Nasheman

India's largest selling Urdu weekly, now also in English

You are here: Home / Archives for Uncategorized

US seeks to overthrow Venezuela government: official

by

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Photo: REUTERS

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. Photo: REUTERS

Caracas/AFP: Tighter new US sanctions against Venezuela are aimed to foment violent unrest to try to overthrow President Nicolas Maduro, his defense minister said Saturday.

“This US interference is aimed at promoting violence… against our institutions” to oust staunch US critic Maduro, Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino told Telesur television.

US President Barack Obama signed a law on Thursday to allow sanctions against senior Venezuelan officials accused of violating the rights of protesters during anti-government demonstrations that rocked the country earlier this year.

The text approved just over a week ago by both houses of the US Congress would freeze assets and deny visas to Venezuelan authorities responsible for violence and political detentions triggered by the protests.

Thousands of activists were arrested and more than 43 people were killed during mass demonstrations that raged from February to May against the government of Maduro, the elected successor of late leftist firebrand president Hugo Chavez.

Maduro has repeatedly accused the United States of fomenting the protests and seeking to overthrow and even assassinate him.

The Venezuelan leader condemned the sanctions law in a series of Twitter posts this week, calling it a “misstep” that resembled the US policy isolating Cuba, which was overturned Wednesday as Obama and Cuba’s leader Raul Castro announced a bilateral rapprochement.

“The background of all this is much more nuanced. It is dangerous because these are the steps they are taking so that they can try to have the world see the Venezuelan state as a failed one,” Padrino warned.

Caracas and Washington have had strained diplomatic ties since Chavez first came to power in 1999, leading to the withdrawal of ambassadors from each other’s countries in 2010.

Still, the United States is the main buyer of Venezuelan oil.

Raul Castro: U.S must respect that Cuba will remain Socialist

by

Cuba's President Raul Castro greets members of the National Assembly at the start of a session in Havana, December 20, 2014. | Photo: Reuters

Cuba’s President Raul Castro greets members of the National Assembly at the start of a session in Havana, December 20, 2014. Photo: Reuters

by teleSUR

The President also announced he will attend the Summit of the Americas, a first for a Cuban head of State.

Cuban President Raul Castro told the country’s legislators Saturday that the United States must respect the island’s socialist political and economic system.

“In the same way that we have never demanded that the United States change its political system, we will demand respect for ours,” Raul Castro told the National Assembly.

The U.S. and Cuba restored diplomatic ties earlier this week, after U.S. President Barack Obama admitted that his country’s half century attempt to defeat Cuba had failed.

Raul Castro added that he will participate in the Summit of the Americas in April, the first opportunity for the leader to meet with United States President Barack Obama following the historic announcement.

Cuba has never participated these summits due to the island’s exclusion from the Organization of American States in 1962.

The Government of Panama had previously stated that it intended to invite Cuba to the summit, while numerous leaders from the hemisphere having previously stated they would not attend unless Cuba was present.

Raul Castro also said Cuba faces a “long and difficult struggle” before the United States removes a decades-old economic embargo against the Caribbean island, in part because influential Cuban-American exiles will attempt to “sabotage the process” toward normalization.

The Cuban National Assembly announced on Friday that it would back the agreement of President Raul Castro and U.S to restore diplomatic ties. Yolanda Ferrer, President of the International Relations Commission of the National Assembly also warmly welcomed the return of three Cuban political prisoners held by the United States for more than 15 years for attempting to thwart terrorist attacks on the island by Cuban-expatriate extremists.

Leaked emails: Obama exerted influence over “The Interview”

by

the interview

by Robert Barsocchini

Antiwar.com’s Dan Sanchez has just reported on leaked emails that reveal that the Obama regime exerted influence over the movieThe Interview “to encourage assassination and regime change in North Korea”.

Regarding the threats of bombings of theaters if the film was shown, Obama has been personally encouraging people to “go the movies” anyway, while hardliners like Mitt Romney have specifically encouraged people to go see The Interview.

This is not the first time strongman Obama has been closely involved with promoting or influencing Hollywood movies spouting negative propaganda about countries Obama and the US want to invade and conquer. Michelle Obama personally presented the Academy award for “best picture” for the filmArgo.

Argo whitewashed the history of US aggression and genocide against Iran. Since 1953, the US has been an accomplice in the torture and killing of over a million Iranian citizens, thousands with chemical weapons.

The Interview almost certainly whitewashes the history of US genocide against Korea, and apparently depicts US forces causing the North Korean leader’s head to explode.

In its aggressive attacks against North Korea in the early 1950s, the US intentionally targeted civilians and flattened entire villages and cities, including Pyongyang. The attacks killed up to 4 million people, mostly civilians, most of whom were killed by the US, many through direct and intentional targeting, such as the machine-gunning of women and children by US soldiers at No Gun Ri.

Scholar Chalmers Johnson finds the North Korea of today a proud, struggling nation that, unlike the US public, is very aware of what was done to it by the US, and sees the aggressive, threatening stance the US has since maintained towards that country.

Johnson also notes that the worst act committed against Koreans by a “Korean” government was the bayoneting of thousands of students by the US-backed South Korean dictatorship in the late ’80s.

The Interview would almost certainly be another exercise in genocide denial for the US, a country that has gotten away with all of the crimes, including multiple genocides, it has thus far committed.

However, though we may be happy when Holocaust deniers and the like decide to hold their tongues, it is extremely unfortunate that Sony’s decision not to release such a film was brought about not by free will but threats of violence from unknown sources, which are to be condemned as threats against speech itself.

According to the leaked emails, Sony was hesitant about depicting the assassination of the North Korean leader, but was “encouraged” by the Obama regime to go forward with it.

It may be useful to imagine how we would feel about the reverse: a slapstick buddy comedy about the infiltration of the country considered the most dangerous in the world – the USA, not North Korea – and the “comedic” assassination of Obama by having his head catch on fire and explode.

It is also relevant to note that North Korea’s official complaint about the film, that it incites terrorism against North Korea (which is what the Obama regime apparently intended), is the same reason the US government has given countless times over the course of its existence to justify brutally crushing free speech and protest – facts all but fully ignored or suppressed in dominant US discourse.

And, as Antiwar.com and Wired report, “North Korea almost certainly did not hack Sony”.

Robert Barsocchini focuses on global force dynamics and writes professionally for the film industry. He is a regular contributor to Washington’s Blog, and is published in Counter Currents, Global Research, State of Globe, Blacklisted News, LewRockwell.com, DanSanchez.me, Information Clearing House, Press TV, and other outlets. Also see: Hillary Clinton’s Record of Support for War and other Depravities. Follow Robert and UK-based colleague, Dean Robinson, on Twitter.

Colombian guerrillas declare indefinite cease-fire

by

A Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia negotiator, Pablo Catatumbo, speaks to the media, flanked by fellow FARC members, in Havana, Nov. 18, 2014. Photo: Reuters

A Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia negotiator, Pablo Catatumbo, speaks to the media, flanked by fellow FARC members, in Havana, Nov. 18, 2014. Photo: Reuters

by teleSUR

The cease-fire will begin Dec. 20, but will need to be verified by international organizations.

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) have declared an indefinite cease-fire, saying that the unilateral move should turn into an armistice for the 50-year conflict.

“This unilateral cease-fire, that we want to last in time, will be terminated only if it appears that our guerrilla structures have been targeted by the security forces,”said the rebel group.

The cessation of hostilities will come into effect on Dec. 20, however it would need to be verified by UNASUR, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the Broad Front for Peace.

It remains unclear whether the Colombian government will join in the cease-fire.

The rebel group launched peace talks with the government of President Juan Manuel Santos in Cuba in 2012, hoping to bring an end to a half-century of armed conflict – the longest running conflict in the hemisphere.

The rebel group and government representatives have so far signed off on partial agreements on rural reform, political participation of FARC members, and the group’s abandonment of drug trafficking.

More than 220,000 people have been killed and over 5.7 million people have been internally displaced due to the conflict.

Dump the dollar, says Ecuadorian president

by

Ecuador's President Rafael Correa has long opposed the use of the dollar. Photo: Reuters

Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa has long opposed the use of the dollar. Photo: Reuters

by teleSUR

President Rafael Correa says the U.S. dollar is the “exact opposite” of what Ecuador needs.

Ecuador’s use of the U.S. dollar is hurting the country’s economic growth, President Rafael Correa warned Monday.

“Dollarization was a bad decision,” Correa said.

The president said that in the face of low oil prices, Ecuador would benefit from control of its own currency.

Ecuador is the smallest member of OPEC. Under Correa, the Ecuadorean government has increasingly invested oil revenues in social services and economic development.

However, with oil prices slumping, Correa says Ecuador needs a flexible currency now more than ever. He argued that by using the dollar, Ecuador is “doing exactly the opposite of what (it) must do to address the looming scenario.”

“In these difficult times we will see just how important it is to have a national currency,” he added.

Ecuador adopted the U.S. dollar in 2000 after the value of its former currency nosedived in 1999.

Correa has long warned the continued use of the dollar is holding back the economy, once describing it as a “straight jacket.”

In July, Ecuadorean legislators approved a law paving the way for the use of a parallel electronic currency for domestic use.

Raul Castro urges US to lift embargo on Cuba

by

Cuban leader says Obama’s decision to renew ties deserves respect, but urges US to lift embargo against his country.

US President Barack Obama shakes hands with Cuban President Raul Castro during the official memorial service for former South African President Nelson Mandela (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

US President Barack Obama shakes hands with Cuban President Raul Castro during the official memorial service for former South African President Nelson Mandela (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

by Al Jazeera

Cuban President Raul Castro has hailed the mutual decision to re-establish the US-Cuban diplomatic relations, but urged Washington to lift the five-decade-long embargo against his country.

On Wednesday, the countries agreed to restore diplomatic ties that were severed more than 50 years ago, and US President Barack Obama called for an end to the economic embargo against its old Cold War enemy.

“President Obama’s decision deserves the respect and acknowledgement of our people,” Castro said in a televised address, while warning that the embargo, which he calls a “blockade”, must still be lifted.

“We have agreed to re-establish diplomatic relations, but this does not mean the principal issue has been resolved: The blockade which causes much human and economic damage to our country should end,” he said.

He challenged Obama to modify the policy, which is rooted in US law, with executive action.

Obama said on Wednesday that the US was changing its relationship with the people of Cuba.

“We will begin to normalise relations between our two nations. Through these changes, we intend to create more opportunities for the American and Cuban people and begin a new chapter,” he added.

Al Jazeera’s Patty Culhane, reporting from Washington, said the trade embargo imposed on Cuba after ties were severed can only be lifted by Congress.

“Senior administration officials tell me they don’t think Congress is going to lift the embargo. We have seen several members of Congress come out and call the president’s moves ‘outrageous’,” she said.

Republican condemnation

Republicans, who will control both houses of Congress from January, oppose normal relations with the Communist-run island.

“Relations with the Castro regime should not be revisited, let alone normalised, until the Cuban people enjoy freedom – and not one second sooner,” said House Speaker John Boehner.

“There is no ‘new course’ here, only another in a long line of mindless concessions to a dictatorship that brutalises its people and schemes with our enemies.”

A day earlier, after 18 months of secret talks, Obama and Castro agreed in a phone call on a breakthrough prisoner exchange, the opening of embassies in each other’s countries, and an easing of some restrictions on commerce.

Havana released a US citizen, Alan Gross, who had been jailed for five years in Cuba, and an intelligence agent who had spied for the US and was held for nearly 20 years.

Cuba’s jailing of Gross, convicted for importing banned technology and trying to establish clandestine internet service for Cuban Jews, had been a major obstacle in improving ties.

The US in return freed three Cuban intelligence agents who had served 16 years in US jails for spying on Cuban exile groups in Florida.

Castro said the Cubans’ release was a cause of “enormous joy for their families and all of our people”.

He also praised Obama for agreeing to the prisoner exchange and pushing for a new relationship with Cuba.

Castro thanked Pope Francis, the Vatican and Canada for helping Havana and Washington reach their historic accord.

Obama said he had instructed Secretary of State John Kerry to immediately initiate discussions with Cuba on the re-establishment of diplomatic relations with Cuba, which were severed in 1961.

“In the coming months, we will re-establish an embassy in Havana and carry out high-level exchanges and visits between our two governments as part of the normalisation process,” Obama said.

EU court orders Hamas removed from terror list

by

Court delays implementing the ruling to allow appeals, drawing ire from Israeli PM Netanyahu and praise from Hamas as a ‘human rights’ victory.

eu-hamas

by Barak Ravid, Haaretz

The General Court of the European Union in Luxembourg accepted the petition by Hamas in which it sought to have itself removed from the EU’s list of terrorist organizations.

The court postponed implementing the ruling for three months to allow for the EU commission or one of the EU’s 28 member states to petition the decision, which drew praise from Hamas and condemnation from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The hearing in the European court was technical and procedural, and did not stem from a change in the EU’s position regarding Hamas.

Although Foreign Ministry officials in Jerusalem played down the importance of the EU decision, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attacked it vociferously.

Netanyahu said Israel is not satisfied with EU explanations that removing Hamas from the list of terrorist organizations is solely a technical matter.

“The burden of proof is upon the European Union, and we expect them to immediately put Hamas back on the list, as anyone understand that it is an inseparable part of it,” said Netanyahu. “Hamas is a murderous terrorist organization, which states in its charter that its goal is to destroy Israel. We will continue to fight in with determination and strength so that it will never achieve its goal.”

A senior Hamas official, Izzat al-Rishq, tweeted that the court decision is “a legal victory for Palestinian rights.” According to the Twitter post, the decision rights an injustice done to the Hamas movement, “which is a national liberation movement.”

The Palestinian terrorist group asserted in its petition that the decision to put it on the EU terror list was carried out without giving it an opportunity for a hearing and without sufficient evidence being presented. The European court accepted the petition based on the precedent of a similar case of the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka.

The court ruled in its decision that most of the evidence used to put Hamas on the list of terrorist organizations were from open sources – mainly press publications. The court made it clear that the ruling does not say anything substantial about the status of Hamas or the character of the organization’s operations.

Likewise, the three-month postponement also means that Hamas assets within the EU will remain frozen as well as sanctions against its members. During this period EU institutions or member states will be able to appeal the ruling or make a new decision within the council of EU foreign ministers, which would define Hamas as a terror organization based on stronger evidence.

The EU ambassador in Israel, Lars Faaborg-Andersen, met Wednesday with the director-general of Israel’s Foreign Ministry, Nissim Ben-Sheetrit, who expressed great disappointment from the EU court’s decision, and demanded the EU act swiftly to reclassify Hamas as a terrorist organization.

The ambassador made it clear in the meeting that there is no change in EU policy regarding recognizing Hamas as a terrorist organization, and that the EU intends to use all means to reinstate the group on the terrorist list. The ambassador also stressed that the court’s decision has no immediate validity, and that there will be no change regarding freezing Hamas funds in Europe.

The EU also issued a special statment in response to the court ruling.

“This legal ruling is clearly based on procedural grounds and it does not imply any assessment by the Court of the substantive reasons for the designation of Hamas as a terrorist organisation,” read the statement. “It is a legal ruling of a court, not a political decision taken by the EU governments. The EU continues to uphold the Quartet principles.”

The statement continued, “The EU institutions are studying carefully the ruling and will decide on the options open to them. They will, in due course, take appropriate remedial action, including any eventual appeal to the ruling. In case of an appeal the restrictive measures remain in place.”

Bush 3.0? Jeb to 'actively explore' presidential run

by

Former Florida Governor gives strongest hint yet on impending campaign for 2016

Jeb Bush, son of former President George H.W. Bush and brother of former President George W. Bush, announced Tuesday he would "actively explore" a presidential run. (Photo: World Affairs Council of Philadelphia/flickr/cc)

Jeb Bush, son of former President George H.W. Bush and brother of former President George W. Bush, announced Tuesday he would “actively explore” a presidential run. (Photo: World Affairs Council of Philadelphia/flickr/cc)

by Nadia Prupis, Common Dreams

Jeb Bush announced Tuesday morning that he will “actively explore the possibility of running for president of the United States.”

The former governor of Florida and son of former President George H.W. Bush made the announcement on social media, posting messages to Twitter and Facebook that he had made the decision after consulting with his family over Thanksgiving.

“As a result of these conversations and thoughtful consideration of the kind of strong leadership I think America needs, I have decided to actively explore the possibility of running for President of the United States,” Bush wrote in a Facebook post published Tuesday.

He continued, “In January, I also plan to establish a Leadership PAC that will help me facilitate conversations with citizens across America to discuss the most critical challenges facing our exceptional nation. The PAC’s purpose will be to support leaders, ideas and policies that will expand opportunity and prosperity for all Americans. In the coming months, I hope to visit with many of you and have a conversation about restoring the promise of America.”

Reaction among progressives on Twitter was dismissive if not swift:

In a mid-October ABC poll, Bush had roughly 13 percent of support among conservatives, putting him in the same league as former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, who each received 12 percent support. He is a divisive figure in politics, even among Republicans, as David Weigel of Bloomberg points out. His legacy as Florida Governor is also punctuated by scandal and allegations of corruption.

Tuesday’s statement is not an official announcement of Bush’s candidacy, but a strong hint that he is planning on running. The New York Times writes:

The question that looms over yet another Bush candidacy, though, is if he can appeal to actual Republican primary voters as much as he does the party’s wealthy bundlers. Many of Mr. Bush’s would-be rivals are skeptical. So for them, Mr. Bush’s making such an early move is not entirely bad news. If it turns out that he cannot appeal to the party base or backs away from a run entirely, there will be time for them to make their move.

U.S feels the heat on Palestine vote at UN

by

US Secretary of State John Kerry (L) meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Villa Taverna in Rome, Dec. 15, 2014. (photo by REUTERS/Evan Vucci)

US Secretary of State John Kerry (L) meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Villa Taverna in Rome, Dec. 15, 2014. (photo by REUTERS/Evan Vucci)

by Jonathan Cook

Nazareth: The floodgates have begun to open across Europe on recognition of Palestinian statehood. On Friday the Portuguese parliament became the latest European legislature to call on its government to back statehood, joining Sweden, Britain, Ireland, France and Spain.

In coming days similar moves are expected in Denmark and from the European Parliament. The Swiss government will join the fray too this week, inviting states that have signed the Fourth Geneva Convention to an extraordinary meeting to discuss human rights violations in the occupied territories. Israel has threatened retaliation.

But while Europe is tentatively finding a voice in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, silence reigns across the Atlantic. The White House appears paralysed, afraid to appear out of sync with world opinion but more afraid still of upsetting Israel and its powerful allies in the US Congress.

Now there is an additional complicating factor. The Israeli public, due to elect a new Israeli government in three months’ time, increasingly regards the US role as toxic. A poll this month found that 52 per cent viewed President Barack Obama’s diplomatic policy as “bad”, and 37 per cent thought he had a negative attitude towards their country – more than double the figure two years ago.

US Secretary of State John Kerry alluded to the White House’s difficulties this month when he addressed the Saban Forum, an annual gathering of US policy elites to discuss the Middle East. He promised that Washington would not interfere in Israel’s elections.

According to the Israeli media, he was responding to pressure from Tzipi Livni, sacked this month from Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, triggering the forthcoming election, and opposition leader Yitzhak Herzog, of the centre-left Labor party.

The pair recently made a pact in an effort to oust Netanyahu. Their electoral success – improbable at the moment – offers the White House its best hope of an Israeli government that will at least pay lip service to a renewal of peace negotiations, which collapsed last April. They have warned, however, that any sign of backing from the Obama administration would be the kiss of death at the polls.

US officials would like to see Netanyahu gone, not least because he has been the biggest obstacle to reviving a peace process that for two decades successfully allayed international pressure to create a Palestinian state. But any visible strategy against Netanyahu is almost certain to backfire.

Washington’s difficulties are only underscored by the Palestinians’ threat to bring a draft resolution before the UN Security Council as soon as this week, demanding Israel’s withdrawal by late 2016 to the 1967 lines.

Given the current climate, the Palestinians are hopeful of winning the backing of European states, especially the three key ones in the Security Council – Britain, France and Germany – and thereby isolating the US. Arab foreign ministers met Kerry on Tuesday in an effort to persuade Washington not to exercise its veto.

The US, meanwhile, is desperately trying to postpone a vote, fearful that casting its veto might further discredit it in the eyes of the world while also suggesting to Israeli voters that Netanyahu has the White House in his pocket.

But indulging the Israeli right also has risks, bolstering it by default. That danger was driven home during another session of the Saban Forum, addressed by settler leader Naftali Bennett. He is currently riding high in the polls and will likely be the backbone of the next coalition government.

Bennett says clearly what Netanyahu only implies: that most of the West Bank should be annexed, with the Palestinians given demilitarised islands of territory that lack sovereignty. The model, called “autonomy”, is of the Palestinians ruling over a series of local councils.

The Washington audience was further shocked by Bennett’s disrespectful treatment of his interviewer, Martin Indyk, who served as Obama’s representative at the last round of peace talks. He accused Indyk of not living in the real world, dismissively calling him part of the “peace industry”.

Bennett’s goal, according to analysts, was to prove to Israeli voters that he is not afraid to stand up to the Americans.

Given its weakening hand – faced with an ever-more rightwing Israeli public and a more assertive European one – Washington is looking towards an unlikely saviour. The hawkish foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman used to be its bete noire, but he has been carefully recalibrating his image.

Unlike other candidates, he has been aggressively promoting a “peace plan”. The US has barely bothered examining its contents, which are only a little more generous than Bennett’s annexation option, and involve forcibly stripping hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Israel of their citizenship.

Lieberman, however, has usefully created the impression that he is a willing partner to a peace process. At the weekend he even suggested he might join a centre coalition with Livni and Herzog.

Lieberman is cleverly trying to occupy a middle ground with Israeli voters, demonstrating that he can placate the Americans, while offering a plan so unfair to the Palestinians that there is no danger voters will consider him part of the “peace industry”.

That may fit the electoral mood: a recent poll showed 63 per cent of Israelis favour peace negotiations, but 70 per cent think they are doomed to fail. The Israeli public, like Lieberman, understands that the Palestinians will never agree to the kind of subjugation they are being offered.

The Israeli election’s one certain outcome is that, whoever wins, the next coalition will, actively or passively, allow more of the same: a slow, creeping annexation of what is left of a possible Palestinian state, as the US and Europe bicker.

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net.

A version of this article first appeared in The National, Abu Dhabi.

Iran warned Australia about Sydney attacker

by

A policeman lays a floral tribute with thousands of others near the cafe where hostages were held for over 16 hours, in central Sydney, Dec. 16, 2014. (photo by REUTERS/David Gray)

A policeman lays a floral tribute with thousands of others near the cafe where hostages were held for over 16 hours, in central Sydney, Dec. 16, 2014. (photo by REUTERS/David Gray)

by Arash Karami, Al Monitor

Man Haron Monis, the gunman behind the 16-hour hostage standoff in Sydney, Australia, resulting in the deaths of two individuals and himself, was well known to Iranian authorities. The self-styled “sheikh,” who left Iran for Australia in 1996, had abused Australia’s political system to gain immunity from prosecution in Iran, where he was a wanted man.

According to Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Marzieh Afkham, “The psychological history and condition of this individual, who for more than two decades was a refugee in Australia, was repeatedly presented to Australian officials.”

Afkham did not elaborate, but Haron Monis’ history while in Australia paints a clear picture of him as unstable and a charlatan posing as a religious man.

Before changing his name, Haron Monis was Mohammad Hassan Manteghi. As early as 2008, the Australian Shiite community warned federal agents he was an imposter posing as a Shiite ayatollah (in fact, they said there were no ayatollahs in Australia at the time) and no one had ever heard of the two names he was using, “Ayatollah Borujerdi” and “Sheikh Haron.” He was, however, in the news at the time for harassing family members of soldiers who died fighting in Afghanistan.

Before his conversion to Sunnism to take up the cause of the Islamic State group, Haron Monis had faced a number of legal battles, including numerous charges of sexual assault — under the guise of religious “healer” — and accessory to the murder of his ex-wife in Australia.

Fars News Agency reported that Iran had requested via Interpol that Haron Monis be extradited in 1996 for “heavy financial fraud,” but that the request was denied when Haron Monis claimed that he would be persecuted in Iran for his “liberal” views. He was eventually granted political asylum in Australia.

A search of Interpol did not bring up anyone by the various names he used, but foreign-based Persian-language Manoto reported that Haron Monis was wanted in a $200,000 fraud case. Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) also claimed that Haron Monis had been wanted by Iran. Interestingly, while most Western media outlets published images of Haron Monis dressed in traditional Shiite clerical garb, IRNA’s choice shows a man in sunglasses wearing a white jacket over a black shirt with white stripes and white pants.

Australian media outlets had long bought into Haron Monis’ branding of himself as “liberal.” In January 2001, Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s Radio National program profiled Haron Monis, before his name change: “While in Sydney, we talk to Ayatollah Manteghi Borujerdi, an Iranian cleric espousing a liberal brand of Islam — dangerously liberal, as his views have led to his wife and two daughters being held hostage in Iran.”

The Fars article, headlined, “The con artist who was not returned to Iran under the excuse of ‘political asylum,’” also criticized the Western media for emphasizing his Iranian nationality.

KNOW US

GET INVOLVED

PROMOTE

Archives