Ahmadinejad's letter to Americans

[Guest Coy Bacon]

Ahmadinejad's letter to Americans
POSTED: 1646 GMT (0046 HKT), November 29, 2006
Adjust font size:
[Editor's note: This is the full text of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's open letter to "the American People," as supplied to CNN.]

(CNN) -- In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

O, Almighty God, bestow upon humanity the perfect human being promised to all by You, and make us among his followers.

Noble Americans,

Were we not faced with the activities of the US administration in this part of the world and the negative ramifications of those activities on the daily lives of our peoples, coupled with the many wars and calamities caused by the US administration as well as the tragic consequences of US interference in other countries;

Were the American people not God-fearing, truth-loving, and justice-seeking, while the US administration actively conceals the truth and impedes any objective portrayal of current realities;

And if we did not share a common responsibility to promote and protect freedom and human dignity and integrity;

Then, there would have been little urgency to have a dialogue with you.

While Divine providence has placed Iran and the United States geographically far apart, we should be cognizant that human values and our common human spirit, which proclaim the dignity and exalted worth of all human beings, have brought our two great nations of Iran and the United States closer together.

Both our nations are God-fearing, truth-loving and justice-seeking, and both seek dignity, respect and perfection.

Both greatly value and readily embrace the promotion of human ideals such as compassion, empathy, respect for the rights of human beings, securing justice and equity, and defending the innocent and the weak against oppressors and bullies.

We are all inclined towards the good, and towards extending a helping hand to one another, particularly to those in need.

We all deplore injustice, the trampling of peoples' rights and the intimidation and humiliation of human beings.

We all detest darkness, deceit, lies and distortion, and seek and admire salvation, enlightenment, sincerity and honesty.

The pure human essence of the two great nations of Iran and the United States testify to the veracity of these statements.

Noble Americans,

Our nation has always extended its hand of friendship to all other nations of the world.

Hundreds of thousands of my Iranian compatriots are living amongst you in friendship and peace, and are contributing positively to your society. Our people have been in contact with you over the past many years and have maintained these contacts despite the unnecessary restrictions of US authorities.

As mentioned, we have common concerns, face similar challenges, and are pained by the sufferings and afflictions in the world.

We, like you, are aggrieved by the ever-worsening pain and misery of the Palestinian people. Persistent aggressions by the Zionists are making life more and more difficult for the rightful owners of the land of Palestine. In broad day-light, in front of cameras and before the eyes of the world, they are bombarding innocent defenseless civilians, bulldozing houses, firing machine guns at students in the streets and alleys, and subjecting their families to endless grief.

No day goes by without a new crime.

Palestinian mothers, just like Iranian and American mothers, love their children, and are painfully bereaved by the imprisonment, wounding and murder of their children. What mother wouldn't?

For 60 years, the Zionist regime has driven millions of the inhabitants of Palestine out of their homes. Many of these refugees have died in the Diaspora and in refugee camps. Their children have spent their youth in these camps and are aging while still in the hope of returning to homeland.

You know well that the US administration has persistently provided blind and blanket support to the Zionist regime, has emboldened it to continue its crimes, and has prevented the UN Security Council from condemning it.

Who can deny such broken promises and grave injustices towards humanity by the US administration?

Governments are there to serve their own people. No people wants to side with or support any oppressors. But regrettably, the US administration disregards even its own public opinion and remains in the forefront of supporting the trampling of the rights of the Palestinian people.

Let's take a look at Iraq. Since the commencement of the US military presence in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed, maimed or displaced. Terrorism in Iraq has grown exponentially. With the presence of the US military in Iraq, nothing has been done to rebuild the ruins, to restore the infrastructure or to alleviate poverty. The US Government used the pretext of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but later it became clear that that was just a lie and a deception.

Although Saddam was overthrown and people are happy about his departure, the pain and suffering of the Iraqi people has persisted and has even been aggravated.

In Iraq, about one hundred and fifty thousand American soldiers, separated from their families and loved ones, are operating under the command of the current US administration. A substantial number of them have been killed or wounded and their presence in Iraq has tarnished the image of the American people and government.

Their mothers and relatives have, on numerous occasions, displayed their discontent with the presence of their sons and daughters in a land thousands of miles away from US shores. American soldiers often wonder why they have been sent to Iraq.

I consider it extremely unlikely that you, the American people, consent to the billions of dollars of annual expenditure from your treasury for this military misadventure.

Noble Americans,

You have heard that the US administration is kidnapping its presumed opponents from across the globe and arbitrarily holding them without trial or any international supervision in horrendous prisons that it has established in various parts of the world. God knows who these detainees actually are, and what terrible fate awaits them.

You have certainly heard the sad stories of the Guantanamo and Abu-Ghraib prisons. The US administration attempts to justify them through its proclaimed "war on terror." But every one knows that such behavior, in fact, offends global public opinion, exacerbates resentment and thereby spreads terrorism, and tarnishes the US image and its credibility among nations.

The US administration's illegal and immoral behavior is not even confined to outside its borders. You are witnessing daily that under the pretext of "the war on terror," civil liberties in the United States are being increasingly curtailed. Even the privacy of individuals is fast losing its meaning. Judicial due process and fundamental rights are trampled upon. Private phones are tapped, suspects are arbitrarily arrested, sometimes beaten in the streets, or even shot to death.

I have no doubt that the American people do not approve of this behavior and indeed deplore it.

The US administration does not accept accountability before any organization, institution or council. The US administration has undermined the credibility of international organizations, particularly the United Nations and its Security Council. But, I do not intend to address all the challenges and calamities in this message.

The legitimacy, power and influence of a government do not emanate from its arsenals of tanks, fighter aircrafts, missiles or nuclear weapons. Legitimacy and influence reside in sound logic, quest for justice and compassion and empathy for all humanity. The global position of the United States is in all probability weakened because the administration has continued to resort to force, to conceal the truth, and to mislead the American people about its policies and practices.

Undoubtedly, the American people are not satisfied with this behavior and they showed their discontent in the recent elections. I hope that in the wake of the mid-term elections, the administration of President Bush will have heard and will heed the message of the American people.

My questions are the following:

Is there not a better approach to governance?

Is it not possible to put wealth and power in the service of peace, stability, prosperity and the happiness of all peoples through a commitment to justice and respect for the rights of all nations, instead of aggression and war?

We all condemn terrorism, because its victims are the innocent.

But, can terrorism be contained and eradicated through war, destruction and the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocents?

If that were possible, then why has the problem not been resolved?

The sad experience of invading Iraq is before us all.

What has blind support for the Zionists by the US administration brought for the American people? It is regrettable that for the US administration, the interests of these occupiers supersedes the interests of the American people and of the other nations of the world.

What have the Zionists done for the American people that the US administration considers itself obliged to blindly support these infamous aggressors? Is it not because they have imposed themselves on a substantial portion of the banking, financial, cultural and media sectors?

I recommend that in a demonstration of respect for the American people and for humanity, the right of Palestinians to live in their own homeland should be recognized so that millions of Palestinian refugees can return to their homes and the future of all of Palestine and its form of government be determined in a referendum. This will benefit everyone.

Now that Iraq has a Constitution and an independent Assembly and Government, would it not be more beneficial to bring the US officers and soldiers home, and to spend the astronomical US military expenditures in Iraq for the welfare and prosperity of the American people? As you know very well, many victims of Katrina continue to suffer, and countless Americans continue to live in poverty and homelessness.

I'd also like to say a word to the winners of the recent elections in the US:

The United States has had many administrations; some who have left a positive legacy, and others that are neither remembered fondly by the American people nor by other nations.

Now that you control an important branch of the US Government, you will also be held to account by the people and by history.

If the US Government meets the current domestic and external challenges with an approach based on truth and Justice, it can remedy some of the past afflictions and alleviate some of the global resentment and hatred of America. But if the approach remains the same, it would not be unexpected that the American people would similarly reject the new electoral winners, although the recent elections, rather than reflecting a victory, in reality point to the failure of the current administration's policies. These issues had been extensively dealt with in my letter to President Bush earlier this year.

To sum up:

It is possible to govern based on an approach that is distinctly different from one of coercion, force and injustice.

It is possible to sincerely serve and promote common human values, and honesty and compassion.

It is possible to provide welfare and prosperity without tension, threats, imposition or war.

It is possible to lead the world towards the aspired perfection by adhering to unity, monotheism, morality and spirituality and drawing upon the teachings of the Divine Prophets.

Then, the American people, who are God-fearing and followers of Divine religions, will overcome every difficulty.

What I stated represents some of my anxieties and concerns.

I am confident that you, the American people, will play an instrumental role in the establishment of justice and spirituality throughout the world. The promises of the Almighty and His prophets will certainly be realized, Justice and Truth will prevail and all nations will live a true life in a climate replete with love, compassion and fraternity.

The US governing establishment, the authorities and the powerful should not choose irreversible paths. As all prophets have taught us, injustice and transgression will eventually bring about decline and demise. Today, the path of return to faith and spirituality is open and unimpeded.

We should all heed the Divine Word of the Holy Qur'an:

"But those who repent, have faith and do good may receive Salvation. Your Lord, alone, creates and chooses as He will, and others have no part in His choice; Glorified is God and Exalted above any partners they ascribe to Him." (28:67-68)

I pray to the Almighty to bless the Iranian and American nations and indeed all nations of the world with dignity and success.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
29 November 2006

[Nati Ice]

i mean... i hate bush as much as the next guy, but i really have no idea where to start with this.

is this some sort of joke?

[|Bunghole|]

Eloquence can never be portrayed as caring.
Both countries are equally fucked if they continue down the current path.
Iran will probably get nukes, and if so....so what?
They have to know that we will annihilate them in an instant if the get all crazy with it.
Perhaps they'll sell the technology of nuclear arms to terrorists or perhaps not. Perhaps their nuclear program is peaceful.
Perhaps we make it up as we go along.
Perhaps we're fear-mongering.
Perhaps Iran is as bad as we believe, at least in regards to Israel and our implicit defense of her existence.
Who knows, really?

[Nati Ice]

[quote name='Bunghole' post='396541' date='Nov 29 2006, 10:19 PM']Eloquence can never be portrayed as caring.
Both countries are equally fucked if they continue down the current path.
Iran will probably get nukes, and if so....so what?
They have to know that we will annihilate them in an instant if the get all crazy with it.
Perhaps they'll sell the technology of nuclear arms to terrorists or perhaps not. Perhaps their nuclear program is peaceful.
Perhaps we make it up as we go along.
Perhaps we're fear-mongering.
Perhaps Iran is as bad as we believe, at least in regards to Israel and our implicit defense of her existence.
Who knows, really?[/quote]
current mood: apathetic

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Bunghole' post='396541' date='Nov 29 2006, 10:19 PM']Eloquence can never be portrayed as caring.
Both countries are equally fucked if they continue down the current path.
Iran will probably get nukes, and if so....so what?
They have to know that we will annihilate them in an instant if the get all crazy with it.
Perhaps they'll sell the technology of nuclear arms to terrorists or perhaps not. Perhaps their nuclear program is peaceful.
Perhaps we make it up as we go along.
Perhaps we're fear-mongering.
Perhaps Iran is as bad as we believe, at least in regards to Israel and our implicit defense of her existence.
Who knows, really?[/quote]

Eloquence can sometimes be portrayed as caring. Whether that's true in this instance will be debated. Stammerin' George sometimes does not get enough credit for caring due to his inarticulate nature.

That said, and practically speaking, Iran is a player in the region and we'd be better off talking with them than not talking with them.

[Guest Coy Bacon]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='396566' date='Nov 29 2006, 10:55 PM']Eloquence can sometimes be portrayed as caring. Whether that's true in this instance will be debated. [b]Stammerin' George sometimes does not get enough credit for caring due to his inarticulate nature.[/b][/quote]

I can't agree with this at all. George Bush is only inarticulate when attempting to mimick caring. He is perfectly clear when breathing threats and slaughter. I don't really understand the pass that people attempt to give George Bush. There's nothing in his background to support the warm and fuzzy ideas people conjure up about him, especially in light of his moments of dark revelation. It angers me because, as easy as it is for me to see through people that are generally supposed to appeal to me, there appears to be some kind of cultural bias that keeps people from seeing how starkly obnoxious and unworthy George Bush is. The only saving grace possible for the man would be that he is a clinical case rather than purely evil.

[quote]That said, and practically speaking, Iran is a player in the region and we'd be better off talking with them than not talking with them.[/quote]

Ahmadinejad appears to be chipping at the exception that world opinion makes for the American populace when criticizing American governmental policy. He's framing all the flattering presumptions that Americans have of themselves and the justifications that others make in an obvious challenge, which brings questions about the validity of these presumptions and justifications into stark relief in public fashion. The challenge runs at a secular level, but it appears more profound when considered from the perspective of a believer in one of the "religions of the book."

Ahmadinejad is taking a very hard stance, but that stance can be interepreted a couple of different ways. In the West, the assumption will be generally that his stance is hypocritical and sinister. That may well be the case, and this is only a manipulation - one that may be backed with a surprising amount of leverage however. On the other hand, the stance is just as hard and even more dangerous to the US if he is sincere, because Ahmadinejad knows that his challenge will likely be rejected and scoffed at - this time not by the American government, which is just another corrupt power like all the rest, but by the American populace, which heretofore has been held relatively blameless by the world.

The problem is that unless you're predisposed to loathe and fear Ahmadinejad on the basis of the exhortations of people of questionable report themselves, what he's saying is not couched in an offensive tone designed to be rejected - even if you recognize the inherent challenge and suspect his motives. Such a presentation would isolate the appeal as a pure ploy on its face, and make outright rejection more understandable. So, the blind rejection that his appeal is bound to receive in the US is potentially even more damning. Americans are having a severe problem dealing with cultural bias right now, and if they're not careful, they're going to really screw themselves up more than they already have. They're just not understanding the world in which they live.

[Lawman]

[quote]Coy
They're just not understanding the world in which they live.[/quote]

Agree 100%

[i]"Dump Bush, allow the Muslims to destroy Israel, and adopt Islam — or else you will be destroyed. This is Ahmadinejad's message." Kenneth R. Timmerman[/i]


[url="http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/11/29/154329.shtml?s=lh"]http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/...4329.shtml?s=lh[/url]

Iran's Ahmadinejad: America's New Pen Pal

Kenneth R. Timmerman
Thursday, Nov. 30, 2006


WASHINGTON –- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has followed up his 18-page letter to President George W. Bush earlier this year with a five-page missive to the American people.

In the earlier letter, which left the Bush White House shaking their heads with wonderment, the Iranian leader invited Bush to embrace Islam. That is a well-established Islamic tradition when dealing with an enemy just prior to war. If they refuse, then the Muslims are "justified" in destroying them.

The letter released today follows a similar pattern. In it, Ahmadinejad lays out his case for America's "injustice," using the term no fewer than 12 times in the five pages.

The concept of Justice lies at the very center of the Islamic faith. Justice is considered the backbone of all creation, handed down by the Almighty. The faithful should strive to achieve justice, to "secure justice," as Ahmadinejad puts it. Those who pursue injustice, on the contrary, are spitting in the face of Allah.

Ahmadinejad claims that America, under Bush, is pursuing injustice.

In making his case, he does not position himself as president of Iran, but attempts to set himself up as a spokesman for all Muslims. Thus, Iran itself barely figures in his letter.

Instead, Ahmadinejad focuses on America's support for Israel, the U.S. occupation of Iraq, and the Bush administration's "moral corruption," or as he puts it, the administration's pursuit of "darkness, deceit, lies, and distortion."

Students of recent Iranian history will recall that the "crime" most often used to justify a death sentence by Islamic Republic revolutionary courts during the early years of the revolution was "corruption on earth." This was how the regime simply eliminated its opponents or those who rejected absolute clerical rule.

Media commentators in the U.S. are likely to pick up on the "public relations" side of the letter. Ahmadinejad calls on the U.S. to bring the troops home from Iraq, to cut off support for Israel, and to stop "kidnapping presumed opponents from across the globe" and holding them in secret prisons.

He even has some advice for the new Democrat majority in Congress: Bend to the Muslim agenda, or you will be tossed out of power.

Ahmadinejad repeatedly tries to appeal to Americans as people of faith, who share Islamic values. "We, like you, are aggrieved by the ever-worsening pain and misery of the Palestinian people," he drones. "Persistent aggressions by the Zionists are making life more and more difficult for the rightful owners of the land of Palestine."

And he trots out his old anti-Semitic saw, claiming that "the Zionists" control America "because they have imposed themselves on a substantial portion of the banking, financial, cultural, and media sectors."

But to focus on these parts of his letter, however silly and objectionable they may be, would be to miss the main point. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not the Hugo Chavez of the Persian Gulf. He knows that soon he will have his finger on the nuclear trigger.

Citing from the Quran at the close of his letter, he says that if Americans "repent" of their "injustice," they will be blessed with many gifts. "We should all heed the divine Word of the Holy Qur'an," he says.

The context of this particular verse (28:67-28, Sura "Al-Qasas," or The Narration), is very clear. It follows a graphic description of destruction and devastation that will befall those who fail to repent of their injustice.

[b]It also sets out the terms of the tradition Muslim warning to the enemies of Allah.[/b] "And never will your Lord destroy the towns until He sends to their mother town a Messenger reciting to them Our Verses." This is precisely what Ahmadinejad is doing in his letter.

[i]Kenneth R. Timmerman is president of the Middle East Data Project, author of "Countdown to Crisis: The Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran," and a contributing editor to NewsMax.com.[/i]

[Guest Coy Bacon]

Timmerman obviously is not promoting understanding. He's promoting jaundice.

[TheBZ]

That article by Timmerman is hilarious...He's basically, saying:

"Of course he's being nice...That's EXACTLY how Muslims declare war! They've got the bomb, and we have to bomb them first!"

There are a hell of a lot of assumptions made to get to that point.

It is an awful lot easier to believe that this is a combination of PR move/screwing with the U.S. that is able to cut both ways in the way that Coy indicated.

Ahmadinejad may be partially or completely sincere...Or not sincere at all. That is the beauty of the letter, and it is very similar to the kinds of letters that Chavez has released, only with a religious twist.

It is designed to force discussion, test rhetoric and expand the context of any rationalizations made for a unilateral attack on Iran. Really, not much of a different strategy that anyone might apply if confronted by a bully in a bar or on the street.

Only the guys coming from where Timmerman is coming from will be able to twist it into a declaration of coming war...And even for those that doubt the sincerity of his words, that twist is not so easy to accept.

For Timmerman:

If Iran is defiant, they have a bomb and want to use it.
If Iran negotiates, they have a bomb and want to use it.
If Iran appeals to peace and cooperation, they have a bomb and want to use it.

It really doesn't leave much in the way of a positive end result, does it?

I guess the question is whether people are so terrified deep down, that they cannot believe there could ever be a positive outcome.

If that is the case, though...That implies a much deeper problem for a population that is simply waiting for everything to fall apart.

BZ

[Lawman]

Once upon a time, there was a grand Emperor who enjoyed elaborate clothing and fine robes as ornate and decorated as any great leader of vast kingdoms. Seeking to be the greatest of all he sought ever finer raiment so that others might see outwardly the greatness and power of his office and influence. He had the finest clothes and trappings commensurate with his desires, but a great tailor and wizard from another land came and whispered in his ear that he could create an adornment so beautiful, grand, and powerful that all who saw it would naturally worship the wearer as the greatest of all leaders. He claimed the material to be used possessed the unique quality of being visible only to the truly enlightened and intelligent, but would be invisible to stupid infidels. Work commenced and soon the great one was on proud display with his new robe for the entire world to see. Until one day, the simple innocence and honesty of an unafraid, unsophisticated child stated the obvious.

[i]The Emperor's New Clothes[/i] by Hans Christian Anderson

[TheBZ]

You do know how to pick them, Lawman...

Does this fable allude to the current state of U.S. foreign policy?

If so, who is the 'tailor and great wizard' whispering in the Emperor's ear?

BZ

[Lawman]

[quote]BZ
Does this fable allude to the current state of U.S. foreign policy?[/quote]

No, Ahmadinejad and the so-called "religon of peace" Islam.

Before you distort what I post as you have done in another thread; from what I have read there
are approximatelly 2 billion Muslims worldwide. The people responsible for terrorist activities and carry out murderous attacks compromise only 10% of this population or 2 million. I recognize there are Muslims like IKOTA that are peaceful and do not prescribe to such violent behavior. The problem I have with Ikota is that I have yet to see him denounce such actions. Of course he can't or won't and I know why:
Abu Afak; Asma Marwan; Kab Ashraf; Ibn Sunayna etc...

[i]The Associated Press [/i] - Nov. 7, 2002 TEHRAN, Iran — A prominent reformist scholar has been sentenced to death on charges of insulting Islam's prophet and questioning the hard-line clergy's interpretation of Islam. A court in Hamedan in western Iran sentenced university professor Hashem Aghajari to death, Saleh Nikbakht told The Associated Press. Aghajari was detained in August after a closed hearing in Hamedan where he made a speech in June questioning the hard-line interpretations of the ruling clerics. Nikbakht said Aghajari, a top member of the reformist political party, Islamic Revolution Mujahedeen Organization, was also sentenced to 74 lashes, banned from teaching for 10 years and exiled to three remote Iranian cities for eight years. Iranian courts often impose such multiple sentences in cases where it wants to make an example of the accused. In cases where the death sentence is imposed, the others are not carried out. Nikbakht insisted his client had not said anything that insulted the Prophet Muhammad, as the charges alleged. "There has never been a word insulting the prophet in Aghajari's speech. This verdict is nothing but a rule against Iran's national interests," Nikbakht said. In his speech, Aghajari had said clerics' teachings on Islam were considered sacred simply because they were part of history, and he questioned why clerics were the only ones authorized to interpret Islam. Later, he was charged with insulting Islamic sanctities and the court described his speech as blasphemous

On Ahmadinejad, An important principal in the Qur’an holds that humanity is divided according to a strict hierarchy of worth. The "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians) come in behind all other Muslims, including Women and slaves, but they do come in slightly ahead of Pagans, Buddhists, Hindus, agnostics, atheists and others who are regarded as worthless and having no soul. In fact Muslims are forbidden to even have Jewish or Christian friends; more to come later on this subject...

With regard to [u]honesty and lying[/u], Islam has some semblance to other religions. There are sections in the Qur’an where honesty is praised as a virtue, and in a general sense lying is forbidden. The Qur’an says, "Truly, Allah does not guide one who transgresses and lies."[Surah 40:28]. In the Hadith, Mohammed was quoted as saying: "Be honest because honesty leads to goodness, and goodness leads to Paradise. Beware of falsehood because it leads to immorality, and immorality leads to Hell." This approach to communication and ethics is laudable, but unfortunately for many in the world, that direction appears to be intended as [b]a standard limited to Muslim-to-Muslim relations[/b], and does not necessarily apply to non-believers, whom the Islamic God 'does not love'. Unlike most religions, within Islam there are certain provisions under which [u]lying is not only tolerated, but actually encouraged[/u]. Bluntly stated, Islam permits Muslims to lie anytime that they perceive that their own well-being, or that of Islam, is threatened. The book "The spirit of Islam," by the Muslim scholar, Afif A. Tabbarah was written to promote Islam. On page 247, Tabbarah stated:

"[i]Lying is not always bad, to be sure; there are times when telling a lie is more profitable and better for the general welfare, and for the settlement of conciliation among people, than telling the truth. To this effect, the Prophet says: 'He is not a false person who (through lies) settles conciliation among people, supports good or says what is good[/i]."

I cannot make this shit up and I wouldn't if I believed that Islam is a "[i]religon of peace[/i]", but I don't.

[quote]If so, who is the 'tailor and great wizard' whispering in the Emperor's ear?[/quote]

Islamic apologists, the myopic liberal media, academic elitists, as well as an unusual conflagration of fascists, communists, European socialists, anarchists, and many other far-left and far-right organizations throughout the world.

Hell, even President Bush regularly defends and praises the "great, peaceful world religion", giving it blanket legitimacy irrespective of the inaction and failure of the worlds ‘best’ religion to put a lid on terrorist acts committed in its name.

[Homer_Rice]

Here's another quaint parable; [url="http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2006/11/puppetry-of-persians-of-course.html"]via the Rude Pundit[/url]:

[quote]Puppetry of the Persians:
Of course Geppetto wanted Pinocchio to be a real boy. The old puppetmaker was tired of plucking splinters out of his fingers, tongue, and cock. For no matter how much you sand the pine sphincter of a marionette, it's still just an asshole made of wood. But flesh, god, how Geppetto dreamed of young, tender boy flesh, even as he pulled Pinocchio to him tight and wept about how wonderful it was just that he had been cut from his strings. When that Blue Fairy finally granted the wish, when she made his sticks supple and changed his sap to blood, Pinocchio knew that he had to try, once again, to run away, even if it meant becoming a donkey. Better an ass than just a piece of ass for an old man whose breath stunk of Lambrusco. So, on his pudgy new boy legs, Pinocchio ran, with that vile cricket constantly pimping for Geppetto, whispering in the boy's ear that he would be better off home.

Geppetto, though, wasn't about to let Pinocchio free, oh, no. He'd faced the belly of a whale to bring him back last time. Pinocchio may have thought he was a real boy, just like he had wished for, but Geppetto was never going to let him forget that he wouldn't have existed without the hammer, nails, and cloth he was first constructed from by Geppetto.

Exactly how much did Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kanal al-Maliki speak at his joint press conference with President George Bush yesterday in Amman, Jordan? 'Cause even a quick scan of the transcript of the event reveals that not only did al-Maliki not have equal time with Bush, but that he was verbally swamped by the flailing Commander-in-Chief, who was making damned sure that everyone knew that puppet strings don't have to be visible to be very much present.

Here's one example: A reporter asked, "Hezbollah has denied that [its] forces trained Moqtada al-Sadr forces, but do you have any information if Hezbollah has actually trained the forces of Moqtada al-Sadr?"

Al-Maliki, who apparently doesn't realize that the key to answering questions of the press is not to answer the question asked, but to answer the question that the voices in your head have asked you, said, "[N]obody has the right, outside of Iraq, to interfere in the political or the security situation inside of Iraq. We invite everybody to cooperate with us, but as far as this issue related to training, Hezbollah denied and they're responsible for their denial." Not much of an answer, but, hey, at least it seems like he paid attention.

Then, without prompting, Bush jumped in, almost interrupting the Prime Minister, spewing talking points like a sliced jugular sprays blood: "Our objective is to help the Maliki government succeed. And today we discussed how to further the success of this government. This is a government that is dedicated to pluralism and rule of law. It's a government elected by the Iraqi people under a constitution approved by the Iraqi people, which, in itself, is an unusual event in the Middle East, by the way." And then, just to demonstrate just how deep his understanding of the region is, Bush started talking about al-Qaeda. Not Hezbollah. Al-Qaeda. Screeched Bush (no, really), "I know that we're providing a useful addition to Iraq by chasing down al Qaeda and by securing -- by helping this country protect itself from al Qaeda."

How embarrassing it must have been for al-Maliki, who had tried so hard just the day before to show that you can't treat a real boy like a puppet, to be dragged in front of the cameras with a hand shoved up his ass to make him turn and speak whatever the puppeteer had scripted. No wonder he couldn't manage a smile. No wonder he seemed a bit put off that Bush had let the whole thing go on longer than they had agreed, when he said, "We said six question, now this is the seventh -- this is the eighth -- eight questions," in response to Bush asking him if he wanted to answer more.

For al-Maliki, the whole event was the rhetorical equivalent of being forced to stand naked with women's panties on his head while the conquerors took souvenir snapshots.

Afterword: Yes, the Rude Pundit's aware that Iraq was not part of Persia, but the title, useless though it may be, made the Rude Pundit giggle. And, besides, are they not both Iran's puppets now?[/quote]

[Chris Henrys Dealer]

10% of 2 billion would be 200 million.

2 million as a percentage of 2 billion would be 0.10%

[Lawman]

[quote name='Chris Henrys Dealer' post='399598' date='Dec 2 2006, 06:18 PM']10% of 2 billion would be 200 million.

2 million as a percentage of 2 billion would be 0.10%[/quote]

Thanks CHD,

the report may of said 1%. So the question begs to ask, what are the other 99% saying
about the violent extremist. I say very little or nothing out of the fear of reprisals as previously
mentioned.

[Khatmandude]

Lawman never ceases to amaze me.....and apparently others also.

And by the way, he's right...I actually want to kill all you people, starting with BZ.

[Lawman]

An Open Letter to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
September 6, 2006


Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran,

Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Joel Richardson. Actually this is not my real name, but rather a pen name that I use when engaging in interfaith dialogue with Muslims—a labor of love which has occupied me for the past several years. The reason that[b] I use this pen name is because I have been issued some very specific Islamic death threats after a Muslim that I was dialoguing with converted to Christianity[/b]. [u]The e-mail that I received essentially threatened that my head would be cut off and that my family would be killed[/u]. Since those days, I have continued to dialogue with Muslims in a spirit of peace and love, although I now have chosen to use this pen name. As such, I ask for your forgiveness for not fully revealing myself to you. I would very much like to do so. Nevertheless, it is my sincere hope that if this letter should miraculously find its way into your hands that you would consider what this little American Christian of no account would like to express to you.

It was with a certain measure of amazement that I read the news that you would be visiting my country next week to address the United Nations General Assembly. Indeed you have surprised the world on more than one occasion over the past several months since your recent election as President of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Many people all over the world have read your open letter to George W. Bush, the President of the United States and invited him to convert to Islam. Many of us also watched as you were interviewed by Mike Wallace on 60 Minutes. As for myself, [u]I have been closely following your brief career as the President of Iran. I have watched as you have made some very bold and at times some very threatening statements. I have also closely followed your many open declarations about the soon emergence of your Messiah figure, Imam al-Mahdi.[/u] And of course, most have closely watched as your nation continues its apparent rush toward the acquiring of nuclear capabilities.

As a Christian and an American, I write to you not only to express some of my concerns, but also to ask you some questions—if you would allow me the privilege to do so.

I am greatly concerned of course for the future relationship between our two countries; the U.S. and Iran. I am most concerned of course for the future of my children—their safety and their well-being. But I am also greatly concerned for the millions of lives of common people that also may be at risk in these seemingly tense times—Iranian, Israeli, American and European—Muslim, Christian and Jewish.

Mr. President, in your letter to President Bush, you said this:

"I have no doubt that telling lies is reprehensible in any culture, and you do not like to be lied to."

Of course, while much of the world has never heard of the doctrines of Kithman or al-Taqiyya, as a Shi’a Muslim, you are most certainly aware of these terms, are you not? Certainly you are aware of the words of Imam Jafar Sadiq, the sixth Imam of Shi’a Islam who clearly disagrees with you about the reprehensibility of lying. In fact, he even states that Allah will dishonor anyone who tells the truth about certain elements of Islam:

"One who exposes something from our religion is like one who intentionally kills us."

"You belong to a religion that whosoever conceals it, Allah will honor him and whosoever reveals it, Allah will disgrace him."

I have also read from A Shi’a Enclopedia a specific definition of al-Taqiyya:

"The word ‘al-Taqiyya’ literally means: ‘Concealing or disguising one's beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of imminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury.’ A one-word translation would be ‘Dissimulation’".

So Mr. President, my first question to you would be the following: Would I be wrong to believe the words of your Imam and the words of your scholars by understanding that Shi’a Muslims are commanded to purposefully hide what they truly believe in order to mislead others as to the true nature of their religion, their "beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies"? As a Christian I am immediately reminded of the words of Jesus who told his followers never to hide their religion:

You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven. Matthew 5:14-16

Mr. President, to the vast majority of the people of the world, religion and deceit are simply not compatible concepts. Basic human intuition exposes such as completely contrary to the divine nature. God does not lie, nor does he ask his followers to lie or hide the truth. In short Mr. President, how could any religion that claims to emanate from God—who is pure light and truth—ever actually command and promote deception toward non-believers and outsiders?

And even more importantly, Mr. President; you are a Shi’a Muslim. In light of the doctrines of Kithman and al-Taqiyya, how can anyone not question the truthfulness of anything that you say to those of us outside of the Shi’a faith? How do the people and the leaders of the world not know that you are simply utilizing al-Taqiyya in an attempt to deceive us?

Mr. President, despite the fact that your nation essentially sits atop an endless supply of oil, how is it that you expect intelligent people to believe you when you claim that your only motivation to achieve nuclear capabilities is for energy? In light of the millions of lives that may potentially be at risk due to a potential nuclear exchange, wouldn’t the leaders of the world be utterly foolish to accept anything you say regarding your nuclear program? And wouldn’t their foolishness be multiplied by the fact that you regularly seem to make outlandish comments such as your recent statement at the "World without Zionism Conference":

"They say, ‘how could we have a world without America and Zionism?’ But you know well that this slogan and goal can be achieved and can definitely be realized."

Mr. President, certainly you must realize how such comments will be viewed by the rest of the world.

Mr. President, I would like to be as frank and as honest with you as I can. What thoughts come to your mind when you think about such men as Adolph Hitler, or Saddam Hussein? History has judged these men as both pawns of the devil and failures, but a far worse judgment awaits both of these men when they face their Creator. Surely you would not desire to be found in the company of such men on the Day of Judgment?

Mr. President, I read your invitation issued just today calling the people of the West to Islam. You also said that anyone who declines such an invitation would have a bad future. Mr. President, I would like to now also invite you to become a Christian—a follower of Jesus. I would also like to explain to you why I must decline your invitation to Islam and why you should accept my invitation.

Mr. President, if you would allow me, I would like to tell you a story. You are obviously a very influential Muslim leader. For the sake of this story, let us say that we have two other great and legendary Muslim leaders: Caliph Omar and also Salah' ad-Din (Saladin). These two men are among the most legendary and admired leaders throughout Muslim history. Now imagine if I claimed that both of these great leaders played with little girls' dolls. Initially any self-respecting Muslim would be infuriated at such an allegation. "Never!" it would be protested; "Far be it from Omar or Saladin that they should play with little girls' dolls! These are great men! It is not befitting that Omar or Saladin to say that they would play with dolls!"

Initially this might sound quite reasonable. But what if the story unfolded that both Omar and Saladin had a daughter? And what if we learned that these daughters were most pleased with their Daddy when he got down on the floor and played with them as they played with their little dolls? What if we learned that because of the father's great love for their daughters, that they humbled themselves and did this with their beautiful little daughters on a regular basis? Would these men be better leaders and better men for doing this or would they be less respectable men and poorer leaders? Surely, Mr. President, you would agree that this humble act would make them better men and greater leaders?

Now, what if we learned that Saladin played with his daughters while Omar absolutely refused to do so? What if Omar agreed with the statement above that he was far above ever doing such a thing? Which leader would then be a greater leader? Which would be more appealing? Omar or Saladin? Personally I would see Saladin as being a far better Daddy, a far better man, and thus a far better leader. I’m sure you would agree. As such Saladin would be a better and more admirable leader, while Omar would be a less qualified leader. Remember, Mr. President; true greatness does not need to be guarded. It does not need to be belabored in order to be authentic. True greatness is self-evident and self-preserving.

Your religion claims that God would never become a man, regardless of the reason.

"Far be it from God that He should have a son! It is not befitting of the Almighty that He should do such a thing!" Sura 19:35

But in this attempt to establish Allah as greater, he has simply become more distant. Is not Allah like Omar in the story above? The Christian belief of God, however, is that He is more like unto Saladin, the loving father in the story above. Because God is good in the purest sense, He desires to share Himself with us. He wants to reveal himself to us. He doesn’t merely want us to have abstract knowledge about Him—He wants us to actually know Him. Jesus revealed the man-befriending-God to us. Jesus said:

"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." John 14:6,7

Mr. President, your religion also refers to Jesus as "The Word of God". Let me ask you, can a person's words be separated from him? Or are a person's words invariably part of him? This is an analogy that God wanted us to understand when we think about the relationship of the Son to the Father. Both the terms, the Son and the Word, are very similar in the sense that each proceeds forth from the Father. The Son bears the very essence of the Father while the Word is the inner expression of a person. "Out of the heart, the mouth speaks." So again affirming both the Son's divinity as well as the fact that all things were created by Him, John the Apostle says that,

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men." John 1:1-4

When we compare the Islamic concept of God to the Christian concept on this point, the Christian concept is far more intellectually and emotionally appealing. The incarnation (God dwelling among men through the person of Jesus) as utterly astounding as it is, is also the most awe-inspiring and incredible idea that one could ever conceive. In fact it is Islam's denial of the incarnation that makes it so utterly unappealing. In Christian theology, God says to each individual, "I love you this much, and here is how I have proven it forever." God became a man and suffered in our place for our deliverance.

Mr. President, throughout history, the Christian Church has affirmed the following:

We believe in God, the Father Almighty,
the Creator of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:

Who was conceived of the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.

He descended into hades.

The third day He arose again from the dead.

He ascended into heaven
and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,
whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.

According to this ancient Christian Creed, Mr. President, when you stand before the Judge of the Earth, His name will be Jesus Christ. On that day there will be no excuse for denying that He indeed has come, was crucified, buried and has risen from the dead. Of course, I’m quite sure that you do not accept this. But Mr. President, have you ever considered the fact that every one of Jesus' disciples, except possibly John, dedicated and eventually gave their very lives as martyrs while preaching the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus—the very Christian Gospel message? Mr. President, what logical answer is there as to why the disciples would give their lives for a complete lie? Unless the disciples were wholly confident of the fact that Jesus was crucified and resurrected, why would they dedicate the remainder of their lives preaching such a lie? Muslims deny the historicity of the crucifixion and resurrection, but they are unable to answer some of the basic questions that explain why the disciples—the very eyewitnesses—would have lived and died as if it were absolutely true. There are many theories among Muslim scholars as to what may have happened. But none can agree. For regarding the crucifixion, burial and resurrection of Christ, in light of the abundant historical evidence attesting such, the Muslim scholars have only conjecture to follow (Surah 4:157-8). Among the various theories offered, some Muslim Scholars teach that God tricked or deceived the disciples.

Mr. President, did Allah deceive Jesus’ followers? Does this make any sense to you? If Jesus’ disciples were preaching a lie, then would you agree that Jesus was the biggest failure of all of the prophets? For if Jesus' true message was not carried on by a single one of his disciples, if after he ascended to heaven, all his disciples were deceived, then indeed, Jesus was the greatest failure of all prophets. Yet even Islam claims that Jesus is second only to Muhammad in terms of the greatest prophets.

Mr. President, the Islamic worldview, when compared to the simple facts of history, simply does not make sense. Jesus—the historical facts surrounding His life and the life of His disciples—is the thorn in the side of Islam, not its vindicator, as we would expect if indeed Islam were only a continuation of the religion that Jesus preached. Islam is not a continuation of the true religion that was declared by the true prophets of God, but something new altogether. Mr. President, I call on you to turn away from religious innovations and to turn to the Truth.

Mr. President, I have heard much of your repeated eschatological references to the soon emergence of Imam al-Mahdi, the one who you refer to as the "last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace." I have also studied the Islamic traditions about al-Mahdi in great depth. As you have stated to your people, "Today, we should define our economic, cultural and political policies based on the policy of Imam Mahdi’s return." I also noticed in your letter to President Bush that you accept the idea that Jesus will also return to the earth. Those of us who are familiar with Islamic eschatology understand that Muslims believe that Jesus will return as a subordinate to the Mahdi. We have seen the Islamic traditions that have spoken of the day when Imam Mahdi, with the assistance of Jesus will unite the Muslim Ummah, attack and defeat the Jewish nation and ultimately cause the entire world to submit to Islam. We have read the opinions of your scholars that the rule of your Imam will only be established with great bloodshed. In Ayatollah Ibrahim Amini’s work on the subject of Mahdism for instance: Al-Imam Al-Mahdi: The Just Leader of Humanity, we read of those who refuse to convert to Islam and submit to the Mahdi’s leadership over the earth:

This group will indisputably be opposed to justice and will never give up their stubborn antagonism against any power. Such people will do anything against the promised Mahdi to protect their vested interests. Moreover, they will do anything within their power to demoralize and combat those who support the Imam (Mahdi). To crush the negative influence of this group there is no other solution except warfare and bloodshed.

And again, we read that:

The Mahdi will offer the religion of Islam to the Jews and Christians; if they accept it they will be spared, otherwise they will be killed.

Mr. President, thinking people around the world will certainly ask; if Islam is such a true and wonderful religion, why then is it necessary to resort to jihad, force and bloodshed to spread among mankind? If God truly wanted Islam to spread, would he not simply cause it to do so through peaceful means? Or is he unable to do so Himself? In this, do we not see the difference between God and Satan. Does God not offer His truth to mankind according to their own choice and free will? Does not God’s ultimate judgment of each person hinge on their own response to His invitation? But historically it is always oppressive and tyrannical regimes that enforce their ideologies onto the people. Can you see how your religious worldview regarding the eventual triumph of Islam does not reflect the manner in which God offers His mercy to mankind? Can you see how your worldview and expectations of the coming new world under al-Mahdi instead reflect the pattern of other various failed regimes of the past, having been exposed by the very people that they once controlled as being destructive and oppressive to the human spirit? In appealing to all of mankind, Jesus Christ once said,

"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light. (Matthew 11:28)

Again, if Islam were a true and naturally appealing religion to mankind, then why do we find such a radically different call to accept Islam from your prophet with the words:

"Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not." Surah 2:216

Mr. President, why would anyone long for the day when all of mankind will openly be subjugated to a religion that openly calls for warfare despite mankind’s natural hatred for such? Should not the true religion be something which the very collective soul of mankind bears witness to and affirms rather than something which your Quran admits is "hateful" to mankind? You seem to be a very brave man; will you search your heart and ask the Lord if indeed he has truly called on his followers to carry out that which is hateful to mankind or if the above quoted verse from your prophet finds it’s inspiration not from God but instead from another source altogether? Will you consider harnessing your bravery and choose to turn toward the truth, which is found only in the freedom that Christ offers and not in Islamic Jihad and the forceful spread of totalitarian religious ideologies? Most importantly, Mr. President, will you reconsider the direction that you are presently leading the Iranian people? Will you choose to lead the Iranian people away from Islamic Jihad and instead to the One whose burden is light—the one who calls those who are weary and burdened and promises genuine rest for their souls? Or will you choose to continue following a dark path and continue to lead the Iranian people toward that which is not only "hateful" to them but also destructive to their lives and their souls? As a humble Christian and a citizens of the Eternal Kingdom of God, I appeal to you to change the path that you are presently leading the Iranian people down and instead to choose the righteous way (John 14:6), whatever the consequences may be. I appeal to you to leave behind the road of Jihad and of Islam and to become a follower of Jesus and a genuine peacemaker. For in doing so, Jesus said that you would be called a Child of God. (Matthew 5)

With Love in Christ,

Joel Richardson

[TheBZ]

[quote name='IKOTA' post='400212' date='Dec 3 2006, 08:06 PM']Lawman never ceases to amaze me.....and apparently others also.

And by the way, he's right...I actually want to kill all you people, starting with BZ.[/quote]

Probably a good choice...I'm far more dangerous than I appear. [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/angel.gif[/img]

[quote name='Lawman' post='400223' date='Dec 3 2006, 08:39 PM']This group will indisputably be opposed to justice and will never give up their stubborn antagonism against any power. Such people will do anything against the promised Mahdi to protect their vested interests. Moreover, they will do anything within their power to demoralize and combat those who support the Imam (Mahdi). [b]To crush the negative influence of this group there is no other solution except warfare and bloodshed.[/b][/quote]

As for Joel Richardson's letter...I'm not sure that meeting a perceived (by Richardson) 'Convert or be attacked' letter with a 'Convert or be attacked' reply does much to pave the road towards peace.

Does Joel have any other ideas?...I would specifically be looking for solutions that don't involve warfare, bloodshed, and the assumption that they are unavoidable.

BZ

[Homer_Rice]

[url="http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2006-12-01T142541Z_01_N30158201_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-MUSLIMS-FEAR.xml&src=rss"]"Joel" would probably be for this...[/url]

[Lawman]

[quote][u]This group will indisputably [/u] be opposed to justice and will never give up their stubborn antagonism against any power. Such people will do anything against the promised Mahdi to protect their vested interests. Moreover, they will do anything within their power to demoralize and combat those who support the Imam (Mahdi). To crush the negative influence of this group there is no other solution except warfare and bloodshed.[/quote]

[quote]As for Joel Richardson's letter...I'm not sure that meeting a perceived (by Richardson) 'Convert or be attacked' letter with a 'Convert or be attacked' reply does much to pave the road towards peace.[/quote]

[quote]Does Joel have any other ideas?...I would specifically be looking for solutions that don't involve warfare, bloodshed, and the assumption that they are unavoidable.[/quote]

BZ, my bad, I should have [i]italicized[/i] where appropriate.

In [i]Ayatollah Ibrahim Amini’s [/i] work on the subject of Mahdism for instance: [i]Al-Imam Al-Mahdi: The Just Leader of Humanity[/i] , we read of those who refuse to convert to Islam and submit to the Mahdi’s leadership over the earth:

Which follows in the first quote "[u]This group will indisputably[/u] .....

Was actually said by Ayatollah Ibrahim Amini and not Joel Richardson.

[TheBZ]

[quote name='Lawman' post='400890' date='Dec 4 2006, 02:56 PM']Which follows in the first quote "[u]This group will indisputably[/u] .....

Was actually said by Ayatollah Ibrahim Amini and not Joel Richardson.[/quote]

Thanks...That makes a big difference.

If that is the case, I don't have much of a problem with the letter at all.

BZ