Babu says: "He's a bad man, a very, very bad man, this president of Iran!!"
Posted on 05/09/2006 5:33:42 PM PDT by wotan
I agree with him that democracy is not a replacement for God. He sees them as an either/or choice. Based on the actions of western countries, it is possible to understand where that idea comes from.
But now George Bush could constructively engage him in a dialog about what America believes the relationship between democracy and God is. And it will probably be informative to people in America too.
Yes, I clearly remember that too. I actually have some photos that I saved someplace (for the future when I knew that I would doubt that it ever happened.)
You read to the end??? Wow! Impressive! It's always good to know what the real issue is.
I haven't read it yet (or attempted to). Is is really that bad? No entertaining ranting? E.g. flowery blusters a la the Arab jihadis; nutso numerology and impending "mother ship" rescues a la Calypso Louie; etc?
I mean, c'mon. The guy's a antisemitic hate mongering apocalypse obsessed religious fanatic. He's gotta have some kinda game?
Why give a lunatic credibility where none is earned?
It's a teaching moment. It's the same reason Reagan went over to the Soviet Union when it was still Communist and talked to people. Dare them to let their people listen to it.
It's like reading annual reports. Go directly to the footnotes first :-)
The only dialog Mahmood understands is at the end of a gun, just like every other 2-bit tyrant. Some are beyond learning the truth, and there's no reasoning with a terrorist thug.
Yes, I clearly remember that too.
Granted though, no telling how much of it was primarily pro-American. Certainly much was, but protesters in Iran have often taken stances, and shouted slogans, in part just because they're the opposite of those of the mullahs. For instance when the protests were at their height, pro-Israeli and pro-Jewish chants were not unusual. (Again some of that was probably sincere as well. I understand that Israeli radio and satellite shows have a popular following in Iran.)
Yeah, well, it's not directed at him. He's going to be incorrigible. It's directed at the people of Iran, and at the rest of the people in the world.
With conversion at the tip of a sword, you only get slaves, lies and evil. Something that should be very familiar to those who practice Islam.
Twelfth Imam bump
Alas, no. It's not like the speeches of Saddam Hussein, which can occasionally be entertaining.
The Asia Times, where I saw the letter, had a headline "The letter; An opening quickly sealed". It suggested that we should respond to "the diplomatic opening the letter provides."
But if you read the letter, it appears to say that Iran has won and the West has lost. He's mad about Iraq, which seems curious since he may be one of the greatest beneficiaries of the war, with his people coming across the border and becoming influential. You'd also think he would be happy just to get rid of Saddam, considering how much damage he did to Iran country during the 8-year Iran/Iraq war.
Of course he has total sympathy for the Palastinians, but their problems cannot be seen in isolation from the savage ways they have attacked Israel.
And yes, his conclusion is interesting. Western society has failed and people are increasingly turning to religion for answers. I must say that I have not noticed this in America. If anything, I've seen people overall turning away from religion.
Western society has some severe problems, but I'd still much, much, much rather be here than under the jackboots of his religious government.
I cited an Asia Times article, which is here:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HE11Ak03.html
After reading the letter I'm firmly on Rice's side.
Mhx: I'm afraid this fellow won't give us the courtesy of listening to our side. He just wants to talk, and bluster.
D
"Jesus Christ (Peace Be Upon Him)"
-Ahmad considers Jesus to be dead, RIP, so this is a denial that Jesus is the Christ.
"Say: O followers of the Book!"
-A implied taunt to Christians; Christians follow Jesus, not a book.
"...come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught with Him, and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah; but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. (The Family of Imran)"
-Ahmad is asking Bush and the West to end their worship of Jesus ("other lords") and convert to Islam.
"Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: "Do you not want to join them?""
-Ahmad is tempting Bush and the West with this nugget: Join them (the Muslims) and your problems will be solved. This is not unlike the passage from Matthew 4:
"8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 "All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me." 10 Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.'"
Charm wit and levity
will win you in the start,
but in the end it's brevity
that keeps the public's heart.
As I read it, he's making the case for attacking America. He falls short of the koranic requirement of warning of an attack, but just barely.
This has got to be the longest screed he's ever written that doesn't mention allah in every paragraph!
I'm curious, is the original in English, Farsi, or arabic? It might make a big difference.
If it were in English, we can safely assume that due to the large population of western schooled Iranians that the text conveys all the original intent.
If our State Department translated it from Farsi, we can assume that the translation has been toned down to fit the Department's gone native political filters. Any actual explicit subtle threat has been toned down beyond recognition. Ahmadi-Najad has satisfied his koranic requirement to give warning, and our own government has made darn sure we don't receive the message.
If the original is in arabic? Dunno, I can only think of a few reasons why it wouldn't be in the languages of either the originating nation, or the recipient nation. None of them pleasant.
1) For a while, all international diplomacy was conducted in french, the lingua franca of the world. Currently, English is as close as we've got to a universal tongue, not arabic. Is Ahmadi-Najad trying to make arabic the new world language?
2) We are not the actual intended recipient, that honor belongs to the arab world.
3) Arabic is the language of the quran, and the pre attack warning is in that language so that the intent is crystal clear to those in the know.
Babu says: "He's a bad man, a very, very bad man, this president of Iran!!"
The original was in farsi.
Someone posted this on my soap opera newsgroup, from an Islamic news source:
http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/line-22/0605094639235358.htm
But check out this corresponding story:
http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-234/0605110155191821.htm
"However, given that we do not merely defend our own nation, we wish to feel the presence of our allies, including Indonesia as one of our closest friends," he added.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.