Archive for the ‘Iran’ Category

Baran: A Movie of Afghan Immigrants to Iran

Monday, November 22nd, 2010

Baran, another very fine movie from Iranian master Majid Majidi [see reviews of his Color of Paradise and The Song of the Sparrows ] informs us in his usual beautiful, well paced way of lives we know little or nothing at all, combined with emotions and relations we know bone deep.  Baran takes us to the Iranian border with Afghanistan where over 1 million refugees fled from the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and wars following wars following wars.  As everywhere, the plight of refugees is cruel.  Removed from their own countries, often from remote rural areas which once constituted their entire world, living in squalid, hastily put together camps without plumbing, electricity or the tools or sense of belonging to use them, they seek work where they find it, at wages below the prevailing native norm.

Much of Baran takes place on a building site where men build and destroy cinder-block and mortar walls in the most appalling safety conditions you can imagine.  I’ve been on Mexican building sites.  They are absolutely Inspection Ready compared to this one.  Many of the workers are Afghan refugees; all men and all illegal.  When one of them falls from the unguarded second floor and shatters his foot not only is his family in extreme difficulty but the building inspectors begin to descend on the Iranian contractor doing the work.

“Afghans!  Afghans run! the shout is taken up and half the workforce clears out — just as Migra raids in Southern California.

A work partner of the disabled Afghani brings his “son,” Rahmat to take his place, promising to watch over him.  The boy soon shows himself as too weak and clumsy to carry sacks of cement up and down make-shift stairways, or wield a sledge hammer.  He is swapped with a tall young Iranian boy, Lateef,  who had been doing the kitchen duties and resents his promotion to much harder work.  He begins to spy on and taunt Rahmat until he discovers what we have suspected from the beginning.  Rahmat is a young girl.

The wonderful central theme is Lateef’s increasing care for her, protecting her while trying to live within the customs of men and women apart, his own love-born shyness, and not wanting to jeopardize her work, and therefore nearness to him.  He goes to increasing lengths to help her, demanding his back wages from the brusque but kind hearted contractor, and selling his identity card on the black market.  Each time the money does not work as he intended.  He is as far as ever from her though eventually she recognizes him, and his intentions.

The ending is bitter sweet as the last gift of money doesn’t help the crippled father stay in Iran but to take the family back to Afghanistan.  The parting scene between the two is very compelling stuff.  The family is boarding a rickety pickup truck in the driving rain when the two finally exchange their recognition of love.  The best  best Cinderella moment I’ve ever seen in life or a movie takes place and then, water splashing into her footprint, the truck moves off.  She is gazing out through a netted niqab at him.  He is smiles at footprint and the water.  Water thrown at departing friends in Iran is a promise of return.

As is typical with Majidi the colors are saturated and rich.  Here, instead of flowers, and streams — though there is one river of particular and harrowing importance– he brings us into the construction site, with billowing gray dust, pouring rain, ruined barrels of steaming liquids, fires to heat the material, the slop of mortar.  It is very much a Dantesque scene, with great snow covered mountains in the background.  Steam coming from the workers mouths and nostrils, eagerly reaching semi-gloved fingers for the hot tea served all around.

I’ve never seen a movie so bound to workers lives as Baran; the constant, brutal physical labor, the fear of losing the job, the intimidating shouts and threats of the contractor.  Even away from this job site work is hard and dangerous.  Women, in full Afghan dress, pull stones and branches from a rushing river — again no safety equipment.  Them major theme of fierce sexual separation and how it is both “natural” and deformative runs the length of the movie.   The girl’s determination to break that wall as best she can to help her family; the Iranian suitor stepping outside his own walls to answer the mystery of his heart.

Our view of immigrants up against the larger culture, the disdain for them, their language and customs from the dominant one will ring familiar to all who pay attention to life here in the United States– but in the movie it is between people we would hardly have thought of in such a context.  And of course, we are reminded, mostly as background but also in one wrenching scene, of the war and the wars that continue to take lives of young people, and leave their families with gaping holes.

And through this, a  dawning love softens a crazy kid, puts him into his very best clothes to make an impression and drives him towards his loved one, despised immigrant or not.  This, he understands in the pouring rain,  is the love I will have in my life.

Every film of Majid Majidi’s is so wonderfully wrought I would go hours out of my way to see anything with his name on it, no title or plot needed, confident I would come away, once again, stirred by the shimmering colors of his human palate.

Attack Iran!

Thursday, June 21st, 2007

Normon Podhoretz who began his intellectual career with scathing attacks on Alan Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac and other Beats for their encouragement of “criminality,” emotionality over reason, romancing brutality, has gone on to bigger things — hoping and praying that the US bomb Iran into oblivion.

As Glenn Greenwald says: Face of a Psychopath

Any doubts about what Norman Podhoretz is — and what the movement is which reveres him — ought to be forever dispelled by his answer, given in the same interview, to the question of what the British should have done in response to the detention of 15 of their sailors by Iran:

“They should have threatened to bomb the Iranians into smithereens if the sailors weren’t returned immediately. They should have threatened it. Whether they would have had to carry out the threat, I doubt, maybe they would have.”

Just think about that. England should have threatened and then “bombed the Iranians into smithereens” if their sailors were not returned immediately. Contemplate the depravity required even to suggest such a thing — that a nation of more than 70 million human beings be reduced to rubble, perhaps vaporzied, over an incident of that magnitude, which was peacefully resolved after two weeks. It is really warped beyond belief. And it’s the tone that is almost as notable as the content — the breezy, smug wave of the hand that signifies the brutal deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people, possibly many more.

You can read the Podhoretz Case for Bombing Iran, here.

You can read about how ordinary folks like Jes Richardson and Leslie Angeline are taking action against the maniac’s ideas here.

Carriers in Persian Gulf Bomb Iraq

Monday, May 28th, 2007

As most of you know, there are two US super carriers and one smaller carrier filled with marines in the Persian Gulf. The electronic scuttlebutt is that a serious game of chicken is in the works between the Ahmadinejad wing of the Iranian government and the Cheney wing of the American government, with the US Ships as the US offering. Mebe so. Meanwhile, there are actual strikes being sent from at least one of the carriers to Iraq.

Aircraft from USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) began providing direct support of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) May 24.

The aircraft, assigned to Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 9 and embarked aboard Stennis, will conduct close air power support, shows of force, and reconnaissance missions for ground forces operating in Iraq.

Operation “Iraqi Freedom”

Don’t know exactly where the ships are, but if they’re close enough to send grief to Iraq they’re close enough to Iran.

Iran: All Eyes On

Saturday, May 26th, 2007

Steve Clemons at The Washington Note reported this on Thursday.

Multiple sources have reported that a senior aide on Vice President Cheney’s national security team has been meeting with policy hands of the American Enterprise Institute, one other think tank, and more than one national security consulting house and explicitly stating that Vice President Cheney does not support President Bush’s tack towards Condoleezza Rice’s diplomatic efforts and fears that the President is taking diplomacy with Iran too seriously.

This White House official has stated to several Washington insiders that Cheney is planning to deploy an “end run strategy” around the President if he and his team lose the policy argument.

The thinking on Cheney’s team is to collude with Israel, nudging Israel at some key moment in the ongoing standoff between Iran’s nuclear activities and international frustration over this to mount a small-scale conventional strike against Natanz using cruise missiles (i.e., not ballistic missiles).

This strategy would sidestep controversies over bomber aircraft and overflight rights over other Middle East nations and could be expected to trigger a sufficient Iranian counter-strike against US forces in the Gulf — which just became significantly larger — as to compel Bush to forgo the diplomatic track that the administration realists are advocating and engage in another war.

Much more of a must read at The Washington Note

Joe Klein at Time, confirms some of Clemon’s report and adds.

Carrier Groups in Persian Gulf

Tuesday, May 22nd, 2007

Following up on the post of a few days ago, the USS Bon Homme Richard (LHD 6), along with the super carriers USS Nimitz (CVN 68) and USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74) have entered the Persian Gulf (not the Arabian Gulf) along with all their supporting guided missile destroyers and cruisers.

USS Bon Homme Richard Enters Persian Waters

Monday, May 21st, 2007

The USS Bon Homme Richard (LHD 6) has arrived in the Persian Gulf/Arabian Sea area to take that slot vacated early in May by the USS Boxer (LHD 4). Though not a true carrier, the flat top is a floating war house at the head of an Expeditionary Strike Group. This formidable force includes 2,200 combat-ready Marines of the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU), based at Camp Pendleton, Calif., USS Denver (LPD 9), USS Rushmore (LSD 47), USS Milius (DDG 69), USS Chung-Hoon (DDG 93), and USS Chosin (CG 65).

That puts, I believe, two US nuclear carriers, the USS Nimitz (CVN-68) and the USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74) and all their supporting guided missle destroyers and cruisers, with the Bon Homme Richard’s Expeditionary Strike Group within a few hours of Iran’s shores.

I’m curious which, if any, carrier or MEU (Marine Expeditionary Unit) are in the Mediterranean. With Lebanon in serious trouble at both the northern and southern ends it would not be at all surprising to hear of a US flotilla hovering nearby. Tripoli, after all, comprises the second line of the famous Marine Corps Hymn, though fighting in Tripoli, Libya, 1805 is being celebrated, not Tripoli, Lebanon. The marines were involved in Lebanon in 1958, and of course in 1982-83 (ending in the horrific bombing of the Marine Barracks in 1983) which cause President R. Reagan –though no one will call it so — to cut and run….

Covert Overt Ops in Iran

Monday, May 7th, 2007

“The governments of Saudi Arabia and the United States are working with other states in the Middle East region to sponsor covert action against Iran, according to a report in this month’s edition of The Atlantic. The report also suggests that covert attacks may occur against Iran’s oil sector.”

Long piece in the Atlantic by David Samuels. Short summary here at RawStory.com