve its waste disposal crisis, reported Anatolia news agency. It said that Salam contacted Ahmet Davutoglu to discuss the issue. Turkish ministerial sources told the news agency that Davutoglu had informed Salam of his country's readiness to help Lebanon end its crisis. “Turkey has the means to end the problem,” he reportedly told the premier. Davutoglu then tasked the Turkish Ministry of Environment and Urban Planning to devise the relevant plans. He also ordered that a technical team travel to Beirut “as soon as possible” to tackle the crisis, added Anatolia news agency. The necessary measures to that end are being taken, it said. The trash crisis erupted on July 17 when the Naameh landfill south of Beirut was closed. The closure resulted in the piling of garbage on the streets as dumpsters overflowed with their contents and politicians failed to find a new landfill.

Berri Says he is Trying to Give Reconciliation a Chance
Naharnet/August 28/15/Speaker Nabih Berri has said that he urged Prime Minister Tammam Salam to procrastinate in calling for a cabinet session to “give a chance for reconciliation” among the bickering parties. Berri's press office said Thursday that he telephoned Salam asking him to wait before inviting the government to convene to give a chance to consultations after Free Patriotic Movement, Hizbullah, Marada Movement and Tashnag party ministers boycotted the session. Despite the boycott, the cabinet took important decisions, including the payment of the salaries of civil servants and the authorizing to the finance ministry to issue Eurobonds. In remarks to al-Mustaqbal newspaper published on Friday, Berri described the decisions as “necessary.” He said, however, that the cabinet deadlock should not continue. “We have an opportunity and perhaps through dialogue and consultations we could reach a solution.”Berri also told his visitors that the absence of the six ministers from the session was not “negative,” saying “essential items” were approved. The speaker also said that efforts are underway to sign the 70 decrees. Berri, who heads the Amal Movement that is allied with Hizbullah, confirmed to al-Mustaqbal a report that he is planning to call the rival politicians for all-party talks similar to the dialogue that he had launched in 2006. “I haven't yet taken a final decision in that regard because the success of (the dialogue) requires consultations,” he told the daily.

Jumblat Rejects Aoun's Exclusion over Cabinet Decrees
Naharnet/August 28/15/Progressive Socialist Party chief MP Walid Jumblat rejected the exclusion of Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun from political decision-making to avoid further tension.
“Aoun should not be shut out,” Jumblat told As Safir daily published on Friday. “I understand his position from the signature of the decrees and I believe that some of them should be approved after consulting him.”The ministers of the FPM, Hizbullah, Tashnag Party and Marada Movement boycotted Thursday's cabinet session after Aoun accused Prime Minister Tammam Salam of infringing on the Christian president's authorities in his absence by only garnering the signatures of 18 out of the 24 ministers on around 70 decrees. The four parties stress that the decrees require unanimous approval. “The issue of decrees should not be used (as a pretext) to exclude” Aoun, said Jumblat. “We don't need more political tension and we should not boycott each other. On the contrary, we should consolidate dialogue, particularly at this stage,” the PSP chief added. Jumblat spoke by telephone with Aoun on Thursday to discuss the political dispute that is crippling the cabinet’s work. Jumblat told Aoun that he is counting on his wisdom in this difficult stage, according to a statement released by the PSP's press office. The lawmaker also stressed his keenness to continue consultations with Aoun, the statement said.

Nouhad Mashnouq Acknowledges 'Excessive Use of Force' in Saturday Protests, Vows Restraint
Naharnet/August 28/15/Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq acknowledged on Friday that “errors” were committed by the Internal Security Forces in confronting the civilian protests that were held on Saturday. He said during a press conference: “We recognize that there was an excess use of force at the rallies and those responsible will be held accountable for Saturday's unrest.” The ISF, army, and parliament guards were the sides that opened fire during the protests, he told reporters. An investigation will be held in the shooting at the protests and the results will be announced next week, vowed the minister. Since Sunday, not a single live bullet was shot during the rallies in downtown Beirut, he said, while adding that two civilians and three security forces members are currently receiving treatment for injuries sustained in the unrest. “No one should attempt to portray the security forces in an evil light. Mistakes were made on Saturday, but since then they did nothing wrong,” he declared. “Camera footage can attest that some politically-affiliated thugs got involved in the civilian rally and led it to take a violent turn,” Mashnouq stressed. On the Saturday's scheduled civil society campaign protests, he said: “I urge maximum restraint among all concerned.” “We are committed to protecting any citizen who expresses himself through peaceful means,” he added. “I vow that the security forces will perform their duties to the utmost in protecting the people, protesters, and public property during Saturday's rally,” he stressed. “I warn of repeated attempts by thugs to exploit the rally in order to vent political frustrations and spite against slain Premier Rafik Hariri,” Mashnouq said in reference to the defamatory slogans that were sprayed at the late PM's grave in downtown Beirut during the protests last weekend. The parliament police command later issued a statement responding to Mashnouq's accusation: “We did not open fire at protesters and our members were inside the parliament building at the time.”“We will await the result of the investigation in the unrest,” it added. Later on Friday, Army Commander General Jean Qahwaji stressed the military's commitment to protect rallies and popular gatherings, saying it is an integral part of freedom of expression that is safeguarded by the constitution. He added however that the army will stand against anyone who seeks to exploit the demonstrations to “violate the lives of citizens and their properties.” “The army will not allow outlaws to steer the protesters towards security chaos,” he declared while inspecting military posts in the North. Clashes erupted last week between security forces and protesters from the “You Stink” civil society campaign that were demonstrating against the ongoing waste management crisis in Lebanon. Police used tear gas and water cannon to disperse thousands of them in Riad al-Solh square and to stop them from moving towards the nearby Nijmeh Square, leaving scores of protesters injured. The demonstrators blamed politically-affiliated thugs for veering the rally off its peaceful course. The trash crisis erupted on July 17 when the Naameh landfill south of Beirut was closed.  “You Stink” is scheduled to hold a new rally in downtown Beirut at 6:00 pm on Saturday.

Aoun Holds onto President's Election by the People, Calls for Demo Next Friday
Naharnet/August 28/15/Change and Reform bloc leader MP Michel Aoun reiterated on Friday his call for the election of a president from the people as he announced his backing for protests, but said he only partly agreed with anti-government demonstrators who accuse the entire political class of corruption. During a press conference he held at his residence in Rabieh, Aoun also invited the supporters of his Free Patriotic Movement to carry out a protest next Friday “to ask for reform and for participation in decision-making, and to call for fighting corruption.” The demonstration is scheduled to be held at 5:30 pm in downtown Beirut's Martyrs Square. “Legitimacy is given to the authorities by the people,” he said, adding “no ruler can be legitimate if the people don't recognize his legitimacy.” Aoun reiterated his demand for the election of a president by the people and called for the approval of an electoral law based on proportional representation.  He also urged the formation of a government that introduces reforms. “This is the only reformist plan,” said the lawmaker, who is also a presidential candidate. He told reporters that Lebanon's rulers have lost the people’s backing because of rampant corruption, which is “blocking the state's arteries.” Aoun also urged friendly countries not to interfere in Lebanon's internal affairs to back the rulers whom he says have lost legitimacy. “We are glad that the people woke up and began demanding their rights,” he said, as he announced his backing for the latest street protests. But he stressed that he only partly agreed with the demonstrators because unlike what they claim there are reformist politicians in Lebanon. Street protests against the government have turned violent after several movements turned a trash crisis, which erupted last month, into a popular uprising against the political class that has dominated Lebanon since its civil war ended in 1990. The “You Stink” movement is organizing another protest in downtown Beirut on Saturday, but Aoun said his supporters would not take part in the demonstration. Aoun was asked about the boycott of FPM, Hizbullah, Tashnag Party and Marada Movement ministers of Thursday’s cabinet session and whether they would hold onto their stance not to attend sessions. “There are discussions to resolve the cabinet crisis,” he said, adding that he didn't address the issue during the press conference to avoid stirring tension.

'You Stink' Campaign Rallies Saturday to Demand Environment Minister's Resignation
Naharnet/August 28/15/The “You Stink” civil society campaign announced on Friday that it will hold a demonstration on Saturday afternoon to demand the resignation of Environment Minister Mohammed al-Mashnouq over his failure to resolve the trash disposal crisis. The campaign announced that the demonstrators will demand that Interior Minister Nouhad al-Mashnouq be held accountable for the “assaults by the security forces and parliament guards” against the protesters last week. Tomorrow's rally will kick off from in front of the Interior Ministry in Beirut's Hamra neighborhood at 5:00 pm and head towards Martyrs' Square in downtown Beirut. “Our campaign started as a few dozen members and our numbers now reach the thousands,” said activist Asaad Zebian during the press conference. “After we were beaten up, it became clear that the government chose to cover its head in the sand rather than face the truth over the garbage crisis,” he declared. The “You Stink” campaign hoped that its efforts will be crowned with the staging of parliamentary elections after the current parliament had “illegally” extended its term on two separate occasions. Clashes erupted last week between security forces and protesters from the “You Stink” protesters who were demonstrating against the ongoing waste management crisis. Police used tear gas and water cannon to disperse thousands of them in Riad al-Solh square and to stop them from moving towards the nearby Nijmeh Square, leaving scores of protesters injured. The demonstrators blamed politically-affiliated thugs for veering the rally off its peaceful course. Earlier on Friday, Interior Minister Mashouq reiterated the accusations, acknowledging that the security forces had “used excessive force” during last week's protests. He vowed that an investigation will be held to determine those responsible for the unrest. The trash crisis erupted on July 17 when the Naameh landfill south of Beirut was closed. The closure resulted in the piling of garbage on the streets as dumpsters overflowed with their contents and politicians failed to find a new landfill.

It’s time for Lebanon to recover its lost dreams
Nayla Tueni/Al Arabiya/August 28/15/The slogan “change is possible and initiative is a duty” which protestors in Beirut’s downtown raised over the weekend reminded me of late Lebanese lawmaker Gebran Tueni’s 1993 editorial of the first copy of Nahar al-Shabab, a weekly supplement of an-Nahar newspaper. The piece was titled: “Wake up and speak out.” Tueni wrote: “It’s time to reawake the dreams of an entire generation - a generation whose enthusiasm and plans were destroyed. A generation who considers it has nothing to do with everything that’s happening in the name of the present and the future. A generation who decided to draw a line between itself and this fake reality which is based on visions that are completely irrelevant to the so-called popular will! Is it true that Lebanon’s people are no longer those vibrant death-challenging people? Is it true that Lebanon has become a country whose people are from the past and who are condemned to remain in the past? No!”
Taking to the street
No and a thousand times no! The Lebanese people took to the street on Sunday regardless of the politicians who think they are still in control of the people and the situation. They took to the streets to reject and rebel against a bitter reality which is the responsibility of politicians who “agreed” among each other to divide gains without considering people’s interests. For 25 years now, i.e. since the civil war ended, the Lebanese have been drowned in darkness. Perhaps Prime Minister Tammam Salam boldly expressed that when he spoke of “political trash.”The Lebanese people took to the street on Sunday regardless of the politicians who think they are still in control of the people and the situation. It’s true that a number of protestors, some of whom are infiltrators and well-known by everyone, were rude and immoral at expressing their demands and their actions were unacceptable while dealing with security forces.
Tragic reality
However this unfortunate reality accurately expresses the tragic situation of the Lebanese people who’ve been suffering from a trash crisis for a month now as a result of political struggles as well as a presidential vacuum which has lasted for a year and three months now as a result of the stubbornness of some parties.In addition to all that, governmental work has been obstructed for three months due to some the personal ambitions of some politicians. This bitter reality has affected the entire Lebanese people and it’s no longer possible to control it without holding politicians accountable. In 1999, Tueni wrote: “It’s time to end this farm-like situation which has led to where we are today. It’s time we build a civilized state – a state of law that is up to the level of the new generation’s dreams. It’s time to build a state as transparent as the dreams of Lebanon’s youth – a civilized, strong and fair state where there’s place for neither thieves nor murderers. Come, let’s perform our role as free, vibrant and democratic people. Come, let’s hold those responsible accountable

My brother, my enemy
Michael Young/Now Lebanon/August/15
Amid reports that Hezbollah may seek to impose Michel Aoun’s presidency on Lebanon’s political class, a subtext of this is the Christians’ relationship with the Sunni community in Lebanon and the Middle East.
The reason is that Aoun’s election, if indeed it happens, is not an end in itself. For Hezbollah, the general’s election would put him in a position to drive a process of constitutional revision. With his large Christian bloc, and in alliance with the Shiite blocs, Aoun could announce that Taif needs to be modified. For Hezbollah, a new constitution is needed to protect the party’s interests at a time when Sunnis feel increasingly empowered by the declining fortunes of Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria.
The party understands that if Assad were to go, Lebanon’s Sunnis would be electrified, making it all but impossible for Hezbollah to pursue an independent agenda on behalf of Iran. At the least demands for the party’s disarmament would rise, posing an existential threat that Hezbollah will not allow.
That is why the party seeks a constitutional transformation and abandonment of Taif. The often-mentioned solution is for a change in sectarian representation in parliament, the government, and the civil service from a 50-50 breakdown of Christians to Muslims to one of thirds — with roughly a third of positions reserved for Maronites, a third for Sunnis, and a third for Shiites, with smaller sects distributed within this framework.
The rationale is that Shiites and Christians would form a structural majority of two-thirds over Sunnis, retaining control over the political system and ensuring that any backlash from events in Syria will not seriously affect Hezbollah’s fortunes.
From the Christians’ perspective, however, what is there to gain from seeing their representation decrease from half the shares in the state to a third? On its own, nothing. But proponents of a division of thirds see things differently. In addition to the purported long-term security such a deal would bring Christians, they would also endorse in exchange for being granted greater decentralization, a clause in Taif that was never implemented.
In fact, in their recent joint declaration, the Free Patriotic Movement and the Lebanese Forces both denounced the “incomplete” implementation of Taif and, in Article 14, stated their commitment to “administrative decentralization.” In a key clause they also endorsed financial decentralization, which Taif does not mention, declaring their support for the “transfer of a large share of the prerogatives of the central administration, in particular those related to development, to elected decentralized authorities in accord with the rules, and the securing of [self-generated] revenues necessary for this.”
Christian fear and resentment of the Sunnis is very disturbing, but is linked to regional developments as well as past frustrations. The progress of Sunni extremists in Syria has alarmed Lebanon’s Christians, and the fate of their brethren in Iraq and Syria has only increased their anxieties. This reaction, however, has been without nuance. Rarely do Christians pause to see the extent to which opponents of the Sunnis have been been responsible for the rise in extremism.
Then there is the longstanding antipathy directed against the Future Movement and Rafiq Hariri’s legacy. To Christians, Taif replaced a system in which Christians were dominant with one in which they became marginalized. The embodiment of this, as many Christians see it, was Hariri himself, who dominated the postwar scene and, with regional and international backing, consolidated a system in which Christians felt they were being shunted aside. Again, this reading, along with the whitewash of the Syrian role in the sidelining of Christians, is crude, but it has resonance among quite a few in the community.
Part of the problem is that these views have been grafted onto past attitudes towards the Sunnis — always perceived as the dominant sect in the region with little tolerance for minorities. To Christians the Ottoman Empire was an instrument of Sunni domination. Similarly, Arab nationalism was later regarded as a mechanism for Sunni ascendancy in the guise of a secular ideology, while support for the Palestinian cause was a byword for a Sunni yearning to control Lebanon before the Civil War.
That’s not to say there were no Christian Ottomanists, Arab nationalists, or pro-Palestinians. But to many Christians all these ideologies or political positions were mainly a facade for Sunni sectarian ambitions and solidarity. And while it’s easy to mock Christian paranoia, Ottomanism, Arab nationalism and support for the Palestinians did frequently reflect, even personify, the attitudes of the Sunni majority in the region.
That is why many Christians regarded Hariri’s political promotion in 1992 as a further stage in this process — the consequence of a political arrangement between the Assad regime in Syria and Saudi Arabia. When the Christian boycott of parliamentary elections in 1992 was ignored, it brought home to many in the community how inconsequential they had become.
Their bitterness, which Aoun has spent the last decade exploiting, never quite left, even if it is difficult to generalize. But Aoun’s success in mobilizing voters against Saad Hariri and the Future Movement in two elections, like Samir Geagea’s great sensitivity to seeing several of his parliamentarians brought into parliament thanks to Sunni votes, shows that the uneasiness with Sunnis is more widespread than we imagined.
However, what Christians must not do is fall into the trap of imagining that an alliance with Shiites against the Sunnis is the solution. Other than the fact that it may undermine the principles of the Lebanese system of power-sharing and coexistence, it also implicitly means aligning with Hezbollah and Iran against a majority in the Arab world. The costs of such a foolish position are potentially very high, when Christians would do far better by maintaining close ties to all.
Between 1975 and 1984, Christians, by fighting the Palestinians and aligning with Israel, also found themselves isolated, against a Sunni majority in the region. The results were catastrophic and by 1990 they paid the heaviest price for peace in Lebanon. History teaches us a lot. Christians would do best to read it.
***Michael Young is opinion editor of The Daily Star newspaper. He tweets @BeirutCalling

Qaida-Led Forces Advance on Syria Airbase
Naharnet/August 28/15/Agence France Presse/Syria's Al-Qaida offshoot and other rebel groups advanced Friday towards a military airport that is the last remaining government-held facility in the northwestern province of Idlib, a monitor said. Al-Qaida-affiliated Al-Nusra Front and other Islamist groups "seized the entrance" to the Abu Duhur airport after carrying out several suicide bombings on motorbikes and "seizing several positions on its outskirts," the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. State television said the army had "killed a large number of Al-Nusra terrorists and destroyed their arms and equipment" at the facility. The Britain-based Observatory said air strikes were launched in response to the onslaught, and that 16 soldiers and 18 rebels were killed in the fighting. The so-called "Army of Conquest," a collection of Islamist and jihadist forces, captured the Idlib provincial capital in March and has since driven Syria's military from most of the province. In Damascus, meanwhile, state television said two people had been killed and seven wounded in rebel rocket fire on the capital. The Observatory also reported the rocket fire on several parts of the city. Rebel forces on the outskirts of Damascus, particularly in the Eastern Ghouta region, regularly fire rockets into Damascus. Rights groups have criticised this fire as a war crime because it is indiscriminate and often kills civilians. The army carries out regular air raids against Eastern Ghouta, often killing dozens of civilians. The town of Douma has been particularly hard hit by the government strikes, and rights groups have also accused the regime of committing war crimes with its raids on the region.

Sunni Muslim clerics furious over upcoming Iranian film about Muhammad
Reuters/J.Post August 28/15/A film on the life of the prophet Muhammad is expected to break box office records in Shi'ite Muslim Iran after its release on Thursday, but some Sunni Muslim clerics in the Arab world are already demanding that Tehran ban it. The state-sponsored Mohammad, Messenger of God, directed by Oscar-nominated director Majid Majidi, is at $40 million Iran's most expensive movie to date. "I decided to make this film to fight against the new wave of Islamophobia in the West. The Western interpretation of Islam is full of violence and terrorism," Majidi was quoted as saying by Hezbollah Line, a conservative Iranian magazine. The 171-minute movie, the first part of a planned trilogy, focuses on the prophet's childhood. His face will not be shown on screen, in accordance with traditional Islamic strictures. The camera shows the boy actor playing him only from behind, or only his shadow. A steadicam was customized especially to depict Mohammad's point of view by the movie's Oscar-winning Italian cinematographer Vittorio Storaro. The identity of the boy playing Mohammad has not been made public. Egypt's Al-Azhar, the most prestigious institute of Sunni Islam, is not satisfied with such precautions and has called on Iran to ban the film. "This matter is already settled. Sharia (Islamic law) prohibits embodying the prophets," Al-Azhar told Reuters in a statement. "It is not permissible in Islam that someone (an actor) has contradictory and conflicting roles; sometimes we see him as a blind drunk, sometimes as a womanizer ... and then he embodies a prophet ... this is not permissible."
Regional rivalry between Sunni power Saudi Arabia and Shi'ite Iran has intensified mutual suspicion between followers of the two branches of Islam in recent decades. There has been no official comment on the movie yet from Saudi Arabia, where Islam was born more than 1,400 years ago. "Most of these reactions are political," Sami Yusuf, who is one of the Islamic world's biggest musical stars and who sang the soundtrack for the film, told Reuters. "I am sure people in Al-Azhar and others who criticize the film haven't seen it yet. They are against the film only because it's a cultural export of Iran." He said it was a "shame" there were only two major productions describing the life of Muhammad, in contrast to the many on Jesus Christ and other prophets. Depictions of Muhammad have often provoked angry unrest after being deemed blasphemous by Muslims. Cartoons published by a Danish newspaper in 2005 were followed by violent protests in which scores of people died, attacks on embassies and consumer boycotts.Islamist militants shot dead 12 people at the offices of French magazine Charlie Hebdo in January this year, saying they were avenging its blasphemous cartoon depictions of Mohammad. Iran's late Supreme Leader issued a fatwa calling on Muslims to kill writer Salman Rushdie in 1988 for The Satanic Verses, a novel deemed blasphemous in its treatment of Muhammad and Islam. Muhammad, Messenger of God is only the second full-length movie drama on the prophet. The first, The Message (1976), was directed by Syrian Moustapha al-Akkad. Anthony Quinn played Muhammad's uncle, Hamza. That film did not depict Muhammad's face on screen, but some Muslims were offended. Akkad was killed in a 2005 suicide bombing in Amman. It is not known whether the attack was related to the movie. "You cannot study Mohammad's life and not fall in love with him and his character. If this film makes people of the world know our prophet better and see how kind he was, we have done our job," singer Yusuf said. Muhammad, Messenger of God has been mainly shot in Iran. Mecca was recreated on a large scale and in minute detail. Scenes with elephants were filmed in South Africa, after India refused to let the filmmakers in, fearing the reaction of Muslim countries to the movie. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has visited the film set through the production, in a strong sign of support. The film is being released in 143 cinemas in Iran on the same day as it opens at the Montreal Film Festival. One cinema in Tehran, which asked not to be named for legal reasons, said the movie was their most popular at the moment.

Four Arrested over Austria Truck Tragedy
Naharnet/August 28/15/Agence France Presse/Hungary said Friday it has arrested four people over the discovery of 71 decomposing bodies in an abandoned truck in Austria, another grim tragedy involving migrants desperately seeking refuge in Europe. In the horrific incident -- a rare occurrence on land in a prosperous country when so many migrants have died at sea -- Austrian police said the dead were likely Syrians and included a toddler and three young boys. "Among these 71 people, there were 59 men, eight women and four children including a young girl one or two years old and three boys aged eight, nine or 10," police spokesman Hans Peter Doskozil told a news conference. He said the time and cause of death still had to be determined but there was a "certain probability" they had suffocated in the truck, found Thursday on a motorway near the Hungarian border.
Meanwhile, Libyan rescue workers recovered 76 bodies from yet another capsized boat crammed with people fleeing across the Mediterranean from conflict in the Middle East and Africa. The United Nations refugee agency, UNHCR, said as many as 200 people on two boats were feared dead near the western port of Zuwara. Hungarian police said they had arrested three Bulgarians and an Afghan and had raided several addresses and confiscated items over the Austria truck discovery. A spokesman for Hungary's chief prosecutor told AFP a court would decide on Saturday whether they would be detained beyond an initial 72-hour period. Austria will likely seek to have the suspects extradited, possibly even on murder charges, the country's public prosecutor Johann Fuchs said. Doskozil said those arrested included the owner of the vehicle and two drivers, and were likely "low-ranking members... of a Bulgarian-Hungarian human-trafficking gang". Austrian motorway maintenance workers alerted police after noticing "decomposing body fluids" dripping from the vehicle, Doskozil said. Police were then confronted by an overpowering stench and a mass of tangled limbs and forensics experts worked all night to clear out the vehicle. The state of the corpses suggested that those inside had been dead for some time. Television images showed flies buzzing around the back of the vehicle in the baking sun. Austrian newspaper Kurier carried a black front page with the headline: "Who will stop this madness?" German Chancellor Angela Merkel, in Austria Thursday for a summit with Balkan leaders on the migrant crisis, said those present were "shaken" by the "horrible" news. "This is a warning to us to tackle this migrants issue quickly and in a European spirit, which means in a spirit of solidarity, and to find solutions," she said. European Union leaders have struggled to get to grips with a crisis that has seen nearly 340,000 migrants cross the bloc's borders this year -- not counting August -- and many have come from hotspots like Iraq and Syria.
Millions of other refugees have sought refuge in places like Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan. Merkel said Friday that EU leaders could hold a special summit on the crisis, but that such a gathering "must be able to take certain decisions". European interior and transport ministers gathering in Paris Saturday to discuss security measures following the thwarted train attack in France will also touch on the migration issue.
"If the stink from our car parks gets stronger perhaps we will finally understand, not just in Austria... that it is time to create safe routes to Europe, fast registration and a swift and a fair sharing out (of migrants)," said Amnesty International's Austrian chief Heinz Patzelt.
The United Nations said the number of refugees and migrants crossing the Mediterranean to Europe has soared past 300,000 this year. Over 2,500 men, women and children have drowned trying to reach EU nations after rickety overcrowded boats operated by often unscrupulous people-smugglers capsized. In the latest disaster at sea, at least 76 people died after a ship carrying hundreds of migrants sank off the coast of Libya, a spokesman for the Libyan Red Crescent said, with 198 rescued. Red Crescent teams wearing protective white clothing and masks collected bodies that had washed ashore on a Zuwara beach, placing them in orange plastic bags and carrying them to ambulances. The Italian coast guard said it had rescued around 1,400 people off Libya on Thursday, a day after it pulled another 3,000 to safety from the same area. A Swedish ship also docked in Sicily after rescuing 130 people Wednesday from a rubber dinghy and another 442 from a wooden boat found drifting off Libya that also contained 52 bodies.
But the grisly event in Austria has shown that even when migrants make it across the Mediterranean, their troubles are far from over, with many forced to put their fate in the hands of profit-hungry people-smugglers. The victims in Austria were highly likely among the more than 100,000 people to have trekked up through the western Balkans into EU member Hungary this year. From Hungary, which is laying a barbed-wire barrier along its border with Serbia along with a four-meter (13-foot) high fence, many try to make it -- via Austria -- to richer nations like Germany and Sweden."We passed by sea. And the sea was just a game playing with our lives," said Lashkari, a 30-year-old Afghan picked up by Hungarian border police Thursday after travelling for 30 days.
"I don’t think we've reached our final destination yet, because after this we don't know where do we go," he told AFP.

Thousands Protest against Corruption in Iraq Capital
Naharnet/August 28/15/Agence France Presse/Thousands of Iraqis demonstrated against corruption in Baghdad's Tahrir Square on Friday, including supporters of powerful Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. Protesters have taken to the streets of Baghdad and cities in the Shiite south for weeks, railing against rampant corruption and abysmal services, especially power outages that leave just a few hours of government-supplied electricity per day during the scorching summer heat. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi has responded to the demonstrations and a call from Iraq's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, with a reform program aimed at curbing corruption and streamlining the government, but it is still in its early stages. At Friday's demonstration, hundreds waved Iraqi flags and chanted anti-corruption slogans as in previous weeks, but this time the crowd also included supporters of Sadr, responding to his call to take part. Sadrists, many of them dressed in black, chanted slogans including "Bye bye Nuri al-Maliki" and called for the ex-premier, whose eight years in office were marked by widespread graft, to be executed. "We came out (to protest) in support of the reforms that were announced by Prime Minister Abadi. We want to push and support the state in implementing them," said Nafia al-Bakhaki, an official in the Sadr movement. "All the officials in the previous governments, especially Maliki's government, are responsible for corruption," said Sheikh Samir al-Zraijawi, also from the Sadr movement. Some did not welcome the involvement of supporters of Sadr, who had ministers in Maliki's governments and still wields significant influence despite seeking to officially distance himself from politics as he pursues religious studies. "It is hypocritical and misleading (to say the Sadrists) are with the people," said Iraqi Communist party member Siham al-Zubaidi, noting their strong presence in parliament and the fact that a since-resigned Sadrist deputy premier faces corruption allegations. Parliament signed off on Abadi's proposed reforms as well as additional measures, and the prime minister has begun ordered changes, including the scrapping of 11 cabinet posts and for the bloated number of guards for officials to be slashed. But even with popular support and backing from Sistani, the fact that parties across the political spectrum benefit from graft is seen as a major obstacle to the nascent reform effort.

U.N. Moves Forward with Plans for Syria Chemical Weapons Probe
Naharnet/August 28/15/Agence France Presse/U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the Security Council on Thursday that he is planning to set up a three-person team to investigate alleged chemical weapons attacks in Syria.The move came amid new reports of a mustard gas attack in Syria that local activists said could have been carried out by Islamic State jihadists. The investigative panel will seek to identify who is behind the attacks, in line with a U.N. resolution adopted this month to establish responsibility for the use of the banned toxic agents. Ban described the panel's mission in a seven-page letter and will await the council's green light before launching a recruitment drive for top experts to carry out the mission. Doctors Without Borders (MSF) said earlier this week it had treated civilians suffering from apparent exposure to a chemical agent in Marea, a town near the northern city of Aleppo, following an attack last week. The Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS) said its own doctors had identified the agent as mustard gas. Nearly two weeks ago, reports emerged that IS jihadists in Iraq may have used mustard gas against Iraqi Kurdish fighters. "The continuing reports of the use of chemical weapons, as well as the use of toxic chemicals as a weapon in the Syrian conflict are deeply disturbing," Ban said in a separate statement Thursday. "The international community has a responsibility to hold the perpetrators accountable and to ensure that chemical weapons never be used again as an instrument of warfare," he said. Earlier this month, the 15-member council unanimously endorsed the resolution setting up the joint investigative mechanism that will work with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. That investigation will seek "to identify to the greatest extent feasible individuals, entities, groups or governments who were perpetrators, organizers, sponsors or otherwise involved in the use of chemicals as weapons" in Syria, Ban said in the seven-page letter, seen by AFP. The team will have "full access to all locations" and "may establish contact and receive information from any parties" in Syria. The United States pushed for the U.N. chemical weapons probe after a wave of chlorine gas attacks that the West blames on President Bashar Assad's forces. Ban did not specify in his letter when the panel will begin its work. The team is to present its first findings to the council 90 days after it begins its investigation.

U.S. Envoy to Syria Visits Moscow amid Fresh Diplomatic Push
Naharnet/August 28/15/Agence France Presse/Russia on Friday hosted the newly appointed U.S. special envoy for Syria as world powers intensify efforts to end the four-year civil war raging in the country. The new envoy, Michael Ratney, who was appointed to his position last month, had previously worked for the State Department in the Middle East. In Moscow, Ratney met with Russian deputy foreign minister Mikhail Bogdanov and other senior officials, but no details about their meeting were immediately released. The spokesperson for the U.S. embassy in Moscow, Will Stevens, told AFP ahead of Ratney's meetings that his visit "reaffirms the United States’ strong commitment to working with the international community to help Syrians lay the foundation for a free, democratic, and pluralistic future."Numerous initiatives have tried at the international level to seek an end to a crisis that has claimed more than 240,000 lives but all of them have failed. In recent weeks Middle Eastern leaders have flocked to Moscow, one of the few remaining allies of Syrian President Bashad Assad. This week Russian strongman Vladimir Putin discussed Syria with Jordanian King Abdullah II and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier this month hosted his Saudi and Iranian counterparts as well as members of the Syrian opposition tolerated by the Assad regime. Moscow is pushing a plan for a broader grouping than the current U.S.-led coalition to fight the Islamic State (IS) group, which would include Syria's government and its allies. Assad's opponents have rejected the idea.Ratney is then expected to travel to Geneva and Riyadh for further meetings on the crisis.

US State Department clarifies description of Parchin as nuclear site
MICHAEL WILNER/J.Post/08/28/2015/NEW YORK - Iran's military complex at Parchin formerly served as a nuclear site, but no longer does, State Department spokesman John Kirby told The Jerusalem Post on Friday. Kirby was clarifying a comment he made on Thursday afternoon in a briefing with reporters, in which he characterized the controversial facility as "a conventional military site, not a nuclear site." The United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency suspects that Parchin hosted Iran's experimentation with nuclear weapons technology in the mid-2000s. The agency seeks access to the site in order to resolve its investigation into that past work. That access - outlined in a road-map agreed upon by the IAEA and Iran last month - is the first step toward implementation of the larger nuclear deal reached with world powers on July 14.But satellite imagery suggests Iran has begun construction on the site since early summer, raising questions as the Tehran's designs for the site. The IAEA has noted this construction in its internal reports on their investigation, but Iran says it is within its rights to build at its conventional military facilities. Asked whether Iran is indeed within its rights to build at the facility, or if the site has been considered nuclear in nature, Kirby replied: "Both are true." "What matters about Parchin is that it was a nuclear site," Kirby said. "And that is why the IAEA needs access to it, to determine the scope of Iranian PMD," referring to the possible military dimensions of Iran's nuclear work. "Today, it is a conventional military facility," he continued. "Construction on it - if true - may have nothing to do with the IAEA's mission of determining PMD."

Iranian boy, 14, ‘marries’ 10-year-old girl
By Staff writer | Al Arabiya News/Friday, 28 August 2015/Photos showing a 14-year-old boy getting married to his 10-year-old partner in Iran have gone viral on social media. The couple, who are under the legal marriage age in Iran, reportedly got married on Aug. 14, after having obtained permission from authorities. The boy wore a grey suit while his bride was in a traditional white wedding dress. The pair were seen with their families in some of the pictures. In the Islamic Republic, girls can marry as young as 13 provided they have the permission of their father. Boys can marry from the age of 15. Despite being legally dubious, as many as 42,000 children aged between 10 and 14 married in 2010, according to Iranian news website Tabnak.

Obama to speak with Jewish groups on Iran deal
By Associated Press/Washington/Friday, 28 August 2015/U.S. President Barack Obama is using a Friday webcast to try to allay concerns from Jewish communities about the nuclear agreement with Iran. Obama will deliver remarks about the agreement and take questions from participants. The webcast is being organized by two major Jewish organizations that have held similar events with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz. The Israeli government adamantly opposes the deal signed by the U.S., Iran and five world powers. The agreement seeks to keep Iran from building a nuclear bomb in exchange for international sanctions relief. Critics say the agreement makes too many concessions and could eventually allow for a nuclear-armed Iran.
The president counters that the agreement contains the most comprehensive inspection and verification regime ever negotiated to monitor a nuclear program.

Erdogan approves new Turkish interim govt
Reuters/ Ankara/Friday/28 August 2015/Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan approved a temporary power-sharing cabinet proposed by Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu on Friday, Erdogan's office said in a statement. The interim cabinet is expected to see the departure of high-profile figures including Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan, senior officials have said, but there is little likelihood of any major policy shifts. Davutoglu is expected later on Friday to give details of the cabinet, whose formation follows his AK Party's failure to find a junior coalition partner after losing its parliamentary majority in a June 7 election.

U.S. urges Iran to release Hekmati from ‘unjust detention’
By AFP | Washington/Friday, 28 August 2015/U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday urged Iran to free Amir Hekmati, an American who served as a U.S. Marine, from four years of “unjust detention.” Saturday marks the fourth anniversary of Hekmati’s imprisonment on what Kerry called “false espionage charges” while Hekmati was visiting relatives in the Islamic republic. “We repeat our call on the Iranian government to release Amir on humanitarian grounds,” Kerry said in a statement. “This is a milestone no family wants to mark, and the Hekmati family has shown inspiring perseverance in the face of this injustice,” he added. “And as befits a former Marine, Amir has shown tremendous courage in the face of this unjust detention.”Kerry reiterated his government’s call for Iran to release two other Americans. These include pastor Saeed Abedini, who was arrested in 2012 and sentenced to eight years in jail for gathering a group of people to study the Bible, and Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian. Kerry also urged Iran to “work cooperatively” to help locate Robert Levinson, a former FBI agent who disappeared while on Iran’s Kish island in 2007. Several lawmakers and Republican presidential candidates have argued that Washington and the international community should have negotiated the return of the Americans as a condition for finalizing the historic nuclear deal with Iran.

U.N. urged to end Syrian ‘suffering’
By Staff writer | Al Arabiya News/Friday, 28 August 2015/The U.N. humanitarian chief urged Thursday the Security Council, its most powerful body, to push for a solution to end the conflict in Syria that has killed more than a quarter of a million people.“With all the will in the world, humanitarian action cannot be a substitute for political action. The Council must exert leadership to push for a political solution,” Stephen O’Brien said after a short trip to Syria earlier this month. “It is difficult to find words that would justly describe the depth of suffering that the Syrians face on a daily basis. Having just returned from the country, I have seen a glimpse of this grim reality myself,” he said.“I left the country deeply saddened and outraged,” he added.
“The needless and immense suffering of ordinary Syrians and the abhorrent destruction this conflict has wrought on the country. I am angry, because we as the international community are not allowed and are not able to do more to protect Syrians who more than ever need our unfaltering support,” he added. The U.N. representative who was visiting Syria for three days also discussed with senior government officials the need to strengthen protection of civilians. “I urged the government to grant full and unhindered access to all people in need, wherever they may be located.”Since the conflict began over four years ago, more than a quarter of a million people have been killed in Syria and over a million people injured, according to the United Nations. Some 7.6 million people have been displaced inside the country. Over one million people have had to leave their homes this year alone.

British hacker for ISIS killed in US drone strike in Syria: sources
The operation deals a major blow to ISIS, say experts/Washington, Reuters/Asharq Al-Awsat—A British hacker who US and European officials said became a top cyber expert for Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has been killed in a US drone strike, a US source familiar with the matter said on Wednesday. It was the second reported killing of a senior ISIS figure in the last eight days. ISIS’s second-in-command was killed in a US air strike near Mosul, Iraq, on August 18. The source indicated that the US Defense Department was likely involved in the drone strike that killed British hacker Junaid Hussain, a former resident of Birmingham, England. A report on the website CSO Online said the drone strike took place on Tuesday near the Syrian city of Raqqa. US and European government sources told Reuters earlier this year that they believed Hussain was the leader of CyberCaliphate, a hacking group which in January attacked a Twitter account belonging to the Pentagon, though the sources said they did not know if he was personally involved. Hussain moved to Syria sometime in the last two years. He was 21 years old, the Birmingham Mail newspaper reported. Hussain is believed to have led a group of other ISIS hackers from his base in Raqqa and overseen the production and distribution of numerous propaganda videos used by ISIS for intimidation and recruitment purposes. US government sources said that in his role as ISIS’s cyber chief, Hussain recently had become a subject of considerable interest to US security and defense agencies.
However, the sources denied a recent British news report that said he was No. 3 on a US list of drone targets, saying other operational ISIS commanders were regarded by US authorities as far more dangerous than Hussain. The killing of Hussain, if confirmed, “would represent a major blow to ISIS and other terrorist groups” operating out of Syria, experts said. “The importance of the killing of influential ISIS elements, like Hussain, lies in the fact that they tend to operate off the radar, without seeking positions of authority or official titles while at the same time they commit the dirtiest of acts inside and outside Syria,” Luay Al-Miqdad, director of Masarat, a group that monitors terrorist activity in Syria, told Asharq Al-Awsat. Miqdad called on the US-led anti-ISIS coalition “to conduct more operations of this type in order to deprive ISIS from feeling safe and the people of the ISIS-occupied Raqqa from feeling they have been left to face their fate alone.”
According to Miqdad, the Syrian people share “a common interest with the US-led coalition countries in dismantling ISIS and striking its leaders.”

Wooing the worriers: US treasury official to visit Israel over Iran Deal
Reuters/Ynetnews/08.28.15,/In continuing campaign to reassure Israel over nuclear deal signed with Iran, official to meet with Israeli leaders, emphasize 'increasing cooperation' between US, Israel. A senior US Treasury official will travel to Israel this week to discuss the nuclear deal reached between Iran and world powers with senior Israeli officials, the Treasury Department said on Thursday.  Acting Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Adam Szubin will travel to Israel from Friday through Monday, the Treasury said in a statement. It will be his first visit there since the nuclear deal was signed in July. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly opposes the accord reached between Iran and the United States and five other world powers, which imposes limits on Iran's nuclear program in return for relief from sanctions. He argues the deal does not do enough to curb Iran's nuclear program and will bring Tehran a windfall in sanctions relief that could help fund regional conflicts. While in Israel, Szubin will discuss details of the nuclear deal and "emphasize the United States' commitment to increasing cooperation with Israel to combat Iran's support for terrorism and other destabilizing activity in the region," the Treasury said. A Treasury spokesperson said Szubin will meet with Dore Gold, director-general of Israel's Foreign Ministry, National Security Adviser Yossi Cohen and Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz, among other officials.

Egypt bids for two advanced French helicopter carriers - counterweight to the Iranian navy
DEBKAfile Special Report August 27, 2015
Egypt is in advanced negotiations with France for two highly advanced French Mistral class assault-cum-helicopter carrier ships that were originally destined for the Russian Navy. debkafile’s military and intelligence sources report that this deal, if it goes through, will substantially beef up the regional lineup of the Saudi, Egyptian and Israeli navies. The new vessels would enable it to contest Iranian naval challenges in the Mediterranean, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, and alter the balance of strength between the opposing sides.
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have given presidents Abdel-Fatteh El-Sisi and Francois Hollande pledges to fund the transaction at $800 million per carrier. The Mistrals will join the missile ships of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Israel and six Dolphin submarines which, according to foreign sources, are capable of firing nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles. Their delivery comes at a time of strengthening strategic ties among Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Israel. The Egyptian navy stands to own the most advanced warships of any Middle East power. The French vessels may also be used as aircraft carriers, because their decks are designed to carry fighter jets as well as helicopters. The only nations maintaining this type of vessel in the region are outsiders – the US, which deploys a Wasp class helicopter for marines; Russia, the ageing Moskva class copter carrier, and France. Originally ordered from France by the Russian Navy, the pair of Mistrals was never delivered owing to the sanctions the European Union imposed on Moscow after the Ukraine invasion. It is a multi-purpose warship, able to accommodate 16 “European Tiger” four-bladed, twin-engined attack helicopters, four large landing craft for dropping 450 marines on shore, 70 armored vehicles, including 14 heavy AMX Leclerc assault tanks.
These figures are flexible. If necessary, the French carriers can handle an expanded complement of 900 marines and 40 tanks. It is also a command ship geared to maintain communications with military forces located anywhere in the world. It also carries a 69-bed field hospital. The Mistral has a maximum speed of 18 knots and maximum range of 20,000 miles.

10 Questions for President Obama About Iran
Jeffrey Goldberg with Robert Satloff/The Atlantic/August 28, 2015
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/obama-nuclear-iran-robert-satloff/402478/
The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg -- who frequently interviews President Obama on Middle East issues -- poses Robert Satloff's ten provocative questions on the Iran deal and promises to get answers. It appears likely, as of this writing, that Barack Obama will be victorious in his fight to implement the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by his secretary of state, John Kerry. Republicans in Congress don't appear to have the votes necessary to void the agreement, and Benjamin Netanyahu's campaign to subvert Obama may be remembered as one of the more counterproductive and shortsighted acts of an Israeli prime minister since the rebirth of the Jewish state 67 years ago.
Things could change, of course, and the Iranian regime, which is populated in good part by extremists, fundamentalist theocrats, and supporters of terrorism, could do something monumentally stupid in the coming weeks that could force on-the-fence Democrats to side with their Republican adversaries (remember the Cafe Milano fiasco, anyone?). But, generally speaking, the Obama administration and its European allies seem to have a clearer path to implementation than they had at the beginning of the month.
Which is a good thing. I remain in the camp of people who are not happy that Iran will be strengthened economically by this deal -- much of this money will be flowing to such horrifying Iranian clients as Bashar al-Assad in Syria and Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon -- but who also believe that there is no reasonable alternative to the deal, and believe, by the way, that Israel, among other parties, might actually benefit from it.
I've read various arguments advancing the line that the U.S. could, in the absence of an agreement, unilaterally prevent Iran from crossing the nuclear threshold without going to war, and there is some merit to these arguments. I don't like the surety of those who argue that congressional rejection of the deal axiomatically means armed conflict between the U.S. and Iran (and I certainly don't like the malevolent attempt by some to label Jewish critics of the deal as traitors), but ultimately these formulas aren't convincing. The deal places real constraints -- not perfect constraints, but meaningful constraints nonetheless -- on Iran's nuclear ambitions. No deal means no constraints. I find myself more or less in agreement with Brent Scowcroft, the former U.S. national security adviser, who wrote in the Washington Post last week that if the U.S. walks away from the deal, it walks away alone:
"The world's leading powers worked together effectively because of U.S. leadership. To turn our back on this accomplishment would be an abdication of the United States' unique role and responsibility, incurring justified dismay among our allies and friends. We would lose all leverage over Iran's nuclear activities. The international sanctions regime would dissolve. And no member of Congress should be under the illusion that another U.S. invasion of the Middle East would be helpful."
The partisan polarization of this issue, and Netanyahu's self-destructive all-or-nothing approach, have made it more difficult to discuss matters that actually need discussing right now: ways in which the deal could be strengthened, and ways in which Iran's regional ambitions -- non-nuclear but still nefarious ambitions -- could be checked.
One person who has been talking about the need to strengthen the deal, and who has been raising questions about the deal's potential unintended consequences, is Robert Satloff, the executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. It's been my impression that Satloff is more skeptical of the deal than I am, though like his Institute colleague Dennis Ross, the former U.S. Middle East peace negotiator (and Obama administration Iran aide), he has not said whether he will support the deal or not. In fact, he argues that the binary choice -- for or against the deal -- is too restrictive when there is still time for the administration to make improvements to the deal without opening it up for renegotiation. It is not yet too late, he contends, to make the agreement stronger -- and that, he suggests, is what the Obama administration should be doing. (It is also what Netanyahu ought to be doing, though there doesn't seem to be any hope that this will happen, because Netanyahu is currently living in an alternate universe where Israeli prime ministers are more powerful than American presidents.) These improvements, Satloff told me, stem from his analysis of flaws in the deal -- both in the text itself and in the thinking that brought the deal into existence.
During the course of a lengthy email exchange with me over the past several days, Satloff generated a list of 10 questions he would like to ask President Obama about the deal. I decided, because I am both fair and balanced, that I would reproduce these questions here in full, without my commentary. I'll follow up this post with another one in which I try to elicit answers to his questions, if not from administration officials, then from people who are more ardently pro-deal than myself. Here are Satloff's questions to the president:
1. You have argued that the Iran deal enhances Israel's security and those of our Arab Gulf allies. At the same time, your administration has offered the Gulf states a huge security package by way of compensation and you have expressed frustration that the government of Israel has not yet entered into discussions with you to discuss ways to bolster its security. But isn't this a paradox? If the Iran deal bolsters their security, shouldn't their security needs be going down, not up?
2. It is surely legitimate for you to argue that the Iran deal enhances U.S. security, but it certainly seems odd for you to claim to understand Israel's security needs more than its democratically elected leaders. Are there other democracies whose leaders you believe don't recognize their own best security interests or is Israel unique in this regard?
3. Constructive, respected, well-informed observers, like your former National Security Council Iran policy advisor Dennis Ross, have urged you to propose transferring to Israel the "mountain-busting" Massive Ordnance Penetrator as a way to boost Israel's independent deterrence against Iran. But you have not done so. Instead, in your letter to Congressman Jerrold Nadler, you highlighted your administration's plan to send Israel a much less capable weapon. Why are you reluctant to send Israel the best item we have in our inventory to address this profound threat?
4. You have said that the Iran nuclear agreement provides a peaceful, diplomatic resolution to the threat of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Would you agree, therefore, that the pursuit of an independent nuclear option by another Middle East country -- say, Saudi Arabia -- would be clear evidence that the Iran deal had failed?
5. In your letter to Congressman Nadler, you refused to spell out the penalties Iran would suffer for violations of the agreement, saying that "telegraphing in advance to Iran the expected response for any potential infractions would be counterproductive, potentially lessening the deterrent effect." On the surface, this is difficult to understand -- after all, as a constitutional law professor, you can appreciate that having clarity in terms of penalties for lawbreaking is a basic element of our legal system. If you aren't willing to publicly spell out this approach to penalties, can you guarantee that the United States and its European partners have already agreed, in writing, on precisely what actions they will collectively take in response to different types of infractions? Will you share these details with at least the leaders of the relevant committees in Congress? Or is the real reason you aren't willing to "telegraph" these penalties in advance is because we and the Europeans can't agree on them?
6. In your letter to Congressman Nadler, you also said you "reserved the right to deploy new sanctions to address continuing concerns." Can you spell out what sort of new sanctions you have in mind? Specifically, wouldn't it make sense for you to ask Congress to articulate new sanctions now that would come into effect if our intelligence agencies reported that Iran was using its sanctions-relief windfall to transfer large sums (or expensive weapons systems) to its allies and terrorist proxies?
7. You have argued that the global sanctions regime falls apart if Congress rejects the Iran deal. But the key variable here is not Europe, China or some other foreign country -- it's the United States. Specifically, the sanctions regime only collapses if the U.S. stops enforcing the sanctions with the same vigor it has enforced them with in recent years, and instead goes back to the policy of the Clinton and Bush administrations, which refused to enforce the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) despite overwhelming votes for that law in Congress. In the event of a "no" vote, can you promise that your administration will expend the same effort and resources to enforce U.S. sanctions laws against Iran as has been the case the last few years? And if that's the case, what's your explanation for how or why sanctions will collapse?
8. The supreme leader clearly wants the benefits of the deal -- both in terms of sanctions relief and the international validation it brings for Iran's nuclear program. Yet you seem to bend over backwards to be wary of saying things that might upset him. (Given the supreme leader's continued hostility toward America, this is a characteristic that he doesn't seem to share.) Specifically, in your letter to Congressman Nadler, why did you resort once again to the "all options are on the table" formulation in the event Iran dashes toward a bomb? Since a "dash" implies Iran would be hell-bent toward achieving its goal, why not state bluntly that we would use force to stop them? If they are dashing, haven't they already violated the core commitment in the Iran agreement not to pursue a weapon? If they are dashing, the threat of renewed sanctions surely isn't an effective deterrent. Wouldn't candor produce more deterrence than subtlety?
9. In your American University speech, you said the Iran agreement produced a "permanent" solution to the threat of the Iranian nuclear bomb. But just a few months ago, you told an NPR interviewer that Iran's breakout time toward a bomb "would have shrunk almost down to zero" when restrictions on centrifuges and enrichment expire after 10-15 years. Can both statements really be true?
10. In your final debate with Mitt Romney in October 2012, just before you came before American voters for the final time, moderator Bob Schieffer asked you specifically what sort of Iran deal you would accept. Your response was: "The deal we'll accept is that they end their nuclear program." Notwithstanding the significant achievements of the Iran agreement, it clearly falls short of "ending their nuclear program." Moreover, you and your spokespeople regularly disparage as warmongers those who advocate what you once called for. Why did your own position in 2012 become warmongering by 2015?

Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan, and Obama’s Illusions
Amir Taheri/Asharq Al Awsat/August 28/15
Promoting the “deal” he claims he has made with Iran, President Barack Obama is trying to cast himself as heir to a tradition of “peace through negotiations” followed by US presidents for decades. In that context he has named Presidents John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan as shining examples, with the subtext that he hopes to join their rank in history.
Obama quotes JFK as saying one should not negotiate out of fear but should not be afraid of negotiating either.
To start with, those who oppose the supposed “deal” with Iran never opposed negotiations; they oppose the result it has produced.
Obama pretends that the alternative to the “deal” that he is marketing is war.
Needless to say, that is not a serious argument. Allegations related to Iran’s nuclear program have been around for two decades, prompting six resolutions of the United Nations’ Security Council. In one form or another, Iran and the major powers have been engaged in negotiations on the topic since 2003. What prompted Obama to press the accelerator was his desire to score a diplomatic victory before he leaves office.
It did not matter if the “deal” he concocted was more of a dog’s dinner than a serious document. He wanted something, anything , and to achieve that he was prepared to settle for one big diplomatic fudge.
Is Obama the new JFK? Hardly.
Kennedy did negotiate with the USSR but only after he had blockaded Cuba and forced Nikita Khrushchev to blink and disband the nuclear sites he had set up on the Caribbean island.
In contrast, Obama obtained nothing tangible and verifiable.
Iran’s Atomic Energy chief Ali-Akbar Salehi, put it nicely when he said that the only thing that Iran gave Obama was a promise “not to do things we were not doing anyway, or did not wish to do or could not even do at present.”
JFK also had the courage to fly to West Berlin to face the Soviet tanks and warn Moscow against attempts at overrunning the enclave of freedom that Germany’s former capital had become. With his “Ich bin ein Berliner” (I am a citizen of Berlin), he sided with the people of the besieged city in a long and ultimately victorious struggle against Soviet rule.
In contrast Obama does not even dare call on the mullahs to release the Americans they hold hostage. Instead, he has engaged in an epistolary courting of the Supreme Guide and instructed his administration in Washington to do and say nothing that might ruffle the mullahs’ feathers.
No, Obama is no JFK.
But is he heir to Nixon?
Though he hates Nixon ideologically, Obama has tried to compare his Iran “deal” with Nixon’s rapprochement with China.
Again, the comparison is misplaced.
Normalization with Beijing came after the Chinese leaders had sorted out their internal power struggle and decided to work their way out of the ideological impasse created by their moment of madness known as The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. The big bad wolf of the tale, Lin Biao, was eliminated in an arranged air crash and the Gang of Four defanged before the new leadership set-up in Beijing could approach Washington with talk of normalization.
At the time the Chinese elite, having suffered defeat in border clashes with the USSR, saw itself surrounded by enemies, especially after China’s only ally Pakistan had been cut into two halves in an Indo-Soviet scheme that led to the creation of Bangladesh.
Hated by all its neighbors, China needed the US to break out of isolation.
Even then, the Americans drove a hard bargain. They set a list of 22 measures that Beijing had to take to prove its goodwill, chief among them was abandoning the project of “exporting revolution”.
Those of us who, as reporters, kept an eye on China and visited the People’s Republic in those days were astonished at the dramatic changes the Communist leaders introduced in domestic and foreign policies to please the Americans. In just two years, China ceased to act as a “cause” and started behaving like a nation-state. It was only then that Nixon went to Beijing to highlight a long process of normalization. In the case of Iran, Obama has obtained none of those things. In fact, his “deal” has encouraged the worst tendencies of the Khomeinist regime as symbolized by dramatic rise in executions, the number of prisoners of conscience and support for terror groups not to mention helping Bashar Al-Assad in Syria.
No, Obama is no Nixon.
But is he a new Reagan as he pretends? Hardly.
Reagan was prepared to engage the Soviets at the highest level only after he had convinced them that they could not blackmail Europe with their SS20s while seeking to expand their empire through so-called revolutionary movements they sponsored across the globe. The SS20s were countered with Pershing missiles and “revolutionary” armies with Washington-sponsored “freedom fighters.”
Unlike Obama who is scared of offending the mullahs, Reagan had no qualms about calling the USSR “The Evil Empire” and castigating its leaders on issues of freedom and human rights. The famous phrase “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall!” indicated that though he was ready to negotiate, Reagan was not prepared to jettison allies to clinch a deal.
Obama has made no mention of Jimmy Carter, the US president he most resembles.
However, even Carter was not as bad as Obama if only because he was prepared to boycott the Moscow Olympics to show his displeasure at the invasion of Afghanistan. Carter also tried to do something to liberate US hostages in Tehran by organizing an invasion of the Islamic Republic with seven helicopters. The result was tragicomic; but he did the best his meagre talents allowed. (NB: No one is suggesting Obama should invade Iran if only because if he did the results would be even more tragicomic than Carter’s adventure.)
On a more serious note, it is important to remember that dealing with the Khomeinist regime in Tehran is quite different from dealing with the USSR and China was in the context of detente and normalization.
Neither the USSR nor the People’s Republic regarded the United States as “enemy” in any religious context as the Khomeinist regime does. Moscow branded the US, its “Imperialist” rival, as an “adversary” (protivnik) who must be fought and, if possible, defeated, but not as a “foe” (vrag) who must be destroyed. In China, too, the US was attacked as “arch-Imperialist” or “The Paper Tiger” but not as a mortal foe. The slogan was “Yankee! Go Home!”
In the Khomeinist regime, however, the US is routinely designated as “foe” (doshman) in a religious context and the slogan is “Death to America!”
Supreme Guide Ali Khamenei has no qualms about calling for the “destruction” of America, as final step towards a new global system under the banner of his twisted version of Islam. Tehran is the only place where international “End of America” conferences are held by the government every year.
The USSR and China first cured themselves of their version of the anti-American disease before seeking detente and normalization. That did not mean they fell in love with the US. What it meant was that they learned to see the US as adversary, rival, or competitor not as a mortal foe engaged in a combat-to-death contest. The Islamic Republic has not yet cured itself of that disease and Obama’s weakness may make it even more difficult for that cure to be applied.
Détente with the USSR and normalization with China came after they modified important aspects of their behavior for the better. Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan responded positively to positive changes on the part of the adversary.
In the case of the USSR positive change started with the 20th congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in which Khrushchev denounced Joseph Stalin’s crimes, purged the party of its nastiest elements, notably Lavrentiy Beria, and rehabilitated millions of Stalin’s victims.
In foreign policy, Khrushchev, his swashbuckling style notwithstanding, accepted the new architecture of stability in Cold War Europe based on NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Kennedy, Johnson and, later, Nixon and President Gerald Ford had to respond positively.
In the late1980s, the USSR offered other positive evolutions through Glasnost and Perestroika and final withdrawal from Afghanistan under Mikhail Gorbachev. Again, Reagan and President George Bush (the father) had to respond positively.
In the case of China we have already noted the end of the Cultural Revolution. But China also agreed to help the US find a way to end the Vietnam War. Beijing stopped its almost daily provocations against Taiwan and agreed that the issue of the island-nation issue be kicked into the long grass. Within a decade, under Deng Xiaoping, China went even further by adopting capitalism as its economic system.
There is one other difference between the cases of the USSR and China in the 1960s to 1990s and that of the Khomeinist regime in Tehran today.
The USSR had been an ally of the United States during the Second World War and its partner in setting up the United Nations in 1945. Although rivals and adversaries, the two nations also knew when to work together when their mutual interests warranted it.
The same was true of the Chinese Communist Party which had been an ally of the US and its Chinese client the Kuomintang during the war against Japanese occupation when Edgar Snow was able to describe Mao Zedong as “America’s staunchest ally against the Japanese Empire.” In the 1970s, Washington and Beijing did not find it strange to cooperate in containing the USSR, their common rival-cum-adversary as they had done when countering Japan.
In the case of the Islamic Republic there is no sign of any positive change and certainly no history of even tactical alliance with the US.
Unless he knows something that we do not, Obama is responding positively to his own illusions.

Egyptian Writer, Yasmin Al-Khatib Muslim: History Is Rife With ISIS-Style Executions; Adopting Enlightenment Is The Only Weapon Against Such Brutality
MEMRI/August 28, 2015 Special Dispatch No.6144
In an article titled "Death by Fire Is an Islamic Punishment," Yasmin Al-Khatib, a liberal Egyptian writer and artist, criticized the fact that, following every brutal execution carried out by the Islamic State (ISIS), many Muslims claim that these actions have nothing to do with Islam. She noted that Muslim history – including the history of the Prophet and his Companions – is rife with stories of grisly executions, which indicates that such actions are not foreign to Islam. She stressed that Christianity, too, has a very violent history and engaged in many brutal practices. However, she said, Christianity changed over the years by choosing the path of enlightenment, and Islam must do the same, otherwise thousands of organizations like ISIS will emerge.
The following are excerpts of her article, which was posted on the website of the daily Al-Tahrir:[1]
"I do not understand why, after every perverted [act of] execution carried out by ISIS, most Muslims insist that these actions have nothing to do with Islam. After all, Muslim history is rife with terrifying forms of execution, similar or even identical to those used by ISIS. I am not talking of executions motivated by revenge, such as the crucifixion of Al-Khallaj,[2] the killing of Suhrawardi,[3] or the slaughter of Ibn Al-Muqaffa.[4] [Nor am I speaking of] the mutilation of dead bodies, such as the practice of displaying the heads of decapitated [victims], which was invented by the Umayyad [caliphs]. The most famous [victim of this] was the greatest rebel in Islamic history, Hussein bin 'Ali.[5] I am talking of execution [methods] used in the early Islamic period, [a period] which most of our clerics regard as the essential [source] for Islamic legislation, such as execution by fire or by being cast from a high place – two punishments that were set out for homosexuals. It was the consensus among the Prophet's companions that homosexuals had to be put to death, but they disagreed on the method. Some thought [a homosexual] should be burned alive, others advocated toppling a wall over him and leaving him to die under the rubble, and yet others thought he should be cast from the highest wall in the village and then, to complete [the task], pelted with stones. The last [method] has actually been applied by ISIS to a homosexual who was cast from a tall building in Baghdad.[6] [The first and fourth caliphs,] Abu Bakr and Ali bin Abu Talib, ordered to burn homosexuals, and this was done. A book by the historian Al-Tabari[7] states that Abu Bakr ordered his commanders, during the wars against the apostates, to burn several of them, and the book Futuh Al-Buldan ("Conquest of Lands")[8] states that [Muslim military leader and companion of the Prophet] Khaled bin Al-Walid also burned some apostate hostages.
"This demonstrates that Islamic thought is not totally free of responsibility for [the notion of] execution by fire – a fact that some people ignored, either deliberately or out of ignorance, after the execution [by fire] of the Jordanian pilot Mu'adh Al-Kasasbeh. These people justified [their position] by quoting the hadith of the Prophet – 'none is permitted to torture by fire but the Master of fire [Allah]' – even though this starkly contradicts the accounts mentioned above of the Prophet's companions executing people by fire. I myself question this hadith, since it first orders to burn people and then says the opposite – fickle [behavior] that does not befit a Prophet who was sent by Allah to guide his creations on the straight path. Here is the full text of the hadith: 'The Prophet dispatched a squadron [of warriors], telling them: "If you find the man named so-and-so and the man named so-and-so, burn them both in fire." Later he said: "I had ordered you to burn those two men in fire, but none is permitted to torture by fire but the Master of fire, so if you find them kill them."'
"In any case, the Umayyad caliphs continued meting out the punishment of death by fire, and later the Abbasid [caliphs] even improved upon it and used to roast the condemned over a slow fire until he expired, just like you roast a slaughtered animal. As for torturing people to death, there is the well-known story about the men of Urayna who took the Prophet's camels and killed the man who was tending them by gouging out his eyes with a sharp sword, cutting off his arms, legs and tongue, and then leaving him to die. When the Prophet heard of this, he ordered to cut off their arms and legs and gouge out their eyes with a red-hot iron and then cast them out into the street until they died. This [punishment] was according to the principle of subjecting [the perpetrator] to whatever he did to others, no matter how atrocious the act.
"Some may think that the purpose of this article is to blacken the image of Islam. So, in order to elaborate and clarify, let me note that, in the past, Christianity also practiced execution by fire. [This was true] especially in the Middle Ages, when the Inquisition courts burned thousands of Muslims and the Church burned thousands of women for practicing witchcraft, as well as philosophers, out of fear [that they would spread] enlightenment. But eventually the enlightenment triumphed and the Church became moderate and tolerant, as it is today. Enlightenment is our only weapon to defeat ISIS, because our real war is not against [this organization] but against extremist thinking, and if we do not confront it and beat it, a thousand [other] ISIS [organizations] will emerge."
Endnotes:
[1] Tahrirnews.com, July 29, 2015.
[2] Mansour Al-Khallaj, a Sufi poet who was crucified for heresy in 922 AD.
[3] Shahab Al-Din Yahya Suhrawardi, a renowned Sufi philosopher executed for his teachings in 1191. There are contradictory reports about his death. It is variously claimed that he was starved to death, thrown from a high place, killed by the sword and/or burned.
[4] Abu Muhammad 'Abdallah Ibn Al-Muqaffa was an eighth-century Persian author, translator and philosopher who converted to Islam. In 759 he was accused of heresy by the governor of Basra and tortured to death in a horrific manner (his limbs were cut off one by one and roasted before his eyes until he died).
[5] The grandson of the Prophet, who, after the Prophet's death, claimed to be the rightful caliph instead of Yazid Abu Sufyan. In 680 he was decapitated and his head was sent to Yazid, who displayed it as a sign of his victory in the struggle for the throne. After Hussein's death, his followers became a separate Muslim sect, the Shi'ites.
[6] In fact, ISIS has executed many men for engaging in homosexual acts, using this method as well as others. See MEMRI JTTM report: "ISIS Campaign Of Executing Homosexuals – By Stoning, Shooting, Throwing Off Roofs, Public Torture: In Accordance With Shari'a Law As Explained By Influential Mainstream Islamic Preachers, Scholars On Leading Arab Media Outlets, Including Al-Jazeera, Hamas's Al-Aqsa TV – WARNING – GRAPHIC IMAGES," March 10, 2015.
[7] Muhammad Ibn Jarir Al-Tabari (d. 923) was one of Islam's fist notable historians and commentators on the Koran. His book Tarikh Al-Tabari chronicles the history of kings and prophets from the creation of the world until his own era.
[8] A history of the early conquests of Muhammad and the early caliphs by ninth-century Persian historian Ahmad Ibn Yahya Al-Baladhuri.

Khamenei’s private and public views on the U.S.
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya/August 28/15
Thanks to the recently established nuclear deal, which was struck in July between the six world powers (P5+1) and the Islamic Republic, other European countries (including France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, etc) are now rushing to restore their relationships or further strengthen their economic and geopolitical ties with Iran. In 2011, the UK embassy in Tehran along with another British diplomatic compound were stormed and ransacked. The timing of this occurrence coincided with the UK's agreement to impose a new round of sanctions on the Islamic Republic. Despite these acts, after four years, both countries have now decided to normalize diplomatic ties and they have reopened their embassies. The nuclear deal can be characterized as the primary force behind the normalization of ties between Iran and the West. The strained ties between the Islamic Republic and the UK has now been replaced with cordial official statements.
Economic spectrum
It is crucial to point out that a considerable part of the Iran-West normalization of relations lies within economic spectrums. Iran offers a large potential market for investment and is a home to sought after resources such as gas and oil. Strategic and tactical cooperation (such as fighting the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) are also part of the normalization package. For example, when it comes to strategic and tactical cooperation in the pursuit of the defeat of ISIS, Iran is being viewed as a major force by the West.
Khamenei holds two stances on the U.S.: one in private, and one in public for the purpose of preserving his legitimacy. As the UK reopens its embassy in Tehran and as other Western countries take concrete steps to further ratchet up their economic, political, and strategic ties with the Islamic Republic, the lingering questions on the mind of many are: what about U.S.-Iran ties? What is Khamenei’s view on the U.S.? Are we going to witness a thaw in diplomatic ties, based on the latest developments? Will Iran and the U.S. reopen embassies in Tehran and Washington as a result of the nuclear deal? After all, the U.S. embassy was ransacked and stormed in a similar fashion as the attack on the UK embassy.
Unique position
The moderate, reformist, and pragmatic camp might be willing to further strengthen diplomatic ties with the United States, short of reopening embassies, in order to gain the popular vote. However, they should be aware that foreign policy is not run or informed by the presidency or the foreign ministry in Iran. Critical issues such as restoring ties with other countries, Iran’s national security, cracking down on domestic oppositions, regional policies, and Iran’s nuclear deal are directly informed by the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, his senior advisors in the Supreme Leader’s office, and Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, as well as its elite Quds Force foreign branch.
Khamenei holds two stances on the U.S.: one in private, and one in public for the purpose of preserving his legitimacy.
When speaking in public, Khamenei’s speeches and statements clearly characterize his distrust towards the “Great Satan.” Khamenei does this for multiple reasons. First of all, the symbolism of opposing the United States (the Great Satan) is deep-rooted in the political establishment of the Islamic Republic. For over 35 years, clerics' speeches, governmental protests, marches, and some walls in the cities, have been filled with slogans that incite sentiments to oppose the Great Satan. Opposing the United States is a primary keystone of the Islamic Republic’s revolutionary principles. Mr. Khamenei was influential in establishing these ideals. From his perspective, the United States should be depicted as a nation which seeks to overthrow the government of the Islamic Republic. The CIA overthrow of the democratically elected government of Mossadegh is also a continuing reminder and key issue carved into the mind of the political establishment.
Expressing anti-U.S. views
Secondly, for over thirty years, Khamenei has been clearly expressing his anti-U.S. views in almost every speech which are all quite influential to his social base. How can he justify an essentially over night ideological reversal that now supports the U.S. and Iran restoring ties? Shouldn't that damage the legitimacy of his views and reveal his inconsistency as a leader? Third, Khamenei draws his legitimacy from the conservative social base which opposes any normalization of ties with the United States. They view restoring relations with the United States as a fatal move that will impede the survival of the political establishment in the Islamic Republic. Khamenei has repeatedly warned about the threat of cultural influence (soft power) that the U.S. can also impose on Iran were they to restore full diplomatic ties. As he tweeted recently “Economic woes won’t cause anxiety, but cultural problems agitate one to lose sleep over them”.For the hardliners, the closer the system is the easier it is for them to control the populations, monopolize, avoid economic competition, and sustain power. From Khamenei’s prism, one of the major reasons behind that revolution in several Arab countries was the close ties between those governments and the United States.
Revolutionary principles
Finally, another underlying tension between Iran and the US is Israel. Opposition to Israel is another primary revolutionary principle of the Islamic Republic. As long as Iran opposes Israel, it is less likely to see thaw in relationships or embassies opening in both countries.
On the other hand, we observe that Khamenei has given the green light to Rouhani’s technocrat team to sit at the same table and directly negotiate with Americans. Without the approval of Mr. Khamenei, IRGC leaders would not have been willing to cooperate tactically with Americans in the region. In conclusion, it is not in the political or parochial interest of the Supreme Leader, Khamenei, to alter his public position on the US. However, it appears that in private he continues to instruct the president’s team to cooperate with America. As long as the Supreme Leader Khamenei, is alive, it is hard to imagine a full normalization of diplomatic ties (such as reopening of embassies) between the U.S. and Iran. Nevertheless, tactical and strategic cooperation as well as behind-the door talks will increase.

Islamic climate change declaration could be a game-changer
Vicente Lopez-Ibor Mayor/Al Arabiya/August 28/15
Last week’s “Islamic Declaration on Climate Change” issued by Muslim scholars from 20 countries fits into a longer trend of faith and civic movements working to galvanize positive political and social change. Those Muslim scholars now join the Papacy, the Church of England, the Unitarians, World Council of Churches, and universities like Oxford and Stanford in advocating a moral duty toward fighting climate change. And just as the Church played a key role in the 19th century Abolitionist movement’s success in shifting public opinion on slavery, today the work of religious and civic leaders is equally important in creating the cultural context necessary for climate action to succeed. After all, mere legislative efforts to tackle climate change faces the very real risk of longer-term political and electoral backlash unless it goes hand-in-hand with sufficient public support and the right cultural framework. Without this there can be no permanent solution to the climate change dilemma.
Attitude battle
A case in point is again the example of abolition. The struggle to emancipate slaves required the input of clergy, politicians, intellectuals and a gruelling civil war. But why, after all that, did it still a century for basic legal rights to be granted to Black Americans? One reason is that the war and the changes to the Constitution did not necessarily change public opinion in the South. While the battle to abolish slavery had been decisively won, the battle to change attitudes had not. Likewise, attitudes on the pressing social and moral challenges of our day must be shifted for permanent wholistic change to be seen.
There is an economic as well as moral argument for the Islamic world to reduce fossil fuel consumption
It is also why the work of religious and civic leaders in promoting an environmental dimension to prevailing notions of justice and moral responsibility is so important, particularly in the Islamic world which boasts some of the world’s biggest oil and gas producing nations.
But there is an economic, as well as moral argument for the Islamic world to reduce fossil fuel consumption. Much of the Islamic world is optimally placed to harness the benefits of solar power, which is becoming increasingly cheaper to invest in. And high domestic consumption of fossil fuels in many Muslim countries means there is a strong case for such a transition, at least domestically. In Saudi Arabia, oil accounts for over 65 percent of all domestic electricity production, in Kuwait it is 71 percent, in Lebanon it is 94 percent and in Yemen it's an astonishing 100 percent. These represent energy policies that are inefficient and in the long run - unsustainable. It is also why companies like Saudi Aramco announced last year that it would be making solar energy investments across Saudi Arabia in an attempt to diversify the country's energy supplies. Elsewhere in the Islamic world, problems with energy infrastructure in countries like Pakistan that routinely suffer blackouts is yet another reason for why clean off-grid energies like solar offer a practical, more effective alternative. In the words of Tesla CEO Elon Musk, technological advances in solar storage capacity could mean third-world off-grid communities "leapfrogging" the need for a centralized energy grid infrastructure, similar to how mobile phones have helped third world communities leapfrog the need for a landline telecoms infrastructure.
Stronger society
Finally, the recent climate change declaration by Muslim scholars reflects an initial step towards the development of a necessary ingredient in the climate change fight - a stronger civil society. Wael Hmaidan, international Director of Climate Action Network said, “civil society is delighted by this powerful Climate Declaration coming from the Islamic community, which could be a game changer”. And indeed it could be. While there are many causes around which civil society could begin to coalesce in order to foster a collective sense of civic purpose, identity and action, few issues have the potential to unite people and galvanise action as well as tackling climate change. Fighting climate change, moreover, has the potential to not only unite members of academia, clergy, scientists and social activists, but could also strengthen civic society in the process. Given some of the challenges of extremism unfortunately present in certain parts of the Muslim world, it’s worth noting that the narrative of environmentally conscious climate action premised on collective action by all for the benefit of all, is antithetical to extremist narratives of fatalism, divisiveness and conflict. When civil society is actualised through common action for the sake of common goals, it will eventually work as a counter-weight to more regressive social and political norms.
The Islamic Declaration on Climate Change is an initial step, but an important one. It stands as an important reminder that faith values can still be employed to help address some of the pressing global challenges of our day. And in the global efforts to avert the prospect of irreversible climate change, the contribution of religious figures, social activists and community leaders is not just helpful, it’s necessary.