Archive

Archive for the ‘Iran’ Category

>Dear Hidden Imam…

August 20, 2009 1 comment

>This is hilarious.

Apparently, the Iranian chief of staff, Hassan Firouzabadi, has written a letter to the Hidden Imam, aka the Mahdi, asking him, basically, to quit with the occulation and return to earth in order to help Islam take over the world.

I have a question.

What address did he put on the envelope?

Would the Tehran post office treat it the same was as the US Postal Service treats letters addressed to Santa c/- North Pole?

Did he send it via email to hiddenimam@occulation.ir?

On July 12, 2009, the Iranian news agency ISNA published a letter written by Iranian chief of staff Hassan Firouzabadi to the Hidden Imam (the Shi’ite messiah, also called the Mahdi). In his letter, Firouzabadi depicts the post-election protests as a conspiracy against the Iranian regime by the West and the reformists in Iran. He also rejects accusations of Basij brutality, saying that the group did not act against the Iranian people in suppressing the protests, but rather tried to protect them. He concludes by urging the Hidden Imam to come speedily and launch a worldwide Islamic revolution.

Following are excerpts from the letter:

“O Lord of Time, peace be upon you… I wish to speak to you once again… [In 1979,] as the celebrations and rejoicing over the Islamic Revolution still reverberated [in the streets], America, the West, as well as the [Iranian] infidel parties on orders from their masters, [were already hastening] to turn every corner of Iran – including Kurdistan, Gonabad, Khuzestan, Amol and Tehran – into arenas of brutal psychological warfare and hotspots of secessionism, essentially striving to annihilate the Islamic Revolution and [its] regime…

“[Today] another round has begun in the cultural attack [on Iran]… In the current round, some of those involved [meaning Mousavi and his supporters] turned their backs on the glorious past of the [Islamic] Revolution, and wished to join Uncle Sam, thereby bringing shame upon the sacrifice and istishhad of our nation. They wished to launch a dialogue with those who attack the rights of the free [peoples] and condemn and assault the values of the [Islamic] Revolution, [i.e. those who attack] freedom, the Imam [Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini], the rule of the jurisprudent, and the clerics…

“Those [Iranians] who constantly spoke of tolerance towards the dissidents, chanting [pluralistic] slogans like ‘long live those who oppose me,’ [actually] wanted the Basij philosophy dead. The essence of the reforms that they wanted was to eliminate the Basij and its philosophy… They targeted the very foundations of the regime, viewing the Basij, and all the revolutionaries and believing [Muslims] in the nation, as an obstacle in their path. They brought about a catastrophe, harmed [the regime] and violated its sanctity, started fires, and fanned the enemy’s hope. They blamed the Basij for crimes that they themselves had committed [a reference to allegations of Basij brutality during the suppression of the protests]…

“When the Arrogance [i.e. the U.S.] saw its hope of toppling the regime dwindle, it mobilized the anti-Basij front, composed of old anti-revolutionary [Iranian] forces and fragments of [groups] that had been disbanded, whose common denominator is hostility towards the Basij and its philosophy, and towards [Iran’s] national awakening.

“This front began its war, orchestrated by [the West], under the guise of [participation in] the presidential elections. When it failed to win, thanks to the praiseworthy participation of 40 million voters, it became enraged, and instigated a bitter civil war. This civil war, which from the outside looked like a ‘velvet revolution’ but from the inside was harsh and brutal, targeted the culture and people of my homeland.

“[O Hidden Imam], you are my witness that [the members of] the armed forces and the Basij regarded all the [presidential] candidates as [honest] revolutionaries, and [some of them] voted for [these candidates]…, as did [other] Iranians, according to the dictates of their conscience. Despite this, you witnessed the curses and accusations that [these presidential candidates] hurled at us. They harmed the people’s security, and when we stood up to defend the people, they called us dictators and tried to disgrace us…

“Dearest Mahdi, we have taught our children and our grandchildren to await your arrival, and to raise the banner of this holy regime until you do… O lord, please beseech God, as we do, that the Islamic Revolution take root alongside the worldwide revolution that you [will bring]…

“Awaiting your arrival,

Hassan Firouzabadi.”

How does the left react when they see such stuff?

These are the same people who excoriate anyone who proclaims religion while in the service of the state in any capacity.

Why is it that nutjobs like those at the top of the Iranian heirachy do everything in the name of Islam but still receive the support of the Western left?

The world is surely upside down.

Whatever way up it is the regime in Tehran is not one that can be negotiated with in a normal manner.

(Nothing Follows)

Categories: Iran, Islam, Lunacy

>Columbia University punks Ahmadinejad

September 25, 2007 Leave a comment

>Did the widespread condemnation of Columbia University’s decision to allow Iranian 9/11 Troofer and Holocaust Denier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak there result in a less amiable than usual reception? Whatever the reason, it’s impossible that the 21st century version of Adolf Hitler expected to be called “petty and cruel” by the president of Columbia in his introduction. Given his repetition of leftist talking points in an effort to drum up support among that intellectually bankrupt group it must have come as somewhat of a shock that he had miscalculated so badly in expecting to be feted as if he was in Cuba or Venezuela.

Vilified as a Holocaust denier, a supporter of terrorism and a backer of Iraqi insurgents, the president of Iran was actually able to make New Yorkers burst into laughter – but not at a joke.

“In Iran we don’t have homosexuals like in your country,” Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at Columbia University in response to a question about the recent execution of two gay men there.

“In Iran we do not have this phenomenon,” he continued. “I do not know who has told you we have it.”

Loud laughs and boos broke from the audience of about 700 people, mostly students at the Ivy League school whose garb included “Stop Ahmadinejad’s Evil” T-shirts.

Everyone from presidential candidates to September 11 families had expressed outrage that Ahmadinejad would speak at the university.

University President Lee Bollinger pulled no punches.

He called him a “petty and cruel dictator” and said his Holocaust denials suggested he was either “brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated.”

“I feel the weight of the modern civilized world yearning to express the revulsion at what you stand for,” Bollinger said to loud applause.

In retort, Ahmadinejad berated Bollinger as a rude host.

“Many parts of his speech were insults,” he said. “We actually respect our students and the professors by allowing them to make their own judgments.”

After his assertions that Israel persecutes Palestinians and that Iran’s nuclear program is for energy not weapons, the Iranian leader’s comment on gays broke the tension.

But it spurred strong reaction too.

“This is a sick joke,” said Scott Long of Human Rights Watch, saying Iran tortures gays under a penal code that punishes homosexuality between men with the death penalty.

When Ahmadinejad, speaking in Farsi, actually tried to crack a joke, it drew no laughter, although maybe the nuance was lost in translation.

“Let me tell a joke here,” Ahmadinejad said. “I think the politicians who are after atomic bombs, or testing them, making them, politically they are backward, retarded.”

The crowd seemed uncertain how to react. Some applauded that pacifist sentiment, others seemed befuddled by the insensitive use of the word retarded.

Ahmadinejad’s visit here was preceded by a deluge of objections when it became apparent he wanted to lay a wreath at Ground Zero and that he would speak at Columbia.

Presidential candidates from both major US political parties took swipes at the president of a country President George W. Bush calls part of “the axis of evil.”

They said he denied the Holocaust, supported terrorism and armed Iraqi insurgents.

New York City councilman Anthony Weiner had a different way of capturing all that.

“Sometimes we have snakes slithering through the streets of New York,” Weiner told protesters outside the United Nations, where Ahmadinejad will speak on Tuesday.

And in a city known for its blunt manners, the Iranian president’s reception was bound to be frosty. The New York Daily News had the front page headline, “The Evil Has Landed.”

How funny is that? The guy uses the word ‘retarded’ and his majority left wing, ‘culturally aware’ audience is ‘befuddled’. It doesn’t take much does it?

If nothing else, it has exposed him to the world as the propagandist that he really is, as well as exposing the left’s naivety to itself – not that they can see it, of course.

Categories: Education, Iran, United States

>Lunatic Aussie Sheik backs hardline Iranian regime

>It seems that the ol’ catmeat sheik Alhilali can’t help himself but heap inflammatory comments on top of the burning pyre of his previous ridiculous rantings. From AAP:

Australia’s leading Islamic cleric Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali has called for Muslims to unite behind the hardline Iranian regime, according to local reports of his visit to Tehran.

In a propaganda drive, the Iranian media quoted the sheik as saying the global Islamic nation would not “kneel” to its enemies, The Australian newspaper reports.

“The mufti of Australia has called on the Islamic world to stand in the trenches with the Islamic Republic of Iran which possesses the might and the power,” the Iranian Alalam News reported in Arabic on its website on Saturday.

It reported that Sheik Alhilali, who was in Tehran for the International Islamic Unity forum, told Alalam TV that he was committed to the unity of the Islamic nation.

“(Islamic unity) is what has brought all the participants together at this Islamic unity conference, to show the whole world that they are dedicated to the one God and dedicated to Islamic unity and the Islamic nation will not kneel in front of its enemies, never,” Sheik Alhilali was reported as saying.

One of the enemies of totalitarian regimes regardless of their religious order is the sheik’s own home of Australia. Why we put up with a person that clearly inflames Muslims to violence against Australians is beyond me.

Federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock told the Australian newspaper he was concerned about the sheik’s reported comments.

“I would be concerned if any Australian was offering support and succour to Iran, particularly as it is intent on pursuing the development of nuclear fuel cycle outside international scrutiny,” Mr Ruddock said.

I’m concerned that he’s only concerned. Sounds too much like a United Nations’ statement to me.

Muslim leaders said the sheik had no authority to speak on their behalf.

“As an Australian Muslim, it’s very worrying to me that he’s speaking on (our) behalf,” said Sydney-based imam Khalil Shami.

“Because really, the Iranian people don’t know we’re not behind Alhilali.

That’s funny. In another article out this morning, the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils has just denied sacking him from his position as Mufti of Australia.

Mr Patel said he had some issues with Sheik Alhilali’s term as mufti, which included controversial comments likening young women to meat, but believed the sheik was the best man for the job.

“He is definitely one of the most knowledgeable, most qualified in Australia, but having said that, if he wants to remain mufti then there would have to be some very strict guidelines that would have to be placed,” he said.

He’s the most knowledgeable and qualified in Australia? Soooo does that mean that all of those controversial statements are made with the full support of the community and are backed up by Islamic jurisprudence?

“He might need some resources in terms of having people who can speak English (to) articulate his thoughts clearly, so there’s no excuse ever put forward that he was misrepresented.

“I will probably be scoffed at when I say this, but he’s probably one of the most moderate of the imams in Australia, but he certainly doesn’t bring that out in his approaches with the media.

The man’s been here for decades and still can’t speak English. What does that tell you about his commitment to Australia? If Alhilali is one of the most moderate imams then does that mean that the Australian National Imams Council is more radical? If that’s the case then there certainly are dark clouds forming over the the future of Australia’s multicultural society. Unfortunately, while the culturally destructive cultural relativists have any sort of influence the sensible majority of Australians will be hamstrung in their efforts to deal with radical Islam in this country.

Categories: Australia, Iran