Obama, Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood

By David Meir-Levi - FrontPage Magazine,  August 1st, 2011

On July 15, without much fanfare, and barely a few lines in the New York Times, President Obama​ formally recognized the rebel leadership in Libya, the Transitional National Council (TNC), as the country’s legitimate government.  This American recognition is no formality, and far more than merely an encouraging pat on the back to the rebel forces.  This recognition allows the rebels to access the $30 billion in Libyan assets held in the USA.  Most of those assets are not liquid, but about $3.5 billion is liquid and can be provided to the TNC immediately.

In the early stages of the war, western allies hesitated to extend recognition to the rebels because of uncertainties about exactly who they were and about their connections or allegiances to el-Qaeda or other terrorist groups at war with the USA or European countries; but protestations by rebel leaders calmed these fears as TNC spokespersons assured the West that their goal is a democratic state.  No one seems to have the perspicacity to ask just how reliable these assurances are.

On February 15, 2008, long before the revolt against Gaddafi began, the US embassy in Tripoli (capitol of Libya) sent a secret cable to Washington warning our government that eastern Libya, the area from which the revolt started and where the rebels have their strongest base and greatest number of supporters is rife with anti-American, pro-jihad sentiment. Three years later, with the revolt in full swing, we learn that Gaddafi is accusing al-Qaeda of fomenting the revolt. Of course Gaddafi is such an erratic personality, as well as a tyrant in trouble, that it might be hard to take him seriously; except that in addition to the warning that our State Department received in 2008, al-Qaeda documents captured in Iraq in 2007 reveal that almost 20% of all al-Qaeda fighters coming to Iraq to fight Americans came from Libya.
Moreover, one of the Libyan rebel leaders, Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, stated in a March, 2011 interview with the Italian newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore, that he and his troops are allies of al-Qaeda who came from eastern Libya to Iraq to fight the Americans, and now they are back in Libya to fight Gaddafi, and they are still allies of al-Qaeda.

The original fears of the western allies may have been well founded; but President Obama seems not to be concerned that the $3.5 billion in cash that his recognition of the TNC will put at the rebels’ disposal might end up in the hands of al-Qaeda operatives or their allies.
He should be concerned because the Libyan rebels are already supplying large quantities of sophisticated arms to Hamas in the Gaza Strip, using the same subterfuges and smuggling routes across Egypt and the Sinai that serve smugglers operating out of Sudan. These are not peaceful folks who want a western-style democracy and egalitarian society.  They march arm in arm with Hamas and al-Qaeda.

Moreover, Ayman az-Zawahiri, now the leader of al-Qaeda, has come out in support of the Libyan rebels and declared that al-Qaeda forces are fighting in the mountains of Libya against Gadaffi.

To understand the significance of az-Zawahiri’s support, we must recall that over the past few years, Abu Yusuf el-Qaradhawi, az-Zawahiri’s colleague and now number two in al-Qaeda, has adumbrated al-Qaeda’s priorities by urging all Muslims to acquire nuclear weapons in order to terrorize Muslim enemies and urging them to kill Israeli women because they serve in the Israeli army.  He has frequently expressed his support for suicide bombers, promised a second holocaust for the Jews, this time at the hands of “the believers;” and he has expressed his great longing for an opportunity to personally kill Jews so that he might acquire the blessing of true Islamic martyrdom.  These are not the kind of guys we want supporting our new friends among the rebels of Libya in their quest for what we hope will be the first successful democratic secular state in the Arab world.

Now let’s connect the al-Qaeda and Hamas dots listed above with another set of dots: Obama plans to establish formal contact with the Muslim Brotherhood​.

Elliot Abrams, a deputy national security adviser handling Middle East affairs under President Bush, noted that Muslim Brotherhood positions on women, on freedom of religion and on religious tests for candidacy to public office are all “an anathema” to the USA.  He went on to explain that there is a great likelihood that those in the Muslim Brotherhood​ who preach the need for the supremacy of Shari’a law in Arab states will prevail.  Nonetheless, he agrees with the President that formal contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood open the doors to American influence, and that influence may moderate the Brotherhood’s extremist Islamists positions.  In addition he expressed the belief that there are divisions in the Brotherhood which could be exploited and deepened by meetings with American representatives.
Abrams’ assessment is very reminiscent of Israel’s western allies believing that political responsibility would moderate Arafat after Oslo in 1993; or that Hamas would be forced to self-moderate once it was saddled with the administration of the Gaza Strip after its bloody coup. Neither belief was founded in reality.

It is important to recall that the Muslim Brotherhood, since its inception more than 80 years ago, has been consistent in its ideology: the imposition of Shari’a law, by violence, on the entire world.  Repression by Arab governments has never moderated it.  Its core motivations arise from the jihadist Islamist belief in the obligation incumbent upon all Muslims to make Islam the only, or at least dominant, religion in the world. It is the oldest and among the best organized and wide-spread Islamic extremist terrorist organizations in the world.  Its program for a “cultural invasion” of western countries, outlining a phased plan for infiltrating western societies and governments until it has the power to escalate its activities into political or violent confrontation, has been public for more than 20 years.  Hamas, a self-proclaimed genocidal terrorist organization whose charter establishes its goal of destroying Israel, is a franchise of the Muslim Brotherhood. Both Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood have expressed the desire to destroy the United States and make Islam the only, or the dominant, religion in the world. Why would a few western carrots or sticks make it change its core beliefs?

It seems likely that whatever his intentions, Obama’s contacts with the Brotherhood will strengthen it politically and increase its chances of becoming one of the dominant, if not the dominant, political force in Egypt.  Being able to boast of Obama’s implicit recognition of the Brotherhood’s importance, the Brotherhood will now have an easier time gaining recruits, soliciting funds, and engaging with other major powers in Europe and elsewhere.

In short, Obama has just handed both al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, two of the most powerful of our jihadist enemies, a major political victory.  Granted, at this stage the victory is merely a symbolic one. But in doing so, Obama runs the very real risk of substantively facilitating their struggle for political domination in the Arab countries currently in upheaval, and of enabling their even more substantive successes in the fields of political and military battle against their avowed and most hated enemy: Western civilization.

In short Obama is helping two of the most ruthless and radical Islamic terrorist forces in the world to achieve their long-awaited goal: “Islam uber Alles.”

One cannot help but wonder, which side is he on?


Notes:
[i] For several reports and assessments of Obama’s decision, see:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/06/reuters-obama-to-establish-formal-contacts-with-the-muslim-brotherhood.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/30/us-usa-egypt-brotherhood-idUSTRE75T0GD20110630

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/06/obama-to-establish-formal-contacts-with-muslim-brotherhood.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/270864/obama-administration-opens-formal-contacts-muslim-brotherhood-andrew-c-mccarthy

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/gaffney070511.php

Of Antisemitism, Elusive Peace and Impossibilities

Edward Khalidi, a Palestinian-American historian, is Professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University, director of the Middle East Institute of Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs and author of the books The Story of the Palestinian Struggle for Statehood and Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness.  He is by every true and positive definition of the word a leader and an intelligent voice on behalf of the Palestinian perspective of their struggle for self-determination.

Khalidi, commenting on Arab antisemitism, stated in a recent PBS interview: "I think the problem of antisemitism in the Arab world, while it has roots that go back before the Arab-Israeli conflict, obviously is mainly driven by that conflict...I think if you were to have a rapid and just resolution to the issues between Israel and the Palestinians, that the overwhelming majority of what one now sees as antisemitism and other expressions of hostility towards Jews would disappear."

Oh, if it were only so.  The only part of Dr. Khalidi's statement that has historical precedence or is even founded in reality is that the roots of Arab antisemitism go back before the conflict.  In fact, the underpinnings of Arab antisemitism and, indeed, world-wide antisemitism are so vastly more far-reaching as to make a highly respected, highly intelligent academic's response sound like the naivete of a school child.

This provocative statement is not meant to indict Dr. Khalidi of disingenuous rhetoric.  In fact, it should not be interpreted as a slight on Dr. Khalidi in the least, nor an impeachment of the Arab intellectuals' perspective in general.  I am enamored by the profound and impassioned dialogue verbalized by these men and women and hardly impressed with the dismissive nature of some of Israel's and worldwide Jewry's leadership toward the Arab intelligentsia.

The problem is, at least with reference to Arab antisemitism, this widely held opinion is not in the least grounded in truth - either historic or current.  What is even more unfortunate is that this sentiment forms the basis for the dominant world-wide present-day opinion vis-a-vis Israel, Jews, Zionists and the so-called Palestinian issue.

If Israel would just end "the occupation" - stop the repression of the Palestinian people - than everything would be hunky-dory!  Jews would live without fear, Israel would finally have peace and the world's most publicized source of political and sectarian conflict would finally be over.  Life could start again and we could finally move on to other critical issues such as solving world hunger, restoring international economic stability, and reducing global warming.  Right?

Well, like many reading this, I may be an idealist - a dreamer...and a believer that hope springs eternal.  But, as much as we may believe that all things are possible (and with G-d, they truly are) even I understand through a well-intentioned analysis of the facts on the ground the following reality:
1. Antisemitism did not start with the Arab-Israeli or "Palestinian" conflict, it will not end with it.
2. Concepts like "occupation" and "repression" are truly one-sided and originated to sway world opinion and promote a vilification of Israel (not to mention, clearly lack a fluent historical perspective).
3. The foundation for Arab antisemitism, like all other forms, is in large part the projecting of Arab intra-cultural repression and demagoguery onto an outside entity.
4. Antisemitism has been a well oiled machine for over 3500 years, reappearing in various forms through the centuries and is not going away any time soon.

Let's be honest...through history, like any other group, we Jews have been far from perfect, with some having committed malfeasance.  Israel's historical policies vis-a-vis the "Palestinian issue" have been noticeably imperfect at times and marred with their share of injustices.  But, from a perspective of sitting at the mountaintop of human history, antisemitism is a reality that is so many standard deviations beyond the norm of human evil, that it borders on - well let's just say it - the metaphysical.  And, Arab antisemitism is no different.

If historical science were a litmus test for veracity (and we all know it is not) than the obsession that mankind has had with the scapegoating of the Jewish people (fully 0.1% of the world's population by religion) should have engendered a fascination chief amongst those in all of history.

Tying the end of the Arab-Israeli conflict to the conclusion (or even reduction) of antisemitism is like tying an individual winning a national lottery to the end of all poverty.  The former is less likely than being struck by lightning! And the latter has absolutely no relationship whatsoever with the former!

And, regarding the Palestinian issue, what will be the end of this high-stakes, high-toll conflict?  Is there a possibility of true and lasting peace...of a just and truly equilateral disengagement of hostility.  There have now been four generations of Arabs who have witnessed the re-population and rebirth of the Jewish Nation in the region we now call Israel.  And, with it, there have been four generations of Arabs who have, despite the moderation of some, taught the succeeding generation to hate...who have vilified Jews as the source of all their ills and have placed their "national" hopes, not on peace with Israel, but on the elimination of any Jewish presence in the middle east.

A wonderful mentor of mine once asked 2 questions: 1) If the Israelis would immediately and unilaterally put down all their weapons and would unequivocally commit to fighting no more, no matter what the consequence - what would happen? 2) If the Arabs would do the same, committed to peace with no threat to Israel at all, what would happen?  His answer?  In the first, there would be an immediate mass infiltration into and the sure destruction of the Jewish state of Israel.  In the second, peace would reign within 24 hours.

Whether you believe this scenario or not, the following video compilation should give you pause for reflection on the idealistic, yet misguided belief that peace and coexistence is even possible, let alone dependent entirely upon Israel.  That Israel's relinquishing of its so-called "occupation" and agreeing to the unilateral demands of the world to give up sovereignty over its land in exchange for Palestinian self-determination will be rewarded by the goodwill of its Arab neighbors and world opinion is more than a pipe-dream.  It is a farce.

What is the answer then?  What will be the final outcome?  The fact that Arab antisemitism is all-pervasive is indisputable.  One may think that these videos depict only radical extremists that have no impact on the average Arab.  But, reality says otherwise.  A recent poll obtained by the Pew Global Attitudes Project documents how deeply these attitudes are reflective of the general Arab populace.  Researchers found that the percentage expressing “favorable views” about Jews - not Israel or Israelis...JEWS - was not only low, but nearly non-existent: Egypt - 2%; Jordan - 2%; Pakistan - 2%; Lebanon - 3%; Palestinian Territory - 4%; Turkey - 4%.  Commenting on these statistics, Walter Russell Mead stated in a recent blog: "Repeat until your conscience goes to sleep: there is no anti-Semitism, and if there is, it is all the fault of the Jews."


Will the world continue its illogical and nonsensical vilification of all Jews with the pretext of punishment for the Arab-Israeli conflict?  Is it just a matter of time until history fulfills its quest to end the "Jewish problem"?  For the answers to these questions, we only need to look at history, which dictates that the strong always overcome the weak.  Or does it?

How do we measure strength?  How did the fledgling Jewish nation overcome the onslaught of 1947 when 5 Arab nations descended on it for purposes of annihilation?  How did it manage to survive when faced with a 100 to 1 disadvantage in 1967 in terms of manpower and artillery during the "Six Day War"?  How has it endured a 100,000,000 to 1 disadvantage in terms of Muslim to Jewish regional populace most of whom are committed to at the very least, its vilification and at the most, its eradication?

I am a scientist.  I am steeped in the Cartesian culture of experimental science, which is often at odds with historical science.  But, even I am intelligent enough to see that history has something to say that defies logic, the theories of strong v. weak and the ultimate predictability of the laws of science.  The passion for survival is one of the strongest of drives, especially when all odds are opposed to it.  But, history is fraught with nations, peoples, lands who fought with only survival to gain - and lost.

Here is where the spiritual has answers that the experimental sciences might attempt to exclude.  WITH G-D, ALL THINGS ARE INDEED POSSIBLE.  Or, as some might put it..."it ain't over 'til its over."  What looks impossible to us humans is temporal - that is, it is subject to an alteration in time a space.  And, with a G-d that works above and beyond the laws that govern our reality and Who has demonstrated that time and time again throughout recorded history, there is always hope.

There is no question in my mind that the worst is ahead of us.  We are fast approaching a time in the Middle East conflict that defies logical options.  The Palestinian Authority will soon deliver a proposal to the United Nations, which brings to fruition the well-documented favorable world opinion to unilaterally create a Palestinian State.  With any "official" pronouncement, Israel will likely be forced to respond in like-kind by annexing Judea and Samaria officially.  What will happen then?  The answers are so very elusive.

For most of us who are steeped in reality, there is no apparent end to the stalemate.  Peace in this part of the world is illusory - always has been.  The difficulties in overcoming suspicion, and so much ignorance, hate and evil, injustice and intransigence are far-reaching.  But, when all seems lost, although Israel and we Jews must be grounded in reality, prepared to stand in strength, mindful of the responsibility to do what's right - even when the most horrible option seems the only one left - will we call out to the human god of history, relying on military strength and the will to survive only to combat the world of prejudice and of hate?  Or, will we cry out to a grace-filled and merciful G-d Who can do all things?

As long as we have breath, it's not too late.  As unlikely as it seems, we must try to work diligently to overcome the impossible.  But, even when the impossible stares you in the face, our hope must never be in the impossibility of human choice, but of G-d's divine grace.

Arendt, Iran and The New Banality of Evil - It's a Time To Pray

Hannah Arendt was a German Jewess born in the early 1900s who's life work as a political philosopher has been well chronicled [1].   In her controversial book entitled "Eichman in Jerusalem - A Report on the Banality of Evil,"  Arendt coins this phrase that has been often quoted and often misinterpreted.

The basic premise of her analysis of Eichmann as the leader of the Nazi's "final solution" of exterminating the Jewish race was that for Eichmann it wasn't a matter of deep hatred for Jews nor an existential evil that motivated him.  As she watched the Eichmann trial unfold, Arendt concluded that it was a lack of deep-seated intellectual reflectiveness over Hitler's delusional Judeophobic propaganda that was at the core of his actions.  Eichmann was just simply following the Nazi "party line" without thought, without feeling in carrying out his quest.  Whether one agrees with Arendt's assertion or not, the precedence she set by coining the phrase "The Banality of Evil" was a seminal one.

Fast forward nearly 50 years from the Eichmann trial to the year 2011 and we find ourselves in a new era, or should I say ever-continuing era, of delusional Judeophobia and Jew-hating. Amongst this era's loudest voices is the one emanating from due east of Jerusalem in Iran.  We have all heard time and again the now repetitive foments of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, his calls to "wipe Israel off the map" and his mantra of holocaust denial.  To Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs of Tehran, Israel and its Western partners are the cause of all the world's ills.  His latest delusional rant blaming Western Europe for "stealing the clouds" in order to create drought in his beloved Iran is continued evidence of his progressive slide into the abyss of his own psychotic mind. [2]

But what of the rest of us - leaders, politicians, and the masses of the civilized world?  How do we assess the ravings of a lunatic?

The definition of "banal" and its use in the context of our understanding of modern evil is the key that unlocks the answer to this seemingly innocuous question.  Similar to what occurred prior to World War II, our world is distracted, facing a number of issues that certainly afford our every attention: economic crises, political and civil unrest, active conflagrations, natural and environmental disasters and, for good measure, the wedding of a King-to-be.  The fact that one lunatic despot continues a musical chime of idiocy becomes banal: defined as "trite, hackneyed, commonplace, devoid of freshness or originality."   In modern language: "it ain't no big deal."

The masses have become mesmerized into a trance-like numbness that allows us to no longer define evil as such - we laugh it off or just stop paying attention at all.  Of course, only a few well-positioned political elite knew the dangers of the Hitler-led Third Reich prior to WW2.  The rest of the world was not inundated with his vitriol day in and day out and the occasional newsreel was not as impactful as today's plethora of information through television and the internet.  So who can blame the world's masses for the holocaust that followed?

Unlike Nazi Germany, whose populace for the most part bought the party rhetoric hook, line and sinker - it is not the people of Iran that have grown to "accept" the vision of their "duly elected" leader and his Mullah puppeteers.   The majority of Iranians know full well the mess that filled the void when the Shah was evicted from Persian society.

Today, however, we have a whole new group of people who have been duped into submission by the Banality of this new Evil - THE ENTIRE PLANET.   Oh, we see the United Nations, emasculated as it might be, and a few of its member nations, threaten Iran with sanctions and even carry out some of them.  While quite harmless and essentially trivial to the leaders of Iran, the sanctions are not even a fly in the holy ointment of their Messianic fervor.

So back to the question at hand: what of this raving lunatic and the regime that he fronts for?  Their march towards completely tipping the scales of power in an already imbalanced and highly volatile region continues daily without even a blip on the Richter Scale of concern for the rest of the world.  After all, it seems as if it is only those "damn Jews" that these looney-tunes hate.  The Jews are the only ones sounding the alarm.  "It's Israel's problem - not ours.  Let them deal with it."  Oh, really?  Have we become so denervated to any sense of impending doom...so extinguished by repetition or whimsicality to even care?  I fear the answer is a clear and resounding YES!!

The world is nearing the point of no return - or should I say KNOW return - as we approach the nuclear age of The Islamic Republic of Iran.  Unlike the the days prior to Hitler's holocaust, the whole world KNOWS it is coming.  And, really, unless we restructure both our thinking AND feeling processes, understand the basic premise of Hannah Arendt's treatise on Adolf Eichmann and truly, deeply reflect over what this will really mean for the Middle East, for Israel and for the ENTIRE WORLD, we will be sorry for sure.   As we have over the deaths of 6 million Jews and many million non-Jews - I fear the same fate will unravel and we will weep in retrospective horror and shame at its consequences.

So, this is a choice we all have to make.  One can stay mesmerized and numb in preparation for the next holocaust.  Or, one can sound the trumpet and sound it continually.  I choose the latter.  I will blow it as often and as hard as I possibly can - while their is breath in me.

In 600 BCE, after his Jewish brethren were completely blind-sided by the Babylonians who stormed the nation, destroyed the Holy City, murdered thousands and exiled an entire people, the Prophet Jeremiah whaled at the myopia that led his people to such a fate.  Jeremiah bemoaned their sin and callousness toward evil as the cause of this horrific event in Jewish history:

Jer. 4:19-21

O my soul, my soul.

I am pained in my very heart.

My heart makes a noise in me;

I cannot hold my peace,

Because you have heard, O my soul,
 The sound of the trumpet,

The alarm of war. 

    

 Destruction upon destruction is cried,
 For the whole land is plundered.
 Suddenly my tents are plundered,
 And my curtains in a moment. 

 How long will I see the standard,
 And hear the sound of the trumpet?

From the Middle East Media Research Institute:  "An article posted April 24, 2011 on Gerdab, the website of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), envisions the day after Iran's first nuclear test. The article states that Iran's first controlled nuclear explosion will not disrupt the daily lives of Iranians, but will only boost their national pride. However, it says, in the Arab world, in the West and in Israel, it will sow a sense of fear mingled with respect for Iran's achievement. The article makes satirical comments on Iran's charged relations with the Arabs and with the West.

The following are excerpts from the article:[3]

"The day after Iran's first nuclear test will be an ordinary day for us Iranians. But many of us will have a new gleam in our eyes.
"It's a fine day. The hour is 7:00 AM. The sun is not yet fully up, but everything is already clear. Many countries in the northern hemisphere are starting their day. It's the first dawn after Iran's nuclear test. It's an ordinary day.
"Yesterday, an underground nuclear explosion took place, probably [somewhere] in the deserts of central Iran, where the Americans and some of the [other] Western countries once wanted to bury their nuclear waste. The blast was not so powerful as to cause much damage to the region, but not so weak as to cause the Iranian nuclear scientists any problem in their experiment.
"It's an ordinary day, and just like on any [other] day when there is news from Iran – which is 90% of year – we see reports on the foreign news websites, and they read as follows:   
"Reuters: 'Iran Detonates Its Nuclear Bomb.'
"CNN: 'Iran Detonates Nuclear Bomb.'
"Al-Jazeera: 'Iran Has Tested Its Second Nuclear Bomb.'
"Al-'Arabia: 'A Shi'ite Nuclear Bomb Has Gone Off.'
"Yahoo News: "Nuclear Explosion in Iran."
"The Jerusalem Post: 'The Mullahs Have Obtained Nuclear Weapons.'
"The Washington Post: 'Nuclear Explosion in Iran; Shock and Anxiety in Tel Aviv.'
"The local [Iranian press] will also shower this achievement by the Hidden Imam and the Leader [Khamenei] with words of praise, as follows:
"Kayhan: 'Iran Has Tested Its First Nuclear Bomb.'
"Jomhouri-ye Eslami: 'Iran Carries Out Successful Nuclear Test.'
"Iran [a popular pro-Ahmadinejad daily]: 'On President's Orders, Iran Tests All-Iranian Nuclear Bomb.'
"Ettelaat: 'Iran Detonates Long-Awaited Nuclear Bomb'...
"It will be a news storm, but it will not disrupt normal [daily] life in Iran. Employees will come to work and punch the clock on time, or [at most] a little late. Bakers will not bake unsubsidized bread. Broadband Internet will function as usual, and even this storm will not make it any cheaper, nor will it cause [Iranian] TV to rethink its policy on the airing of foreign programs.
"The day after Iran's first nuclear test will be an ordinary day for us Iranians, but many of us will have a new gleam in our eyes – a gleam of national pride and might.
"[Koran 8:60:] 'And prepare against them what force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to frighten thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy'"

So, I ask the question: will we be an accomplice in this new and modern Eichmann-esque version of The Banality of Evil?  I submit that by saying and doing nothing, we are, in fact, choosing to be the de facto Adolf Eichmanns of today's Hitlerian movement in the halls of Tehran.  Will you turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to this clear and present danger?  Or will you be one of those who sounds the alarm loud and clear?  It's your choice.  Yes, this is a call to be deeply reflective.  But, it is also a call to action.

And, without question, if you are a believer in the God who moves on behalf of the intercession of humble, faith-filled people devoted to eschewing evil, it is a clear call to pray - earnestly, fervently, continually!

Endnote:

[1] Arendt - On-line biography (http://www.iep.utm.edu/arendt/#H6)
[2] MEMRI - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Accuses the Europeans of Emptying the Clouds
[3] Gerdab (Iran), April 24, 2011.