Monty batted reasonably well for  his unbeaten 30 odd, but rightly so Klusener was roundly cheered by the sizeable crowd, considering it was a Friday.

Glamorgan were visibly flat in the field and looked to have an uphill battle to save the game after losing a wicket before bad light ended the day's play. Hence I got to see Monty bat as well as bowl.

On Sunday I managed to see England's last performance of the 'summer', beating South Africa in the 4th ODI at Lords in what turned into a 20 over slog in the gloaming. Pietersen's captaincy has reinvigorated the England team and as a result had convincingly won the one day series before even getting to HQ. Which was just as well as the weather was shit. I have a friend that I regularly go to cricket with who seems to carry the rain around with him, I mean this summer he has literally always been under a cloud, that more often than not chooses to spill its guts.

Luckily the Lords drainage showed its worth and we were able to get underway shortly after 1pm. England choose to field and were going through fielding drills before the start.

South Africa actually started their innings really well with Amla and Gibbs hitting regular boundaries with Amla looking in especially good touch before a shambolic attempt at a run, ended in Shah running out the bearded opener. Gibbs was the only South African batsman to make a meaningful contribution before the rains came again in the 32nd over.

Between the innings I walked around the ground as is traditional at the innings break and got talking to one of the stewards alongside the pavilion, who like the rest of the people in the ground was disappointed at the reduced play. He was absolutely adamant that the ground should have a roof for such occasion! A well natured argument then ensured with I, even with having being continually been screwed over by the weather this year, advocating no roof as atmospheric conditions play such a large part in the game.

Continuing the walk around the ground I came to the Nursery Ground under the Media Centre where there were many people milling about. Suddenly a group of stewards parted the crowd and between the 2 support columns of the Media Centre came the serious looking Andrew Flintoff who strode purposefully to the nets to prepare for the innings. He looked in good touch when smashing a few throw downs in the nets.

It came in useful later when despite the near dark, Flintoff and Shah smashed several boundaries to reach the target of 137 with a few overs to spare. England had started slowly with Bell and Prior struggling to find the boundaries early on. After their dismissals, Shah, Pietersen and Flintoff played themselves in before teeing off. In the best of lights it's a challenge to face the likes of Dale Steyn, so to watch the batsmen flog them to all parts in the dingy light was an immense end to the summer.

Building the country during Pahlavi era:

Import everything with petro-money, mostly from USA. The best quality. Dont make anything yourself so the country doesnt make any real progress.

Building the country during Islamic Republic era:

Build everything yourself so the country can progress; if you can, mostly by praying and copying old chinese, russian and ukranian technology that doesnt work.

A Newsmax article, appropriately titled, "Jimmy Carter's Trail of Disaster," underscores just how colossal a failure Jimmy Carter has been in foreign policy for years. But nowhere was that failure more costly or pathetic than his failure on Iran. Christopher Ruddy writes:

The media would have us forget Jimmy Carter's presidential record.

But I won't.

Remember Carter's human rights program, where he demanded the Shah of Iran step down and turn over power to the Ayatollah Khomeini?

No matter that Khomeini was a madman. Carter had the U.S. Pentagon tell the Shah's top military commanders – about 150 of them – to acquiesce to the Ayatollah and not fight him.

The Shah's military listened to Carter. All of them were murdered in one of the Ayatollah's first acts.

By allowing the Shah to fall, Carter created one of the most militant anti-American dictatorships ever.

Soon the new Iranian government was ransacking our embassy and held hostage its staff for over a year. Only President Reagan's election gave Iran the impetus to release the hostages.

The man who will be addressing the Democratic National Convention personally presided over the abandonment of an Iranian government that had been America's strongest ally in the Middle East under the Shah and actually enabled its transformation into America's greatest enemy in the Middle East under the Ayatollah.

It's not all Carter's and Obama's fault. Failure, weakness, and appeasement are in their blood as Democrats. Read the INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY piece titled, "97 Reasons Democrats Are Weak On Defense And Can't Be Trusted To Govern In Wartime", for more on that. Jimmy Carter features prominently in those 97 reasons.

When Jimmy Carter speaks, don't bother listening to any of his pseudo-humanitarian blather. Think rather of the similarities between the failure Jimmy Carter and the failure-waiting-to-happen Barack Obama.

Think of how Barack Obama has already demonstrated an astonishing failure of naiveté and ignorance when he said that "Iran does not pose a serious threat to us." And that "If Iran ever tried to pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance."

Iran is clearly determined to progress into a nuclear-armed state, and could even have the bomb within six months if it pulled out all the stops. With nuclear weapons, Iran would be impervious to attack - even if it masterminded the next 9/11 attack against us. To underestimate either their threat or their evil is the very worst kind of folly.

We have seen Barack Obama issue horrible double-minded statements that reveal both frightening weakness and indecisiveness. Obama said that Jerusalem must remain the undivided capital of Israel to Jewish groups, and then said to Palestinians that the issue of Jerusalem would be subject to negotiation. Jerusalem is the hottest, most easily-ignitable flash point in the history of the world; you simply DO NOT commit such massive blunders with this piece of real estate. Obama's indecision and pandering weakness on Jerusalem reveals exactly the sort of man who would ignorantly empower our worst enemies and then indecisively sit on his hands while they made us look like fools, as Carter did with Iran before and after the Ayatollah seized our embassy and held Americans as hostages.

The similarity between Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama does not end with naiveté and indecisiveness. It extends into their philosophy.

Both men have exhibited a degree of moral equivalence that prevents them from seeing the difference between the good and the evil.

Jimmy Carter has displayed a shocking inability to see the difference between democratic Israelis trying to protect themselves from terrorism, and nihilist terrorists out to kill as many Jewish women and children as possible:

I don’t consider... I wasn’t equating the Palestinian missiles with terrorism. But when the Palestinians commit terrorist acts, and I mean when a person blows himself up within a bus full of civilians, or when the target of the operation is women and children – such acts create a rejection of the Palestinians among those who care about them. It turns the world away from sympathy and support for the Palestinian people. That’s why I said that acts of terrorism like I just described are suicidal for the popularity and support for the Palestinian cause. In my book, I talk about violence from both sides, and I describe very carefully and accurately the number of casualties among Palestinians and Israelis, including children. The number of Palestinian children who died because of the violence is five times greater than the number of Israeli children, and I condemn this kind of violence on both sides.

Carter was forced to apologize for what he claimed were misconstrued statements. But Alan Dershowitz has come to see two Carters - what he calls the "Brandeis Carter" who says the right things in democratic forums, and the "Al Jazeera Carter" who makes shocking statements about the state of Israel.

The very title of Jimmy Carter's book - Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid - reveals not only an incipient antisemitism, with Israel depicted as an apartheid (and therefore racist and illegitimate) state, but also a shocking degree of moral equivalence.

American Thinker has an article titled, "Obama's Moral Equivalence Problem," that discusses this very same tendency on the part of Barack Obama. Obama not only demonstrated this in his initial patronizing statement for both Georgia and Russia to stop fighting (lumping the invaded democracy in the same category as the attacking autocracy), but he then proceeded to go even further by comparing Russia's actions to the United States' action in its invasion of Iraq.

If that is not bad enough, Joe Biden - Obama's pick for running mate - also has a significant history of failure to understand Iran or deal with the threat that this terrorist state presents to the United States.

As Jimmy Carter speaks, and throughout this convention, we should seriously consider the Carter years, and the return to unmitigated disaster the Obama years would bring.

A Newsmax article, appropriately titled, "Jimmy Carter's Trail of Disaster," underscores just how colossal a failure Jimmy Carter has been in foreign policy for years. But nowhere was that failure more costly or pathetic than his failure on Iran. Christopher Ruddy writes:

The media would have us forget Jimmy Carter's presidential record.

But I won't.

Remember Carter's human rights program, where he demanded the Shah of Iran step down and turn over power to the Ayatollah Khomeini?

No matter that Khomeini was a madman. Carter had the U.S. Pentagon tell the Shah's top military commanders – about 150 of them – to acquiesce to the Ayatollah and not fight him.

The Shah's military listened to Carter. All of them were murdered in one of the Ayatollah's first acts.

By allowing the Shah to fall, Carter created one of the most militant anti-American dictatorships ever.

Soon the new Iranian government was ransacking our embassy and held hostage its staff for over a year. Only President Reagan's election gave Iran the impetus to release the hostages.

The man who will be addressing the Democratic National Convention personally presided over the abandonment of an Iranian government that had been America's strongest ally in the Middle East under the Shah and actually enabled its transformation into America's greatest enemy in the Middle East under the Ayatollah.

It's not all Carter's and Obama's fault. Failure, weakness, and appeasement are in their blood as Democrats. Read the INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY piece titled, "97 Reasons Democrats Are Weak On Defense And Can't Be Trusted To Govern In Wartime", for more on that. Jimmy Carter features prominently in those 97 reasons.

When Jimmy Carter speaks, don't bother listening to any of his pseudo-humanitarian blather. Think rather of the similarities between the failure Jimmy Carter and the failure-waiting-to-happen Barack Obama.

Think of how Barack Obama has already demonstrated an astonishing failure of naiveté and ignorance when he said that "Iran does not pose a serious threat to us." And that "If Iran ever tried to pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance."

Iran is clearly determined to progress into a nuclear-armed state, and could even have the bomb within six months if it pulled out all the stops. With nuclear weapons, Iran would be impervious to attack - even if it masterminded the next 9/11 attack against us. To underestimate either their threat or their evil is the very worst kind of folly.

We have seen Barack Obama issue horrible double-minded statements that reveal both frightening weakness and indecisiveness. Obama said that Jerusalem must remain the undivided capital of Israel to Jewish groups, and then said to Palestinians that the issue of Jerusalem would be subject to negotiation. Jerusalem is the hottest, most easily-ignitable flash point in the history of the world; you simply DO NOT commit such massive blunders with this piece of real estate. Obama's indecision and pandering weakness on Jerusalem reveals exactly the sort of man who would ignorantly empower our worst enemies and then indecisively sit on his hands while they made us look like fools, as Carter did with Iran before and after the Ayatollah seized our embassy and held Americans as hostages.

The similarity between Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama does not end with naiveté and indecisiveness. It extends into their philosophy.

Both men have exhibited a degree of moral equivalence that prevents them from seeing the difference between the good and the evil.

Jimmy Carter has displayed a shocking inability to see the difference between democratic Israelis trying to protect themselves from terrorism, and nihilist terrorists out to kill as many Jewish women and children as possible:

I don’t consider... I wasn’t equating the Palestinian missiles with terrorism. But when the Palestinians commit terrorist acts, and I mean when a person blows himself up within a bus full of civilians, or when the target of the operation is women and children – such acts create a rejection of the Palestinians among those who care about them. It turns the world away from sympathy and support for the Palestinian people. That’s why I said that acts of terrorism like I just described are suicidal for the popularity and support for the Palestinian cause. In my book, I talk about violence from both sides, and I describe very carefully and accurately the number of casualties among Palestinians and Israelis, including children. The number of Palestinian children who died because of the violence is five times greater than the number of Israeli children, and I condemn this kind of violence on both sides.

Carter was forced to apologize for what he claimed were misconstrued statements. But Alan Dershowitz has come to see two Carters - what he calls the "Brandeis Carter" who says the right things in democratic forums, and the "Al Jazeera Carter" who makes shocking statements about the state of Israel.

The very title of Jimmy Carter's book - Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid - reveals not only an incipient antisemitism, with Israel depicted as an apartheid (and therefore racist and illegitimate) state, but also a shocking degree of moral equivalence.

American Thinker has an article titled, "Obama's Moral Equivalence Problem," that discusses this very same tendency on the part of Barack Obama. Obama not only demonstrated this in his initial patronizing statement for both Georgia and Russia to stop fighting (lumping the invaded democracy in the same category as the attacking autocracy), but he then proceeded to go even further by comparing Russia's actions to the United States' action in its invasion of Iraq.

If that is not bad enough, Joe Biden - Obama's pick for running mate - also has a significant history of failure to understand Iran or deal with the threat that this terrorist state presents to the United States.

As Jimmy Carter speaks, and throughout this convention, we should seriously consider the Carter years, and the return to unmitigated disaster the Obama years would bring.

Oh oh, oh no
Oh oh, oh no

The ocean is dry
Do you feel hollow?
Nowhere to hide
And nothing to swallow

And when you can't recognize
Anything solid
Where do you turn?
When you can't buy it?

What can you believe in now
With no love to follow?
Now that you have lost yourself
Oh, can anything help you now?

Just let your fears go
You might find your way back home
Let your fears go
You might find that you're not lost

Just let your fears go
You might find your way back home
Let your fears go
You might find that you're not lost

What did you learn?
What was it worth?
What did you yearn for?
Everything's lost now

And not alone and not alone
And not alone and not alone
And not alone and not alone
And not alone and not alone

Just let your fears go
You might find your way back home
Let your fears go
You might find that you're not lost

Just let your fears go
You might find your way back home
Let your fears go
You might find that you're not lost

In any serious English literature program, we learn about writers, mostly English, whose histories are preserved beyond letters and literature. That is, the British have a wonderful program, the National Trust, "with its astute blend of commerce and high-mindedness, has long preserved authors' houses. After all, one founder of the Trust was Beatrix Potter. As well as her Lake District home, the Trust's equipe includes Thomas Hardy, T.E. Lawrence, Rudyard Kipling, Jane Austen, Bernard Shaw and Thomas Carlyle." (TLS "Homes and Haunts") That doesn't include the cult followings that take care of graves and other works of art that reference their idols.

In Iran, our ancestors teach us to preserve our Shakespeares by naming children after characters and reading major works. Beyond this, cult followings are quite rare, except the pilgrimage to Hafez's grave in Shiraz.

There are translators and scholars in the United States who are dedicated to modern Iranian writers who the shah suppressed, but I wonder how different Iran could have been, at least in literary life, if maniacs like the shah hadn't suppressed them. I wish people who have fantasies of the shah would realize this. Iran has a long way to go, but a look at the past is a good place to make changes, at least in this area.

Cars in the National Car Museum of Iran

Exif: Canon EOS 30D, Shutter Speed:1/60sec, Apreture:F/2.8, ISO:1600 @ 17mm

Exif: Canon EOS 30D, Shutter Speed:1/30sec, Apreture:F/2.8, ISO:1600 @ 17mm

Mercedes Benz 500K

Exif: Canon EOS 30D, Shutter Speed:1/60sec, Apreture:F/2.8, ISO:1600 @ 17mm

Exif: Canon EOS 30D, Shutter Speed:1/80sec, Apreture:F/2.8, ISO:1600 @ 17mm

Exif: Canon EOS 30D, Shutter Speed:1/40sec, Apreture:F/2.8, ISO:1600 @ 17mm

Exif: Canon EOS 30D, Shutter Speed:1/8sec, Apreture:F/2.8, ISO:1600 @ 17mm

Exif: Canon EOS 30D, Shutter Speed:1/30sec, Apreture:F/2.8, ISO:1600 @ 17mm

Exif: Canon EOS 30D, Shutter Speed:1/30sec, Apreture:F/2.8, ISO:1600 @ 17mm

Exif: Canon EOS 30D, Shutter Speed:1/60sec, Apreture:F/2.8, ISO:1600 @ 17mm

Peoples Mujahedin (MKO) a very disciplined and organized opposition group had close ties to the revolutionary government. The main problem is that Mojahedin is not very different from this current government and in addition was allied with the arabs, Saddam Hossein. These two vital facts makes Mojahedin very unpopular. The sect of Rajavis are fortunately finished.

This leaves us with Reza Pahlavi II. RP strong pro democracy and civil disobedience not unlike Gandhis is a rational and a great opportunity. Bein a pro democracy RP has gained some support from the left too. However his opposition and ideoligy contains some weaknesses that can be traced back to his father.

First is the elitism. Reza Pahlavi II is no Reza Pahlavi I (Reza Shah). Reza Shah was uneducated and understood his people. Reza Pahlavi II doesnt understand the reality of iranian life and his own people. Being a crown prince and lived isolated most of his life, RP is like most monarchs far from his people, the poverty and the mentality of most iranians, the masses. Unlike Khomeini and Reza Pahlavi I he is not from the "masses" and this is perhaps his greatest weakness. 

Secondly, RP officially at least is a pro Israel and Fox News figure. Most Iranians are anti-arab and anti-islamist but have sympaties with the Palestinians and condemn the immense human rights violations done by the Israelis. This is another important point that makes RP far from his people.

Thirdly, the effect of the dualism in people, ie being shia muslims but at the same time zoroastrian (in the terms of culture and noruz for instance) is another example of RPs weak political program. Because RPs extreme secular ideoligy will alienate the religious masses. RP should show himself as a believer and only then condemning the mullas by using the weak economy of Iran. Human rights shouldnt be the main part of his campaign. Human right is more important to exile Iranians than Iranians in Iran.

Forth. RPs infamous fathers human right violations hasnt been condemned by RP. RP should distance himself (very hard for an Iranian) from his father and focus and the weaknesses of the Shahs government too. Iranians are nostalgic, who doesnt miss the opportunity to see Viguen at Cafe Naderi or the freedom to love and have a good life? These are all the results of the positive sides of the Shah. But the lack of political freedom is a fact. The autocratic tendences of his father should be condemnded.

This list can continue further. These four (could be easily four more) important points underline why RP is largely seen as irrelevant, and will fail.

As a pro secularism and a supporter of RP (even though im not a right wing), I hope he makes some changes to his policy and distances himself from the Fox news and pro Israel/USA camp and joins his people. However he should be credited for his strong anti-war and pro Iran activities in USA. Ill return shortly with another list, this time focusing on the good qualities of his campaign.

            In fall 1978 the CIA issued a favorable report that the Shah of Iran would remain in office; safe and secure in his massive military, well trained secret police and enjoying the resources of his super-power.  One hundred days later he had been overthrown in a largely peaceful and popular revolution.  Where had the CIA and many other people including many Iranians gone wrong in their thinking?  Why was this seemingly so safe and secure regime so swiftly and effectively dispossessed in such a short time span.  Why was it that in the midst of confusion, underground pamphlets, encouraging edification by Khomeini and disruption of the pre-Revolutionary year to result in “the unthinkable revolution” of 1979?

            In an attempt to analyze how this seemingly unthinkable revolution occurred, Kurzman examines the theories of revolution and applies them to the factual setting and context of Iran in the late 1970’s.  The theories of interest are: political, organizational, cultural, economic, military, and critical mass.  Each of these concepts is analyzed in a particular chapter of the book.  The question arises; was the 1979 revolution a deviant revolution?  It seems that none of the traditional theories of revolution satisfactorily explains what transpired.  Or, was the revolution consistent with a blend of theory?  Perhaps the answer is forthcoming once more information is known.  For the time being questions remain and some facts seem to be shrouded in secrecy, some perhaps taken to the grave.

            In the first sentence of the Preface to the book, Kurzman writes, “Iran first entered my consciousness, as it did many Americans’, when U.S. diplomats were taken hostage in 1979.” In addition, I too must admit that I experienced the same.  I had no true understanding of what Iran had been, or was like; its people, government, and I barely knew where it was located other than somewhere in the Middle East.  Day after day reports were issued as news agents feverishly covered the story of the hostage situation.  Days become weeks and weeks months and time still passed.  Unlike Kurzman, it was many years later before I gained an appreciation for and interest in the Middle East and its culture.  As he, I must admit that even though I had long been a lover of the study of people and society I was vastly ignorant of the “mystical” Middle East and subject to many western myths about it.

            As discussed in class, the government of the Shah had come to power in a coupe that displaced a popular, democratically elected government.  In early years, the Shah had been popular with the people and served his function as a figurehead.  However, power begets power and often corruption.  The Shah experienced this sequence and through manipulation and appointment succeeded in creating a puppet Parliament that gave him increasing dictatorial power.  The result was that his secret police and agents of state quieted the various khans, landowners, religious leaders and merchants.  No longer did the constitution and the assembly serve to balance the power of the regime for the common interest of the society, but rather the subservient interests of the Shah... (Continuted).

For a complete copy of this reflection paper please contact Malcolm L. Rigsby ( Copyright 2008 ).

The Movie:(Contains no spoilers ... :) )

The movie is a story of love.Not a love story ... since these two words bring a specific template in hindi movie viewers minds..... Its a story of love between a group of friends , focussing on the lives of two very close friends Jai Singh 'Rats' Rathore(Imran Khan) and Aditi 'Meow'(Genelia D'Souza) (Both look very cute throughout the movie..... :) ).

Its a very refreshing movie that leaves one with a sense of lightening (couldnt think of anything else....meant to be something which lightens u up and kindof uplifts ur mood..... :) ). A.R.Rahman has done a superb job with the music.Really nice watch....

Congrats to Aamir ,Imran,Genelia,Karan,Nirav,Alishka,Sugandha,Renuka for a job very  well done..... nice work and do bring such refreshing films periodically ..... :)

In the Eastern corner, wedged between terrorist havens of Iraq and Afghanistan, with a population of over 65 million, with controversial nuclear programme claimed peaceful, defender of Theocracy… The Islamic Republic of IRAN!!!

Let’s get ready to RUMBLE!!!

All right, enough hype. Let us be serious for a moment. Iran versus Israel. Both are religious states, both have substantial military capabilities, and both are guilty of crimes against minorities in their population. Yet both are viewed very differently in the eyes of the Western media and politicians. Let us look at both countries, and how the media depicts them.

Iran is by no means a model example of a perfect peaceful democracy. Apparently the home to the earliest charter of human rights, Iran is now a well-publicised abuser of the rights of its citizens. Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution Sharia law is in place, and executions have increased as a result. According to political historian Ervand Abrahamian, "whereas less than 100 political prisoners had been executed between 1971 and 1979, more than 7900 were executed between 1981 and 1985. In 2004, a 16-year-old was executed for “crimes against chastity”. Homosexuality is also a crime punishable by death, with over 4,000 men and women having been killed for the offence since 1979.

However, there are claims by some of the sizeable Jewish residents that they co-exist peacefully in the Islamic state.

“Whatever they say abroad is lies - we are comfortable in Iran - if you're not political and don't bother them then they won't bother you” Hersel Gabriel, BBC News

In fact surprisingly, Iran has the largest Jewish population in the entire Middle East. Rightly or wrongly, the media focuses less on this reality, and more so on the rhetoric of its leaders and their alleged nuclear weapons programme. Regardless, more focus should be placed on the human rights abuses, that is, the things we know to be occurring, rather than those we do not and can only speculate.

Supporters of Israel claim the Jewish state gets an unfair portrayal in the media. It is claimed Israeli attacks on Palestinians receive undue coverage, whereas Palestinian suicide and rocket attacks are ignored. The good things about Israel are believed to be neglected by critics and the media. It is popular for supporters to point out that it is the sole democracy in the region. The rights of Palestinians, it is argued, are respected within Israel, and the rights of women, homosexuals and other minorities are respected as greatly as in a Western democracy, and much more so than any of Israel’s Middle Eastern Muslim neighbours.

What are shied away from are abuses by Israel. No one with a conscience can honestly defend the shelling of a busy beach in Gaza in 2006, which ended a 16-month truce with Hamas or the disgusting use of cluster munitions against Lebanon (90 per cent of which were dropped in the last 72 hours, as a ceasefire was approaching). So try as one might, no one can sincerely and rationally absolve Israel of its share of guilt in the atrocities of the Middle East. And when international law deems Israeli settlements to be illegal, how can Israel been seen not to be provoking hostilities? If it were not for America’s veto in the Security Council, Israel would have certainly faced greater condemnation from the international community. Whether its supporters would humble themselves and join the chorus of criticism is unlikely. There clearly is a double standard.

To silence debate, anyone who criticises Israel is labelled an anti-Semite. The association is made between critics or opponents of Israel and the European persecutors who drove them from Europe in the 1930’s and 1940’s. Critics are discredited as racist, and the atrocities committed by Israel can be swept aside. This tactic is used by everyone from Israel supporters on the street to US government officials.

“The distinguishing feature of the new anti-Semitism is criticism of Zionism or Israeli policy that – whether intentionally or unintentionally – has the effect of promoting prejudice against all Jews by demonising Israel and Israelis and attributing Israel's perceived faults to its Jewish character,” US State Department report to Congress.

So no one can criticise this sovereign democratic state, for fear of being smeared as racist. The ridiculous thing about this slander is that Palestinians are also Semites. But don’t let facts get in the way of this foolproof tactic to silence critics and stifle debate.

I have no problem with there being an Israel. And I do believe that an Israeli state could coexist alongside Palestinian, Syrian, Lebanese and Egyptian states. But this will never happen if world leaders and the media maintain a racist bias because they don’t want to be labelled anti-Semitic. Is it not also then anti-Persian to criticise Iran?

Zionism maintains that Israel is Jewish land. Judaism also maintains that Jews are God’s chosen people, an idea that can only resemble racial superiority. Hence comparison’s between Zionists and Nazis are to be expected, and although are certainly not fair and are based largely on conspiracy theories (yes, people still believe the Protocols of the Elders of Zion!) and true anti-Semiticism, the comparisons should not be dismissed outright. I have nothing against Jewish people, only Judaism, in the same way that I have no problem with Christians, only Christianity. And I have a problem with anyone who deem themselves superior to others. I think the religious aspect of this issue is for a large part the biggest problem. In the same way that religion is used to justify Islamic “terrorist” attacks against Israel, Israel justifies its own crimes as part of the Zionist goal. Israel is not a secular democracy; it is a religious state, with Judaism as its foundations. The occupation is justified because many Israelis believe the land to be their religious homeland and they will act militarily in defence of this belief. Palestinians and Israelis believe that the land is their god given right. And as religious disagreements cannot be resolved and compromises cannot be meet, not until Israel becomes secular and reject Zionism, and Palestinians do likewise with fundamentalist Islam, no resolution can be met. The same applies to Iran, where the root of their human rights auses is religious fundamentalism. However, arguably the root of the rise of religious fundamentalism is Western interference in the region, which is perhaps best left to another blog post (or read War for Civilisation by Fisk to see how religion was at the forefront of resistance to Western exploitation in the region).

The tension has been cast as battle between good versus evil. The propaganda from all sides has overwhelmed rational debate. Iran has depicted Israel as a “stain”, the “regime of occupation” and the “filthy Zionist entity” and the United States as the “great Satan”. Iran, on the other hand has been described as the “greatest threat to the Israel and the US”. The media’s role in twisting the debate is immediately recognisable when one compares the relative treatment of two similar comments made by two prominent officials in Iran and Israel.

In his 2005, “World without Israel” speech, Mahmood Ahmadinejad was translated to have said Israel must be “wiped off the map”. It has been argued that correctly translated he said the “regime occupying Jerusalem” must be removed not Israel itself. This correction has been made repeatedly to defend the President’s comments, but has been ignored by Western media. Although Ahmadinajad’s hostility towards Israel is real, his comments have been twisted for propaganda purposes. It cannot, of course, be denied Iran does pose a threat to Israel, but it is disingenuous to paint Iran as the sole agitator. He has since confirmed the statement that he does not believe Israel has the right to exist and his questioning of the holocaust illustrate not only his animosity towards Jews, but his complete ignorance and stupidity. However, the media and the West’s politicians have been less than equal in their criticism of similar aggressive comments by Israel and others.

Israel’s Deputy Defence Minister, Matan Vilnai, warned Palestinians would face a Shoah, the Hebrew word used for holocaust, if rocket attacks on settlements did not cease. Considering the horrifying loss of life in the Jewish Holocaust, it is utterly mind-blowing he would make such a threat, and even more unbelievable that the media would fail to follow up the statement with criticism or further inquiry. Yet Vilnai was still able to criticise one of the country’s Deputy Prime Ministers of trying to boost his own political standing by threatening Iran after Shaul Mofaz said military strikes to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons looked "unavoidable". Israel is positioning for war against Iran, and it has been alleged they are considering striking to provoke a retaliatory attack to validate war.

To further illustrate the hypocrisy of the coverage of Ahmadinajad’s stupid yet misquoted comment, one can only look at former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who threatened to obliterate Iran, in her quest to appear tough on foreign policy to the electorate. George W Bush is also guilty of similar aggressive comments. Such moronic threats should be dismissed as irresponsible war mongering, and not tolerated from anyone, friend or foe.

At the heart of the tension is Iran’s alleged nuclear programme. Ahmadinejad vehemently denies his country aims to obtain nuclear weapons:

“We're fundamentally opposed to the expansion of nuclear-weapons arsenals. This is why we have proposed the formation of an unbiased organization and the disarmament of the nuclear powers. We don't need any weapons. We're a civilized, cultured people, and our history shows that we have never attacked another country.” Ahmadinejad to Der Speigel

The West is not convinced. Although Iran claims their plans to enrich uranium are for peaceful energy producing purposes, critics argue the Islamic state aim to produce nuclear weapons. Israel characterises Iran's nuclear program as an "existential threat". The IAEA has not settled the dispute, having stated that it appears the programme finished in 2003, yet also stating that the country is not cooperating with inspectors. Considering the threats surrounding the programme, the stakes are high. It should be vital to establish facts from fiction before acting. The misinformation that lead to the Iraq invasion of 2003 is testament to the power of propaganda. Ensuring this does not occur again does not appear to be the priority of an international media that laps up the chest beating of warmongers.

The obvious hypocrisy of this is that not only does much of the West possess thousands of nuclear weapons, but Israel undoubtedly also has such weapons of mass destruction. Despite the hard line being taken with Iran and North Korea, and the volatility of the region, Israel has not even the courtesy to inform the international community of their arsenal or be party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Despite their denials, their nuclear capabilities are the world’s worse kept secret, exposed by Mordechai Vanunu in 1986, confirmed by a slip-up by Prime Minister Ehud Omert in 2006 and confirmed by Jimmy Carter in 2008.

So who is a threat to whom? Who is the bad guy? Is there a good guy?

But where does the truth lie? Is it possible, as perhaps the respected Independent reporter Robert Fisk would have as believe, that each side is in the wrong. Despite many on the right slandering him as biased against Israel and the United States, anyone who has read a great deal of his work and is honest would acknowledge he is critical of all sides in the quagmire that is the Middle East. However, with all the hyperbole and propaganda, it is understandable why people might view Fisk and others’ equal treatment of all guilty sides with suspicion. With this in mind, how should we approach the situation? Should anyone be taking sides, or should the world aim to involve all concerned nations in dialogue and attempt to defuse the tensions? Have the world’s media distorted the debate to ensure conflict is inevitable?

Iran is dangerous, but so is Israel. The actions of Israel should be held to the same critique as Iran or any other nation. Let us not be deceived by propaganda, political point scoring, or by racist ideology. Let us call a spade a spade.

Come two o'clock I was ready to hit the road for the 2 hour journey home avoiding the rush hour and as a last resort popped into the Sports Cafe to see if there was any prospect of play. It was absolutely agonising watching the groundstaff tentatively pull off the first of the outer covers in the background while David Gower chaired a breeze shooting session in the foreground on Sky.

My mood lifted in the taxi on the way to the ground, better late than never I suppose and Edgbaston cheered heartily when the players appeared for the 3pm start with Ian Bell playing at his home ground and the prospect of KP's switch-hitting fresh in the memory.

Bell only lasted 3 balls before he got a leading edge and was caught in the off-side, looking to clip the ball off his legs. Never mind, time for Pietersen.

Great cheers as he walked out, however he didn't really seem to time the ball too well, before he hit a catch straight to long-off on the edge of the fielding circle after scoring 13. Luke Wright on the other hand had some good clean hits in half century and having seen him for the first time I was reasonably happy with what was on show.

England lost wickets at some rate towards the end of the innings with Collingwood and Bopara involved in the most farcical, both diving towards the crease to avoid a run out. Bopara went for 10. I was really impressed by Owais Shah who looked in great touch as he got to 18, the highlight being a six he hit deep into the stands and midwicket that got the weather resilient Brummie crowd roaring. Dimi Mascarenhas tried to force the pace towards the end but was out cheaply as England lost all their wickets for 162 runs in their shortened 24 over innings.

Considering the weather, it was absolutely farcical that everyone sat around for half an hour between innings, surely the priority should have been to get on with the game? As it turned out, it made a real difference to the outcome. Or lack of.

The Kiwis came out to bat at six o'clock looking to chase 160 runs in 23 overs with the asking rate at about 7 an over, they played effectively if not in exactly a thrilling manner, picking up singles with the odd four clubbed along the way. The Mexican wave is often a key indicator of such play, but this is what the Black Caps do best; no place for a McCullum or Taylor fireworks show late in the day.

Cloud after dark cloud rolled over the ground during the match, over the pavilion, the pitch and then away towards the city. Unsurprisingly, it got progressively darker during the Kiwi innings with lights from the scoreboard and corporate boxes being very noticeable in what turned out to be the dying overs of the match. The temperature also dropped away significantly with the flecks of rain coming again. Wearing just a T-shirt under my light jacket it was the 18th over when I decided, looking at the skies coming in from behind the pavilion, that I'd had enough. After finally getting a cab outside of the ground (unreconstructed madness!), I slumped thankfully in my seat out of the rain that was now teeming down. On the radio Jonathan Agnew had just announced the abandonment of the game in the 19th over, 6 balls short of the Duckworth Lewis calculation kicking in and a result being had. The Kiwis were rightly annoyed being ahead on Duckworth/Lewis when the umpires pulled the plug.

Driving away from Birmingham later that evening the sky was the brightest it had been compared to almost anytime during the day. Frustrated but not as much as if I were a New Zealander. I had a slight smirk at that.

Hopefully Sunday will be better; I'm going to watch Northants in the Twenty20 Cup.

AA MIL YAAR SAAR LAE  MERI

Aa mil yaar saar lae meri,
Meri jaan dukhaaN ne gheri.

Aa mil yaar saar le meri,
Meri jaan dukhaaN ne gheri

Aau saiyo ral diyo ni vadhaai,
MaeN bar paaiya raaNjha maahi.

Bulhe Shah ik sauda keeta,
Peeta, zahir piyaala peeta,
Na kujh laha ToTa leeta,
Dard dukhaaN di gaTHaRi chaai,
Aau saiyo ral diyo ni vadhai

************************************************

 BahuReeN ve tabeeba

BahuReeN ve tabeeba
MaeNDi khabar gaeeya,
Tere ishak nachaaiya,
Kar thaeeya thaeeya.

Ishak Dera mere aNdar keeta,
Bhar ke zahir piyaala maeN peeta.
Jhabde aaveeN ve tabeeba,
NaheeN te maeN mar gaeeya,
Tere ishak nachaaiya,
Kar thaeeya thaeeya.

CHup giya sooraj baahar rahi gaeeya laali,
HovaaN maeN sadke, muRje deN vakhaali,
MaeN bhul gaeeya,
Tere naal na gaeeya.
Tere ishak nachaaiya,
Kar thaeeya thaeeya.

Tere ishak di saar ve maeN na jaana,
Ih sir aaiya, ih mera haeTH vadaana,
SaT payi ishak di
Te kookaaN daeeya,
Tere ishak nachaaiya,
Kar thaeeya thaeeya.

Es ishak de koloN menu haTak na maae,
Laahu jaandaRe beRe moR kaun haTaae.
Meri akal bhulli,
Naal muhaaneeyaaN de gaeeya,
Tere ishk nachaaiya
Kar thaeeya thaeeya.

Es ishak di jhaNgi vich mor buleNda,
Saahnu kaaba te kibala piyaara yaar daseNda.
Saahnu ghaayil karke,
Pher khabar na laeeya,
Tere ishak nachaaiya
Kar thaeeya thaeeya.

Bulha Shah, Anaayit de bahi boohe,
Jis pahinaae chole saave te soohe.
Ja maeN maari uDaari,
Mil piya vaheeya,
Tere ishk nachaaiya
Kar thaeeya thaeeya.

BAS KAR JI HUN BAS KAR JI

Bas kar ji hun bas kar ji,
Ik baat asaaN naal has kar ji.

TuseeN dil mere vich vasde ho,
AeveN saathoN door kyoN nhasde ho.
Naale ghat jaadu dil khasde ho,
Hun kit val jaaso nhas kar ji.
Bas kar ji hun bas kar ji.

TuseeN moiyaaN nu maar na mukde si,
Khido vaaNg khooNDi nit kuTde si.
Gahl kardiyaaN da gal ghuTde si,
Hun teer lagaaiyo kahs kar ji.
Bas kar ji hun bas kar ji.

TuseeN CHapde ho asaaN pakaRe ho,
AsaaN naal zulf de jakRe ho.
Tusi aje CHapan nu takRe ho,
Hun jaan na milda nas kar ji.
Bas kar ji hun bas kar ji.

Bulha shauh maeN teri bardi haaN,
Tera muhk vekhan nu mardi haaN.
Nit sau sau mintaaN kardi haaN,
Hun baeTH piNjar vich ghass kar ji.
Bas kar ji hun bas kar ji.

"A vintage Daimler Benz car late King Tribhuvan had received as a gift from Adolf Hitler in 1940 has been found inside Narayanhiti Palace." Ok, Ok, old news, we know. But then comes this:

"Meanwhile, the Kathmandu Post quoted an unnamed palace source as saying that some former royals had attempted to take away the Daimler Benz car out of the palace by using a crane a couple of days before Gyanendra Shah left the palace but were prevented from doing so by the palace security."

Hello, Lord Brahma, this sounds so, eh, well, so Direndra Shah, the late king Birendra's youngest brother, and Bhatapur's Bhupatindramalla pillar thing in the 80s. A crane, to lift some stuff out, perhaps sell it in a foreign country.

If this story is true, you have to ask yourself how fucked up is the whole Shah clan. Yep, it is a rhetorical question.

Cuenta Tahir Shah, en su libro “El aprendiz de brujo”, que en 1830 se llevó a cabo una increíble experiencia en la India. En efecto, ante la presencia del marajá de Lahore y una distinguida comisión de sabios, un hombre fue enterrado vivo, durante 40 días y ¡sobrevivió! Se trataba de Haridas, el santón. Antes de su hibernación, el hombre se preparó tomando leche y yogur, depués se bañó y se tragó 1 metro de lino, para limpiar todo resto de heces que pudiera haber quedado en sus intestinos. Luego, se concentró , bajando el pulso y la temperatura a voluntad. Fue enterrado en un foso, cubierto con tierra y tapado con un muro. Cuarenta días después, el marajá ordenó desenterrarlo. El santón salió vivo, como si nada hubiera pasado. Finalmente, el hombre recorrió la India, lleno de fama y de riquezas. Dicen que esta experiencia de hibernación se reprodujo por doquier, allá en ese lejano país. ¿Qué será de Haridas el santón, hoy?

HOUR 1 - TRANCE
01. Steve Allen & Ben Alonzi - Wildfires (Mac & Taylor Remix) [Communicate]
02. Karl G ft Vicky Fee - Repeat It Again (Leon Bolier Remix) [Fektive]
03. Underwater - Sleeping Under The Stars (Original Mix) [Shah - Music]
04. Dj Shah ft Inger Hansen - Don’t Wake Me Up (Original Mix) [Magic Island/Armada]
05. Alexander Popov - Vapour Trails (Original Mix) [Insatiable]
06. Duderstadt & Kirsty Hawkshaw - Beatitude (Duderstadt Uplifting Mashup) [Afterglow]
07. Andy Tau - The Path (Original Mix) [Infrasonic]
08. Buro ft Tiff Lacey - Close Enough (Original Mix) [Shah - Music]
09. Sasha Da Link - Meteor (Mellomaniacs Rework) [Shah - Music]
10. Vincent De Moor - Worlds Of Doubt (Dj Shah Remix) [Cloud 9]

HOUR 2 - BALEARIC
11. Basil O’Glue - Vernal Equinox (Original Mix) [White]
12. Cosmic Gate - A Day That Fades (Inpetto Remix) [Blackhole]
13. Mike Danis - Happenstance (Original Mix) [Mesmerized]
14. Aurosonic - My Way (Guitar Mix) [Shah - Music]
15. The Doppler Effect - Beauty Hides In The Deep (The Blizzard Remix) [ASOT]
16. Envio - For You (Sunlounger Remix) [ASOT]
17. Tim Besamusca ft Rosa V. - Waiting (Alternative Mix) [Timeshift]
18. Criss Source pres High Rollers - Fortuna (Original Mix) [Supra]
19. Dj Shah ft Nadja Nooijen - Over & Over (Club Mix) [Magic Island/Armada]

DOWNLOAD Magic Island - Music for Balearic People Episode 007