Latest Entry: American Pravda and New York's Sixth Crime Family     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« The Self-Deluded Anti-Alito 'Freedom' Fighters | Main | Third Child In Turkey Dies From Bird Flu »

January 6, 2006

Iran's Ahmadinejad: Islam Can Save The World

Topics: Iran

ahmadinejad_lg_012.jpgIran's president and chief motor-mouth, who is already infamous for calling the holocaust of European Jews a "myth," that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth, offering to move the state of Israel to Europe, and more - said Thursday that his government's number-one objective is to reach beyond national boundaries to reedeem the world in the name of Islam. He told a crowd of clerics and theology sudents in the city of Qom that "To take Islam throughout the world and save its oppressed populations is a duty for all Muslims, but right now it is the Iranian polity that must do this." But he didn't stop there, and went on to say:

"Led by Ayatollah Khomeini, we carried out the Islamic Revolution in Iran, whose principal objective was to change the world and show it the way of Islam," Ahmadinejad continued. "This movement must originate in Qom, Shiite and Iranian Islam's chief cultural centre. Qom forms our cultural calling card and credentials to revolutionise the current world order."

"We need to re-write a number of Iran's laws to uphold the morality and dictates of Islam,"

Is it just me, or is this guy sounding more and more like Hitler every time he opens his mouth? As chief Islamofascist in a Islamofascist regime, perhaps we should expect such comments - but that doesn't make him and his regime any less dangerous. We sat back and let Hitler rant on, before we acted - and we all know the result of our inaction.

Now that we have the cataclysmic events of jihadists and Islamofascists coming together at a common moment in history, a dire need exists for our country to come together in the fight against Islamic extremism, Islamofascists such as Ahmadinejad, and the terrorist threat. We need to do this now, while we still can.

The threat is real, folks, and it's building. Time for our nation to come together is getting short - Ahmadinejad, other Islamofascists, and the jihadists, are all very real and very determined. It's time for us all to decide - Ahmadinejad's view of life under Islam, or life as Western civilization exists today (hopefully improved in the process of coming together).

Every one of us needs to realize that "this may be a war unlike any other we have ever fought, but it is a war. Nothing less than our survival as a free, democratic and secular nation is at stake."

As Frank Gaffney Jr. put it in his piece at NRO, " God Save Us -The West is in a death struggle with Islamofascism":

We confront in this war ideologically driven enemies, not simply the instrument of their aggression, terrorism. They are bent on our destruction just as surely as were their predecessors -- the Nazis, the fascists, and the Communists. Their stated goal is to establish a global "caliphate" subject to a repressive, Taliban-like interpretation of sharia.

Such ambitions may sound as absurd as did Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto. But, consider the definition of jihad officially issued by the Islamic Affairs Department of Saudi Arabia's embassy in Washington, D.C.: "Muslims are required to raise the banner of Jihad in order to make the Word of Allah supreme in this world, to remove all forms of injustice and oppression, and to defend the Muslims. If Muslims do not take up the sword, the evil tyrants of this earth will be able to continue oppressing the weak and [the] helpless."

Time is critical, and there is no way that you can be too much of an alarmist when it comes to helping our nation and others in the West realize that a dangerous threat to our survival is upon us. So take heart, and pass the word, making sure that your politicians hear it!

Footnote: I heard Gen. Wesley Clark run his mouth on Fox News TV this morning, saying that the Bush administration needed to "talk" to Iran, that gee, we can work this all out by talking - a continuation of the previous elections Kerry and Clark theme. Apparently he didn't pay attention to the years of talks with Saddam and the years of talks that the EU has already expended, indeed wasted, with Iran. While the EU talked, and talked, and talked, Iran fed them spoons of hope while continuing the development of nuclear weapons and delivery systems, even ordering parts right under their noses.

And look where we are today as a result:


Received Wednesday, 4 January 2006 15:33:00 GMT

TEHRAN, Jan 4 (AFP) - Iran has vowed that its decision to resume nuclear fuel research is not negotiable, causing EU negotiators to cast doubt on the prospect of fresh talks aimed at convincing Tehran to halt enrichment activities.

A day after Iran notified the UN atomic watchdog of its decision to "start research on the technology of nuclear fuel in a few days," the country's chief official for the nuclear file, Ali Larijani, said the decision was "not negotiable."

His comments followed similar remarks late Tuesday by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was quoted by state television as saying Iran would not "step back" on its decision to resume nuclear fuel work.

The increasingly hardline tone from Iranian leaders came despite calls from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Europe and the United States to maintain its suspension of enrichment-related activities.

Germany, a member of the EU-3 negotiating team that also includes Britain and France, said it viewed Iran's latest announcement with "concern," and added that it could "throw into doubt the exploratory talks" to be held in Vienna on January 18.

France also urged Iran to withdraw plans to resume research on its nuclear programme, warning that future talks could be put on hold.

"We firmly call on Iran to retract this announcement which if carried out would clearly go against the demands of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) ... and place in serious doubt the continuation of discussions started on December 21 in Vienna," foreign ministry spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei said.

A Western diplomat said that Tehran's gesture "is the sign that shows Iran's negotiations with the EU are on their last legs."

However Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki insisted on state television that "Iran is ready for negotiations with the European Union."

The negotiating process has been increasingly fragile since Tehran restarted uranium ore conversion last year, a precursor step to enrichment.

Though Iran did not specify exactly what kind of research it aimed to restart in the coming days, the deputy chief of Iran's atomic energy agency said the Islamic republic had "voluntarily" suspended such activities for around "the past two-and-a-half years."

The timeframe roughly corresponds to when Iran ceased enrichment activities in October 2003, a suspension which was sealed in an agreement between Iran and the European troika in November 2004.

The United States threatened Tuesday to seek international action against Iran if it resumed nuclear fuel research, suggesting the world's patience with Tehran could be wearing thin.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack accused the Iranians of doing a "bob and weave" in negotiations, and said that "if Iran takes any further enrichment-related steps, the international community will have to consider additional measures to constrain Iran's nuclear ambitions.

"Trying to draw a line around something being pure research with respect to enrichment activities is not something that we're going to buy, and I don't think the international community will either," he added.

However, Larijani retorted that "Iran has said for a long time that the question of research did not form part of the negotiations."

Iran's position is that "research has its own path, and has nothing to do with the industrial production of fuel." The United States charges that Iran's nuclear program is a cover for developing an atomic bomb. Iran has vigorously denied the accusation, insisting the program is solely intended to meet its civil energy needs.

The United States has been hoping to refer Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions though it has backed efforts by the EU-3 to wean Iran off its nuclear ambitions with a package of economic and security incentives.

Meanwhile, Tehran has said a Russian delegation is to visit on Saturday to discuss Moscow's proposal to enrich Iranian uranium in Russia.

Iranian leaders have said the proposal would only be feasible if it acknowledged Iran's right to enrich uranium on its own territory.

Previous stories in same thread:

France warns Iran not to resume nuclear fuel research (Wednesday, 4 January 2006 14:49:00 GMT)
Iran to resume suspended nuclear research (Tuesday, 3 January 2006 14:48:00 GMT)
France calls on Iran to maintain nuclear research suspension (Tuesday, 3 January 2006 14:16:00 GMT)

General Wesley Clark, albeit an intelligent and decent man, is a fool, and if we follow his advice, we will all end up dead fools.

Posted by Richard at January 6, 2006 10:08 AM

People speak about guys like Ahmadinejad as if:

A. They are what they say.
B. They are significant.
C. Relating to A & B, they are as powerful an enemy as Nazi Germany or as dedicated as 1940s Japan.

Iran is neither A, B or C.

A. Ahmadinejad (educated ex-lecturer) is probably saying what he says to weaken the regime because of some internal dispute. Likewise, he may be trying to divert attention AWAY from the real issues in Iran like unemployment by pretending these are Israel's, etc. fault and not the fault of over 80 years of failed government in Iran/Persia (first, by 2 Shahs, then by the chaotic musical-chairs-style government from 1978 to 1981 and then from 4 failed Presidents and 2 failed Supreme Leaders from then on. Of all, Ahmadinejad is the weakest and most unsure leader Iran has EVER had. He is unable to be a real dictator and a man who couldn't even nominate his own government for months ain't a leader.

B. Ahmadinejad is the leader of IRAN, a big nation but it ain't China. Iran is afterall a poorly-armed, divided nation where the people hate the government and the army would desert in mass if a war broke out (just like Saddam's army did). Iran as an enemy would be more like Saddam's Iraq (sans the strong leadership) than like 1939-45 Germany. Ahmadinejad is the leader of an insignificant country that wants to be a power but clearly is not and was not for a long long time. The last time Iran was a power it was called Persia.

C. Ahmadinejad, like Saddam, wishes and pretends to be a powerful leader of a powerful country. He ain't. The US would sweep Iran and rout the regime in 3 WEEKS! Of course, there would be an insurgency like Iraq, but Ahmadinejad or Ali Khamenei would not be there to 'enjoy it'.

Iran is no different to Yugoslavia, Afghanistan or Iraq. The US has always defeated weak countries with already unpopular leadership.

The Serbian people did not like American invasion much, but hated Milosevic and decided to rebuild their nation rather than fight with the US again.

The Afghan people welcomed the end of the Taliban and by and large want US protection.

Iraq: The Kurds are pro-US, the Shiites 50% 50% pro/anti US. The Sunnis are anti-US.

Iran: probably like Afghanistan, will want the US to protect a new democracy but the Baluchistan region (already in turmoil) will be a headache for Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan to deal with and the Arab part of Iran will cause trouble in the West.

Posted by: JP Power at January 6, 2006 3:56 PM

Your points are all good and well taken.

But there is a bit more to consider. Although many of the people of Iran rank among the most America-philic in the world, the Iranian regime is a strong supporter of world-wide terrorism, is about to have nuclear weapons and would likely use them or have them used by their terrorist friends, and perceives their role in the world as being the instrument for spreading Islam in it's most radical form, globally.

Jihadists are a threat not to be taken likely, as is Islamofascism. We've sat back far too long and allowed the West to approach ever closer to having it's continued existance threatened.

Now is no time to ignore Iran's regime, nor the threat from the jihadists and the global Islamic threat.

Posted by: Richard at January 6, 2006 4:09 PM


Your points are very true, too. But:

1. Jihadism/Islamofascism is a threat to the whole world. But, it comes from Sunni lands like Saudi (who speak with the same hatred of Israel as Ahmadinejad) or indeed nuclear-armed Pakistan. Shiite and mostly secular Iran has a government who are anti-US and like all weak leaders and third world wannabes, are their own (rather than our) worst enemies. If the US don't get the disgraced Iranian Revolutionary government, then the Iranian people will! I hope that Reza Pahlavi becomes Shah, is popular with the people and puts these Pasdaran/Basiji thugs on trial.

The Iranian revolution is the work not so much of clerics but of the above criminal 'armies' which were/are no more qualified to be armies than the IRA, or Arkan's Tigers or indeed Al Qaeda. The Iranians wanted a very different revolution in 1979 but didn't get it. Even Khomeini said in his tapes that no cleric had the right to tell people what to say, eat, drink or dress in. That was true, and he [probably] meant it (Khomeini, Bani Sadr and all these lived in France and intended a mix of French-style democracy in their post-Shah nation). But, the fired up peasant gunmen (many convicted criminals under the Shah) hijacked the revolution, repressed the people, etc. BEFORE Khomeini was even back. They nominally supported Khomeini, but pursued their own violent agenda. One 80-year-old cleric was NEVER responsible for a revolution so violent: the real Iranian enemy have always been the Pasdaran and Basiji (still little more than mafia-type criminal thugs). Since Ahmadinejad is one of them, it seems they now are no longer even happy that clerics nominally rule Iran. This is my dispute theory: Ahmadinejad wants to divide and conquer the regime and he knows how to do this by saying the things he says.

Posted by: JP Power at January 6, 2006 4:29 PM

Ahmadinejad is scary. There is a lot of evidence that the people of Iran are making some headway in forcing positive changes in their country. No doubt many of them are just as alarmed as many of us are re this leader. I think Iran is potentially internally combustible. I hope our country doesn't agressive engage just yet, as desired changes may arise in Iran from within.

Posted by: shonane at January 7, 2006 2:34 AM

Ahmadinejad may well be "scary", but he is more like an old tomcat without any claws. He'd be much more scary for real if:

1. He had power like the USSR had.
2. His people supported this line.
3. The Pasdaran/Basiji/Iranian Mafia were the only "army" and "police" in Iran. There is also a regular army and police (the legal/offical ones) and thankfully they have power, too. Many regular army and police dispise the infiltration of the mafioso rivals who they look down on. A civil war between the real Iranian army and the Pasdaran is inevitable sooner or later.
4. Even some Pasdaran/Basiji/Mafia and definitely a whole flock of Ayatollahs and Mullahs hate the current system as well as the ordinary people. They are sick of the same old forces/faces in power and want a complete overhaul of the corruption.

Ahmadinejad was not elected to cause a war with Israel, show that Iran is a disguised military regime or cause trouble with the US. He was elected to stifle corruption, improve the economy and to ease unemployment, share oil wealth, etc. So far, he has done exactly the opposite. His mandate and promises to the people are gone, so the regime cannot even justify its existence on a lie.

People who voted for him in good faith must be disgusted that he has went back on his promises to improve the economy. Improving the economy is not easy, so he blames the outside world not the inexperienced Iranian governments of 1978-2006 for the mess. The 1979 Iranian government came into being to try to do the things the Shah couldn't. When they found it was hard to do these things, what did they do? They blamed the US, Israel and, yes, each other. Iraq tried to take advantage of the weak Iranian system, although Iran united and fought back. This unification of Iran only lasted until the war was over, and that war even ruined the economy more. However, after the war, it was back to the internal rows in IRI government and blaming all that was wrong on the outside. The next decent Iranian government would be best advised to:

1. Admit progress is not easy.
2. Make ammends with countries that can help it.
3. Rename their country "Persia" to take away the bad image of the last 27 years.

Posted by: JP Power at January 7, 2006 11:48 AM

Exactly. That is why I think Iran is internally combustible and ready to blow.

I think that Iran's population is tired of being a backward, suppressed, isolated and depressed country - - that the population is impatient with the status quo and is willing to endure the trauma of oververt rebellion to their government,if needed, to create a new Iraq. Your idea of a rename back to Persia is interesting and could have a powerful effect if combined with a new government and a committment to progressive change - I like it. Have people there been discussing this?

Imagine being a more aware, progressive person, perhaps educated and knowing the possibilities and opportunities for creating a very different and more prosperious Iran that can join the world community as a respected and even one day maybe even a politically powerful country. The potential is there. Then, living through the crazy and antagonistic outburst of a leader who is taking them in the opposite direction than promised or desired.

A different collective consciousness seems to be emerging in Iran. I don't think the population is going to stand by much longer and tolerate the emarrishment, potential danger, and lack of postive change demonstrated by this ineffective and possibly delusional leader.

Posted by: shonane at January 7, 2006 3:45 PM

Articles Related to Iran: