[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index [FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great
Views expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

SHITTY LITTLE COUNTRY??!! Wipe it out????
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    [FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index -> Noteworthy Discussion Threads
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
AmirN



Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You have resumed a normal discussion without attempting personal attacks. I will therefore respond to you. But realize that whether you know this or not, sometimes you tend to deviate into slinging mud at your opponents. If you continue down that path, it is a path I cannot follow, and I will reluctantly be forced to cease my discussions with you.

Quote:
Let me then (since you completely missed the irony in my statement) explain to you exactly what I mean by the following....

"Man, don't ever generalize a lump sum definition of people with me, I'll pick you apart till hell freezes over, and you've just found out what a taste of that is like. "



Regardless of your intended irony with the word “lump,” when you make a statement as you just made, the interpretation is unmistakable. You invite retaliatory comments that can easily spin out of control. That may not have been your intention, but I guarantee you that is the result. My advice to you is to tone down these types of “fighting words.” They serve no one, including yourself. I also guarantee that no one here is interested in pursuing these kinds of inflammatory discussions with you; you’ll simply be ignored and no one will be left to talk to you. Which would be a shame, because despite your abrasive stance at times, you have much to offer and many interesting thoughts.

Quote:
I personally believe one creates their own heaven or hell right here on Earth....so yes indeed, you can look around for yourself and find all the evidence you need to see the truth of the existance of hell...and if you look hard enough...a slice of heaven or two.



I’m with you so far. I agree with this assessment.

Quote:
And why did I describe this as a generalization of people? Because.....you yourself have "attached" people and Islam in the same phrase below. Accurate it is to say that the body of Islam is made up of the people who believe in it, for what is Islam without people who believe in this dogma. See, you misunderstood something...I never said religion was not associated with dogma, I simply stated that it was not a STATIC (or unmovable, unchangeable in interpretation) dogma.

Now in your own words you say....

Quote:
"Because people are erroneously attached to this filth, and are unwilling to let go. They think Allah will punish and curse them. Do they not realize though, that if they change islam, the islam given to us by God and Mohammad, that they will be cursed and punished regardless?"


You draw an extrapolated conclusion, which does not exist. I said "Because people are erroneously attached to this filth, and are unwilling to let go.” Which means that they have obtained an emotional attachment to islam. You are erroneously concluding that “becoming attached to something” and “becoming the same thing as something” are the same. They are clearly not.

Example: I may say “Bob is attached to his cocaine, and is unwilling to let go.” I may then call cocaine filth, garbage and evil. Am I saying Bob is filth, garbage, and evil? Of course not. Bob is a distinct entity, quite different from his cocaine, but has an unfortunate attachment to it. One can conclude that I dislike and condemn cocaine, because of what I’ve seen it do to Bob, even though Bob may not realize it himself. I see Bob as the victim of cocaine. You see, Bob and cocaine are quite different, though they share a relationship. To propose otherwise (as you are doing) is ludicrous.

I see what you are trying to do here. Trying to use my own words, after an extrapolation, to disprove me. I have no worries though. My idea, my premise, is based on solid foundation. My message is simply honesty. You may try to rattle the words, but you can’t shake the premise.

So, there goes your brilliant theory of trying to show that I equate moslems and islam. Your false theory that my attack on islam is the same as an attack on all moslems. In case you missed it, your theory is the one that just got thrown out the window.

Now, let’s move on to your insistence on the concept of religious dogma as not being STATIC. In my previous posts, I have tried to demonstrate using logic how dogma is no longer dogma if it is changed in any way. A non-static dogma refutes the very definition of dogma. Dogma is seen as THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH. How can the absolute truth change? If absolute truth changes, it was never the absolute truth. Anyway, I think I’ve sufficiently shown this concept in my prior posts, and I will not repeat those arguments in order to avoid repetition. You can refer to them yourself if you’re interested.

But I will post this paragraph from Wikipedia’s Encyclopedia regarding “Religious Dogma.” It demonstrates well that dogma, by definition, IS STATIC:

“Dogmata are found in many religions such as Christianity and Islam, where they are considered core principles that must be upheld by all followers of that religion. As a fundamental element of religion, the term "dogma" is assigned to those theological tenets which are considered to be well demonstrated, such that their proposed disputation OR REVISION effectively means that a person NO LONGER ACCEPTS THE GIVEN RELIGION as his or her own, or has entered into a period of personal doubt. “

Quote:
So, it is logical for any reader to assess your following statement...

Quote:
“Believing in garbage” and “being garbage” itself are two separate things. Please read the messages and words carefully before putting “words in my mouth” as you always like to say.


...As an intelectual attempt to cover your ass when caught up in the inconsistancy of your statements....


Assuming you didn’t get lost in any of my arguments so far, where is the inconsistency? And if you did get lost anywhere, just ask, and I’ll clarify.

As far as covering my ass…I usually make no attempt to cover it…it is simply too beautiful to be covered…he..he..he.

Quote:
But then this begs the question if God made man in his own image, are we not then ourselves God?


I have recently pursued a similar argument with American Visitor. There I said: “Man was not created in God’s image. God was created in man’s image.”

Quote:
Thing about Buddism is that it is by its very nature, a studied observation into one's own nature, and that of all things, as NOT SEPARATE from each other.

As I said, all things are made of atoms, and I'll elaborate by saying that the essence of life in not separate from the universe itself....thus if one is to put a name to this essence, and call it God (or whatever) then truly the very fact of being alive means one is "one with God", or by inference..."though art God".

Therefore it is impossible to be an athiest or risk denying one's very nature.


My knowledge of Buddhism is very limited. I hope that with the passage of time, you can further my education on the matter, as I do have an interest. But as I previously told you, it is one of a very few religions that I respect and don’t criticize. I may not subscribe to its beliefs, but I also don’t find it ridiculous or malevolent. So I simply look at it with curiosity.

The issue I take with you in general, Oppenheimer, is that you tend to sometimes make assumptions that are not grounded by facts. You leap across too many bridge-less gorges. Your arguments above lead me to think one of the following. That either you don’t fully grasp the concept of “atheism,” or that you chose to change its founding principles in order to give your own arguments added flare.

Let me explain. Here you have changed the definition of the traditionally held concept of “God.” What you are calling God here is completely different from the God that atheism denies. You are defining God as “the essence of atoms and life.” If this were how you define God, I would no longer be defined as an “atheist.” Honestly, from a philosophical and scientific point of view, I am at a loss for understanding the true nature of this “essence,” and probably unable to either confirm or deny it. It sounds a lot like the “Force” from Star Wars. Although I would neither deny nor confirm it, it would probably also be irrelevant to me, and I would simply move on to another topic. It would be irrelevant, unless some started to claim to receive “messages” from it, use it to subjugate humanity, use it as a motive to commit rape, murder, genocide, wars, etc.

But the “atheism” I subscribe to is the denial of a supernatural, all-powerful, all-good creator of the universe and humanity, as held by the Judeo-Christian-Islamic faiths.

Quote:
By the way, I have no problem with your vision for Iran's future, but I think I hit the nail on the head when I said that your viewpoint of Islam stems from the Islamic criminals running Iran....and if this were not the case, I doubt very much (you being an athiest) that you'd have an opinion one way or another about Islam, or any other religion for that matter...It just wouldn't concern you, I think.



Assumptions…assumptions…assumptions…What did I tell you about making assumptions? If you have a theory or question, it is probably best to simply ask, instead of posing it as a fact. Not only did you not hit the nail on the head, but you missed it by a mile. If you wish to know the circumstances that lead me to atheism, just ask me…I’ll gladly tell you.

I left Iran at the time of the revolution. Although I do have memories of Iran, I was much too young to have any real understanding of politics or religion. I have spent the vast majority of my life in various western countries, and most of that in the US. It was in Greece (the cradle of Christianity), and later the US that my understanding of monotheistic religion and the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God truly blossomed.

In order to oppose a concept, one must first understand it. I gained a very good understanding of this monotheistic God during my years in Greece and the US. I understood what the concept of God entailed, and I accepted it early on with faith. I understood Christianity and Judaism extremely well, but though I was a “moslem” by name, I did not know most of the details of islam. My knowledge of islam was derived by extrapolating upon my understanding of Christianity, because at their core all three of these religions are based upon belief in the “one true God, which is one and the same.” Though there was merit in this extrapolation, it was obviously erroneous, because the details that islam demands of its followers are quite different. I was ignorant of these “details” at the time.

As I continued to mature, I noticed that my faith in God shrank more and more as my knowledge and education grew during late adolescence and early adulthood. My knowledge in the sciences lifted much of the spooky mystery behind much of this universe, and God’s role as the “answer man” diminished. My growing knowledge of philosophy made me realize that God’s existence is illogical. My growing knowledge of world history showed me that since the dawn of civilization, man’s pursuit of religion and God has had the opposite intended effect, leading to cruelty, murder, war, and further away from morality.

Using science, philosophy, history, logic, and common sense I tried to reconcile this world with the concept of God. I found that it couldn’t be done, and realized that this Judeo-Christian-Islamic God cannot exist. For me, the single biggest argument against the existence of this benevolent God is the presence of evil in this world. But keep in mind that although these three are based on the same God, it was my knowledge of Christianity that caused me to dismiss this God, not my knowledge of islam.

It was not until a few years after my pronounced atheism that I began to finally research islam itself, out of curiosity for my ancestral religion. It was then that I became disgusted and shocked at what islam really teaches and demands.

Keep in mind that all these events occurred at a time when I was living in the US as an Iranian, but an Iranian who was very ignorant of Iran’s past and present. Since my departure from Iran at a young age, I had turned my back on my country of origin and was quite disinterested in it. My knowledge of its history was almost non-existent. My knowledge of its current state of affairs was almost as equally limited. For me, at that time Iran was out of sight and out of mind, and I simply didn’t care.

As recently as two years ago, two events (which I won’t go into now) set me off to discover my heritage. It was then that I took up for the first time any interest in Iran. Both in its history, as well as its current affairs.

It was only two years ago that I became a real Iranian. I realized that although I had left Iran both physically and emotionally, Iran had never left me.

But let’s get back to the point. I gave you this background to show you that it was not my interest in Iran that caused me to denounce religion in general and Islam specifically. It was not the criminal mullahs in Iran that directed me down this path, although they served to re-affirm my stance. It was my upbringing in a free society. A society that gave me the opportunity to obtain a top notch education. A society that placed importance on education, and placed the knowledge of the world at my disposal. More importantly, a society that gave me the freedom to chose my own path, follow my own heart, think my own thoughts, and accept or denounce whichever religion I chose. The importance of the above cannot be overstated. I hope all people of the world, and specifically all Iranians can someday live under the banner of such a society.

Quote:

Quote:
I say Islam is filth and garbage, and we need to get rid of it. I don’t aim to get rid of the Moslems. All I wish to promote is the falsity of Islam, and thereby help people realize Islam for the garbage it is, and hopefully slowly abandon it voluntarily. If they do, great. If they do not, I’ll just continue talking and writing. I would never take up arms against them, to either convert them by force or to exterminate them. Remember, these acts are the foundations of my arguments against Islam. Do you think I would resort to do the same thing I have been so highly critical of all this time?


No, not at this point, but other's might if they took you seriously and were of a more violent mindset.



I’ve been very specific in my message. I denounce islam, not moslems. I’ve also been very specific in explaining that my aim is only education and peaceful persuasion, and I also specifically condemn any bigotry or violence directed at anyone because of his beliefs or religion. If some loony acts violently against a moslem, would you honestly and fairly be able to blame me? I think not.

Quote:
And so I ask, where is the love....if you yourself would promote the falsity of Islam and simply let other's act on it....whether you wished them to or not.....See, if you believe in peace....you would be promoting co-existance, rather than the extermination of something....that a billion and a half people have incorperated unto themselves, and cannot be separated from, just as you cannot be separated from your athiesim.



I promote the falsity of islam, but again, what I ask of others is to also realize this falsity, and abandon islam. I ask no one to persecute anyone else.

I think you are missing my point that I do wish for peaceful coexistence. If moslems decline to dump this religion (and I know most of them will decline), I say fine. Let’s coexist peacefully, regardless of religion, ethnicity, or whatever else. I’ll continue making my arguments, but I can easily criticize islam and yet coexist with the moslems.

Yes, I call for the extermination of something…an idea I see as evil, and as a scourge on humanity. If seventy years ago, someone said that he was calling for the extermination of an idea called “Nazi ideology,” would you ask him “…but where is the love?” To clarify, this hypothetical person was not asking for the extermination or harm to any members of the Nazi party, but just the ideology of Nazism, by promoting its falsity and evil. Would you say “but there are millions of people that have incorporated it upon themselves, and cannot be separated from it?”

According to you, this hypothetical opponent to Nazism is not promoting peaceful coexistence. He is “lumping” millions of Nazi Germans together. He is promoting hate and intolerance…or is he?

And by the way, I have no particular attachment to atheism. I’m always ready and willing to hear arguments against atheism, and view it without sensing personal persecution or threat. And if I hear a convincing argument for why atheism is false and evil, I’ll drop my atheistic views like a hot potato. No love will be lost there.

Quote:
Yet, you begrudge them for believing in "garbage", and that my friend is where you make your biggest mistake.



I don’t begrudge them anything. I view them as victims of this garbage. Victims of a lie.

Quote:
It's fine to begrudge the criminals that have turned it into "garbage" as you call it, and so will the vast majority of Muslims themselves, eventually cast out the "apostates" promoting jihad.....without you lifting a finger to type your thoughts about it.

That change has already started.

Deny this if you wish....it's just another observational analysis, and we all have a viewpoint based upon where we are standing at any given point in the realm of reality as we know it.


I don’t deny anything. I don’t deny that certain moslems have gotten fed up with the hate and violence and wish to change islam itself. More power to them. They are certainly free to pray and practice their religion as they wish. Just as I am free to mock them for their hypocrisy. The hypocrisy of changing “an absolute truth” and calling it “the new absolute truth.” If they want to do that, they might as well just rethink why the are a part of such an islam to begin with, and maybe realize that there is no absolute truth, and that all of islam was a farce from the beginning.

I don’t at all deny change. You shouldn’t either. There is also another change going on. Unfortunately, the world had been asleep about islamo-fascism until recent “islamic global terror.” The world still has a long way to go before it realizes the true nature of islamo-fascism, or simply islam; the two terms are interchangeable. But the change in world understanding has already started. Furthermore, this realization has also hit home with many moslems themselves. The kind of moslems that are simply born into islam without having truly understood it. Many of these moslems are now realizing the true nature of islam, and are rightfully abandoning it. It is mostly to these gentle and noble people, these victims of a lie, these “so called moslems by name,” that I direct my message.

Quote:
I once gave Blank a bit of flack for his repeated use of the word "Raghead", and whether he knows it or not, it is an insulting term to Hindus, Seeks, and a number of other folks that have nothing at all to do with Islam or Iran....simply because it is a reference (derogatory) to those that wear a certain type of head covering...

He got kind of bent out of shape and has since refused to have a discussion....that's his choice....maybe you both should lighten up, and quit generalizing and start projecting your honest anger on specific targets of merit.


I have usually conducted myself in a civil and calm manner. Don’t mistake mockery, criticism, or disapproval for anger.

And I don’t think that anyone here has gotten bent out of shape. I can’t speak for blank, but judging by the exchange you had with him I can’t blame him for his refusal to have a discussion with you anymore.

I don’t think it’s about “lightening up.” I think it’s about courtesy and respect. It is completely acceptable and fair to disagree with someone else, and attempt to disprove your opponent’s points. It is quite another to personalize the attacks, and insult your opponent directly. If you choose the later path, you’ll find out that your opponent (OR FRIEND) will simply stop talking to you. And nobody, neither you nor your friend would want that to happen.
_________________
I am Dariush the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage

Naqshe Rostam
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oppenheimer



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 1166
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico

PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OPPIE"S QUOTE OF THE DAY:


"The patience of the international community cannot be stretched for long," said Konstantin Kosachev, head of the International Affairs' Committee in the lower house of parliament, on Echo Moscow radio. "First there will be the reaction of the IAEA, then the U.N. Security Council and I suspect that if provocations continue, Russia's stance will not be different from the stance of other permanent member countries of the Security Council."


Source:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/10/AR2006011000140.html

-----------------------------

As I said Amir, change is inevitable.....

This is just another example.


Here is another notable quote, one that I'm going to ask you to factor into your assesment of the correctness of your line of reasoning....

Former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami, who is identified with the "reform-seekers" camp that was pushed out of the Iranian political arena, and who is now promoting his "Dialogue among Civilizations" initiative throughout the world, called on the world's intellectuals "to [act] to get rid of … 'Islamophobia.'" Addressing a high-ranking U.N. team on the Alliance of Civilizations initiative in Barcelona, [29] Khatami said: "The West is not right with its Islamophobia, because terrorism has nothing to do with Islam and is, on the contrary, against principles of the peace-seeking and philanthropic divine religion.... Terrorism is a phenomenon which does not discriminate [among] Muslims, Christians, and Jews, and all should unite to uproot it."

At the same time, Khatami attacked the West, saying: "The world of Islam is, more than ever, being targeted by the West. Western civilization has gained major achievements, a main part of which it owes to Islam... The Western approach has gone to the extent that it does not have any belief in other civilizations and cultures due to its being based on individualism."


Source:

Special Report - No. 39 - Iran, January 5, 2006
Iranian Leaders: Statements and Positions (Part I)

http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=countries&Area=iran&ID=SR3906

-------------------------

Now let's discuss "fighting words" for a moment.....see, I'm not here to insult you....or patronize you, for that matter....I'm trying to teach you something.

To do that, I have had to lead you to draw some conclusions, so that I may show you by example exactly what I think the basic strategic flaw is in the premis of your argument. And I say stategic for a good reason because essentially we are talking about the war of ideas as it is integral to the war on terrorism.

So you say my words are fighting word....ah, so now I got you to feel something....now when you call Islam "garbage" ....those are fighting words to any Muslim that feels that the west is trying to "pick apart" the religion of Islam by insulting the very basis for their belief, for to them it is not garbage.

Thus along with your statement that Islam should be eliminated as a cancer within humanity, it is without question that someone like Katami would view your remarks as an example of "Islamaphobia" , by his definition of it.

Now then to an essential question I want you to dwell upon for a good while:

How then by your promotion of your arguments, are you feeding Katami's rational ?

In fact, this is the very basis for my suggestion that you, and anyone else that sees the correctness in NOT giving this man fuel to add to the bonfire of religious conflict that Antar, Ras the repugnant, and all their buddies including UBL acting as their chief foreign policy consultant wish to consume the world.

To in fact re direct your legitimate and honest anger at the intent that I have just illustrated.

Listen, you say I am abrasive? I am simply direct, being as efficiant in my lesson as I can possibly be, to get you to a point of realization as fast as possible.

If I have to push some buttons to get you there, I figure you might just understand why in the long run, if not thank me later.

But I have no expectations....(chuckle).


Let me give you a quick lesson in Buddhism while I'm at it. I asked you to dwell upon this question above. Rather meditate on it.....sit with it for awhile so you may consider the world not just as a stage and all the people players, but that the world is the theater and all the people audience as well, witness to the reality they create, out of the one which is the world we live in.

A theater of the dysfunctional and absurd at times, to be sure....the IRI is living proof.

That the IRI will take the truth and twist it to justify its agenda is a "given" , in more aspect than I can possibly list in the short time I have to reply today.

What I'm suggesting to you is mediate on and consider wisely whether you are in any way contributing to their ability to justify their own line of reasoning.

It is important for the Iranian opposition to do "red -team" thinking on a constant basis, adjust, adapt, be not predictable in your approach to any given situation, and above all, never let the enemy choose the field of battle....including the battle fields in the war of ideas.

What is "red-team" thinking? being in the enemy's shoes to put it in simplistic terms, and this is what I referenced strategy above.

The premis of your argument as I see it is essentially flawed because it further enables and empowers the exact fundementalist , paranoid meglomaniacal rational that uses the fear that Islam will be overwhelmed by western corruption , and "oh look, all ye faithfull, the infidels think we're garbage...."

See what I mean?

Katami's statement regarding terrorists is correct on its face, but coming from him is a complete farce....

Now I suppose unless some terrorist quotes you directly, citing you as the source, we'll never know if your words influenced him or not....chuckle.....but it's not me that you have to worry about blaming you, it's you that has to worry about blaming you.

You say I use your arguments against you.....therin is another lesson by example.

Don't fall victim to those that would use your argument for political purpose.....as Katami would.

I hope you seriously consider this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AmirN



Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Let me give you a quick lesson in Buddhism while I'm at it. I asked you to dwell upon this question above. Rather meditate on it.....sit with it for awhile so you may consider the world not just as a stage and all the people players, but that the world is the theater and all the people audience as well, witness to the reality they create, out of the one which is the world we live in.


You are a Buddhist, and I respect that. You asked me to meditate, so I did. You say my viewpoint is flawed, but I still don’t think you have shown that.

Quote:
Former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami, who is identified with the "reform-seekers" camp that was pushed out of the Iranian political arena, and who is now promoting his "Dialogue among Civilizations" initiative throughout the world, called on the world's intellectuals "to [act] to get rid of … 'Islamophobia.'" Addressing a high-ranking U.N. team on the Alliance of Civilizations initiative in Barcelona, [29] Khatami said: "The West is not right with its Islamophobia, because terrorism has nothing to do with Islam and is, on the contrary, against principles of the peace-seeking and philanthropic divine religion.... Terrorism is a phenomenon which does not discriminate [among] Muslims, Christians, and Jews, and all should unite to uproot it."

At the same time, Khatami attacked the West, saying: "The world of Islam is, more than ever, being targeted by the West. Western civilization has gained major achievements, a main part of which it owes to Islam... The Western approach has gone to the extent that it does not have any belief in other civilizations and cultures due to its being based on individualism."


That’s a cute quote from mullah Khatami. As you yourself say, it is a farce. As for what you said immediately before "it is a farce," ...well I'll get to that before this post is over.

Quote:
So you say my words are fighting word....ah, so now I got you to feel something....


I think that perhaps you are flattering yourself a bit. You haven’t got me to feel anything. My request was that we have a discussion based on mutual courtesy and devoid of threats. And all I said was that if you didn’t abide by that ground-rule, I would simply stop talking. Emotion has nothing to do with it.

Quote:
Thus along with your statement that Islam should be eliminated as a cancer within humanity, it is without question that someone like Katami would view your remarks as an example of "Islamaphobia" , by his definition of it.


“Islamophobia.” This is the latest term invented by the Islamic propagandists. What does it really mean?

Looking at the roots of the word, it obviously is derived from the terms “islam” and “phobia.” What does phobia mean, and what is its connotation as used when combined with another prefix?

Phobia is a Greek word, pronounced Fovos. It means “fear.” In its original Greek, as its subsequent English use, it was used as a suffix to deliver the following meaning. To imply a general sense of generalized, visceral, and almost always an irrational “fear” or “suspicion” of the word to which it was attached. It usually implies ignorance of the true nature of that pre-described word. In this case, islam.

So, the term islamophobia is used to describe an irrational, ignorant, almost visceral suspicion and fear of islam.

Does islamophobia truly exist? I’m sure that it does. Irrational fears of many subjects exist in this world. Arachnophobia, herpetophobia, agoraphobia, and even coulrophobia (the fear of clowns, and don’t bother looking it up in the dictionary, cause it’s not there; it’s a very new term), to name just a few. I’m sure that there are some people who fear and mistrust islam out of irrational prejudices and ignorance. People like that exist for almost any subject matter.

Now consider the likes of someone such as Winston Churchill, who was an outspoken opponent of Nazi ideology and the phenomenon of Nazism. He didn’t do it out of an irrational fear and ignorance. He opposed it however way he could, both out of a need for self preservation and because it was the right thing to do. Shall we label the opponents of Nazism as Naziphobes? Shall we label the opponents of rape, homicide, and genocide as rapeopbobes, homicidophobes, and genocidophobes?

You see, most of the people that oppose islam such as myself don’t do so out of irrational fear and ignorance. They do it because they understand the nature of islam, many of them better than the majority of Moslems themselves. It is not a “phobia.” It is a conscious decision to oppose that which is wrong, that which preys on humanity, that which is evil.

Quote:
How then by your promotion of your arguments, are you feeding Katami's rational ?

In fact, this is the very basis for my suggestion that you, and anyone else that sees the correctness in NOT giving this man fuel to add to the bonfire of religious conflict that Antar, Ras the repugnant, and all their buddies including UBL acting as their chief foreign policy consultant wish to consume the world.


I don’t have to add any fuel. All the fuel in the world is already there. Their bonfire of evil and hate has been burning already for 1400 years. It has always burned and will continue to burn regardless of what I or anyone else has to say about it.

Your attitude may be to just casually look at this fire, shake your head, and keep quiet lest you further infuriate these arsonists. I take a different stance. I see this fire, and I yell out loud. I am yelling for help to put it out. I yell, so perhaps the fire department might be alerted and arrive. I yell so that bystanders will be alerted and take caution to avoid the blaze.

Islamophobia? I think that’s a term reserved for the relatively few who don’t understand islam, and though they oppose an evil entity, they do it for the wrong reason.

You say I fuel this bonfire of hate with my criticism of it. No sir. I say you are the one who is fueling it, with your relativistic silent attitude towards the hateful foundation of this fire: islam.

Your quote from Khatami:

Quote:
Terrorism is a phenomenon which does not discriminate [among] Muslims, Christians, and Jews, and all should unite to uproot it."


Followed by your interpretation:

Quote:
Katami's statement regarding terrorists is correct on its face, but coming from him is a complete farce....


It is true that terrorism’s VICTIMS are indiscriminate, be it Moslem, Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. But that is not the point. The point is, the PERPETRATORS of terrorism are very specific. The PERPETRATORS of terrorism, by overwhelming majority (with the exception of a very few) are the followers of islam; the warriors of Allah. It is islam that has created them and unleashed them upon the world, even at the risk of killing and devastating fellow moslems. If we are to unite and uproot it, we ought to uproot the very thing that is the factory of terrorism and hate: islam.

So, Mr Khatami and Mr Oppenheimer, let us please paint a complete picture of facts in this “theater of the world.” We must not only speak of terrorism’s victims, but more importantly its perpetrators. And the ideology that is used to brain wash those perpetrators and justify to them these evil acts.

Quote:
You say I use your arguments against you.....therin is another lesson by example.


Again, perhaps you are flattering yourself. I said you are TRYING to use my words against me. To TRY (unsuccessfully, I would add) and to DO are very different things, my friend. If you recall my next sentence after that, it was “I have no worries though.” No worries indeed.

Quote:
Don't fall victim to those that would use your argument for political purpose.....as Katami would.


he..he..he.

I find it funny that you are concerned about me falling victim to the likes of Khatami’s “political purpose.” The humor lies in the fact that you are the one who is quoting Khatami and AGREEING WITH HIM while illustrating your points. You are the one that followed that philosophically brilliant quote by Khatami with “Katami's statement regarding terrorists is correct on its face.”

I am so glad that this “theater of the world” also puts on its share of comedy from time to time.
_________________
I am Dariush the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage

Naqshe Rostam
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oppenheimer



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 1166
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico

PostPosted: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As I said katami's statement is true on its face, why? because if you did some research, you'd understand that terrorism is not the sole domain of Islamic radicals.

Terrorists come in all colors, and affiliation. The IRA, Terry McVie (oklahoma bombing in the US) The jewish defense league's attempted bombing of a congressman's office, as well as a mosque in Calif.

In your twisted interpretation of my wordsa to you, you then try and associate me with somehow being allied with Katami...where those words, correct as he stated (on their own, if spoken by anyone else) simply become a hypocritical joke coming from a former leader of the biggest state sponsor of terrorism on Earth.

It is not Islam that is the problem, it is those who rap it around themselves like a cloak of justification for their meglomaniacal agenda, and the means and the methods to achive them.

My point is (since you are obviously purposely being obtuse in understanding it) that by generalizing Islam as being "garbage" you are in fact adding fuel to his argument. And true enough you have no "need" to do so, for it is not only far better time spent to attack the idealogues themselves, rather than lump all Muslims into (and someone like myself that opposes their agenda) into that camp.

Words create reaction, action in response....what then is a proper response.....Why getting real specific and calling Katami a hypocrite as I just did....as a simple example of where you might think to better direct your anger.

Instead of playing the fool and pretending that your statement isn't attacking all Muslims by association with "garbage".

If you can't grok this, and have obviously spent no time at all sitting with the concept I have illustrated to you as to why you are making a STRATEGIC mistake, and basing it on a false premis, then I would simply tell you "More sitting, less pontification of semantics."

You say you arn't supportive of bigotry, yet you expouse it, by your generalistic statements condeming all of Islam, when in reality only a small segment of the Muslim community supports UBL, the mullahs, or a retrograde, backward, fundementalist, extremist idiology in practice.

In fact, demographicly, more Muslims live in free societies and democracies than are living in totalitarianism. This is world wide.

The mullahs want to promote Islam as a world religion, OK fine...it already is....what I have a serious problem with is the interpretation that it should be the only religion.

Then you have the demographic fact that out of the billion.5 Muslims in the world, not more than .1, (maybe at most 100 million have any sympathy with that agenda. Still a lot of people, but proof positive that the call to jihad has been ignored by the vast majority.

Why? Because they do not wish to create a situation that would cause someone like yourself to call their belief "garbage" and act, based on that premis.

By your premis, you would say that president Bush's statement that "Islam is a religion of peace." is allied with Katami's statement that it has nothing to do with terrorism.

Terrorism is essentially a methodology of violent political coersion, and used by those with a meglomaniacal agenda to take over the world.

That has nothing to do , by definition , with religion per se, those who rap themselves in Islam that promote terrorism, are simply using Islam as a vehical for the justification of their criminal behavior.

Much as Hitler used a certain philosopher's ideas (which you've had agreed with me about) to justify his criminal actions.

Now do you see a pattern emerging in all totalitarian ideology, and why feeding their argument as you do by generalizing the issue as being a philisophical one, rather than a problem with individuals as they are using, "hijacking" a religion to serve their purpose. And in so doing, are you so obtuse as to not recognise that this generilization in your premis is exactly what they need to prove that this is a war on Islam, rather than a war on terrorism?

Therefore, take your unkind insinuations that I am "silently" aquiesing to, or appeasing them by not being like you and generalizing Islam the way you do, and realize that you are only acusing me of what you yourself are guilty of.

Maybe you're not guilty in your own mind, but you are in practice by your words, and the reaction they cause, by being generalistic in nature, and therefore subject to error.

You've been at this what? a couple years? I'm glad you chose to seek your roots, in any case....but your argument is very young minded indeed.

When you've got a decade or more under your belt, then come and talk with me about it.

I don't have the time to indulge you, or your insults, your failure to come to realization about the incorrectness of your premis, or any rebuttal in defense of your bigotry on this subject.

I'm not here to entertain you, and things are moving really fast in the international reaction to the threat the IRI poses to global peace and security.

Suffice to say, I have more specific axes to grind in support of the Iranian opposition, and a lot of work to do to as one small cog in the engine of freedom.

I've been at this too long to really care much whether you grok what I have to say or not, and whether you come to that realization or not, I have presented it to you out of courtesy, so that you may decide what is best in how you direct your energy.

Failing even to undertstand this much, you continue to insist that I am insulting you, where I am simply causing you to question your premis....and don't tell me you don't feel anything....that's just a cop-out, in denial of your true nature....and maybe the only true thing you've said is that you can't "handle it" ....someone who is teasing you out of the artificial shell you have created as your reality, in response to the reality that others that have hijacked Islam have helped you create.

Ah well, as I said...I have no expectation that you'll grok anything...but as you said....I tried.

And so now I am done trying, or wasting more of my time on this discussion with you, and you are welcome to your illusions, for all the good that will do you, or anyone else.

We can certainly discus other things, and there is much afoot to talk about....but this conversation is hereby ended on this topic.

By all means, you are welcome to have the last word if you wish....anyone reading this archived thread will hopefully find their own understanding of the issues involved.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AmirN



Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 11:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I noticed that your …chuckles… were conspicuously absent in this last post of yours.

I also sensed a general portrayal of frustration from you. This is unfortunate, because my aim was never to frustrate and upset you. My only goal when I debate someone is to portray my opinions and views to the world. I never set out to really change my opponent’s mind, since that would be an exercise in futility. My real goal is to portray myself to the silent “audience” who is out there and listening. So you see, frustrating or upsetting you is quite irrelevant to me.

I’ve noticed you have something called “Oppie’s quote of the day.” Good for you. That’s very cute.

Seems you also have a similar concept, “Oppie’s word of the day.” It also seems that your word of the day during your last post was “obtuse.”

Quote:
My point is (since you are obviously purposely being obtuse in understanding it)…


Quote:
And in so doing, are you so obtuse as to not recognise that…


“Obtuse”…It’s not a commonly used word. It has definitely been a while since I last heard that word. We both know what it means…and we both know it is derogatory. A lesser person might take offense at it, but I won’t. A lesser person might even try to return it with kind, and use another offensive word to describe you. But I won’t do that either. Instead, I’ll even have fun with it, and indulge you by being less…obtuse.

Quote:
As I said katami's statement is true on its face, why? because if you did some research, you'd understand that terrorism is not the sole domain of Islamic radicals.

Terrorists come in all colors, and affiliation. The IRA, Terry McVie (oklahoma bombing in the US) The jewish defense league's attempted bombing of a congressman's office, as well as a mosque in Calif.


First, the Oklahoma City Bombing was perpetrated by Terry Nichols and Timothy McVeigh, not by “Terry McVie.”

Second, you’ll notice that I said in my prior post that “The PERPETRATORS of terrorism, by overwhelming majority (with the exception of a very few) are the followers of islam; the warriors of Allah.” Which means that I am very much aware that NOT ALL terrorism is committed because of islam, and that a few exceptions exist, such as the ones you just mentioned. My point was that in the recent past and present, the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of terrorist acts are committed by islamists. Try to refute that if you wish, but that is just a simple fact.

If you wish to get a flavor for the documented (though not exclusive) list of Islamic terrorist acts in just the most recent years, go to the following link. Go there, and stroll to the bottom of the page for “the list.” And that list is just for 2005. If interested, also check 2004, as well as 2001 through 2003.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

“Still think it has nothing to do with islam?...”

I hope you don’t find this list too…obtuse.

Quote:
In your twisted interpretation of my wordsa to you, you then try and associate me with somehow being allied with Katami...where those words, correct as he stated (on their own, if spoken by anyone else) simply become a hypocritical joke coming from a former leader of the biggest state sponsor of terrorism on Earth.


he..he..he.

Don’t get upset with me if you allied your arguments with those of Khatami’s…you did that yourself.

You say he is “correct.” If something someone says is “correct,” it is correct regardless of the source. If two people say the same exact statement, one cannot be correct while another incorrect. One may be a hypocrite, but that is irrelevant of the correctness or incorrectness of the statement.

Therefore, if as you claim he is correct, and you are correct, then you are both in agreement. As far as how much “allied” you and Khatami really are, I’ll let you be the judge of that.

Nothing so far is…obtuse…is it?

Quote:
It is not Islam that is the problem, it is those who rap it around themselves like a cloak of justification for their meglomaniacal agenda, and the means and the methods to achive them.


There is a reason why these “megalomaniacs” wrap themselves in the cloak of islam for justification. Because islam REALLY DOES provide justification for them. Islam was originally made by such megalomaniacs. It is a cloak that begs to be worn by such people. But as I told you before, this cloak is what it is and cannot be changed. It is not a cloak that can be substituted for another during Gucci’s “fall collection.”

Quote:
Instead of playing the fool and pretending that your statement isn't attacking all Muslims by association with "garbage".


I believe I have more than adequately defined my stand on the matter. I have honestly and logically showed that my attack of islam as “garbage” is very different from implying that Moslems are “garbage.” You can continue to insist otherwise, for it matters not to me. I won’t even bother to insult your intelligence for not grasping this concept.

No sir, I see no need to call you a “fool,” or “obtuse,” as you choose to call me.

Quote:
You say you arn't supportive of bigotry, yet you expouse it, by your generalistic statements condeming all of Islam,


Generalized statements condemning all of islam? Does your statement really make any sense? Think about it for a minute, or rather …”meditate” for a minute.

Islam is a religion, a concept. It is ONE thing. Unless you are referring to the different sects of islam, such as Shiite, Sunni, etc. And our discussion has nothing to do with the different sects of islam, so I know that’s not what you are talking about.

So, if islam is ONE thing, ONE concept, how am I “generalizing?” When one speaks of islam, one cannot help but be very specific to this single idea or entity. And if one condemns islam, by definition one condemns ALL of it. There are no different, independent, and unrelated parts to islam. One can either condemn islam (which by nature would be all of it), or not condemn islam (which would mean NONE of it).

Did your meditation help you? Did you grasp this explanation which I hope is less than…obtuse?

Quote:
The mullahs want to promote Islam as a world religion, OK fine...it already is....what I have a serious problem with is the interpretation that it should be the only religion.


Why do you have a problem with that interpretation? It was clearly Mohammad’s intended and unmistakable message. It is clearly spelled out in the Qur’an as well as the works of Bukhari and others. The message is clearly “to fight until no other religion exists but islam.”

Or do you also find the Qur’an and other historical works to be…obtuse?

Quote:
Why? Because they do not wish to create a situation that would cause someone like yourself to call their belief "garbage" and act, based on that premis.


I don’t need to just look at how Moslems conduct themselves in order to call islam garbage. I only need to look at the teachings of islam itself to come to that conclusion. I only need to read the Qur’an. I only need to know about the thoughts and practices of Mohammad, the creator of islam, to proclaim islam garbage.

Since I have done that, it is with extreme confidence that I proclaim islam to be garbage.

How am I doing so far in not being…obtuse?

Quote:
That has nothing to do , by definition , with religion per se, those who rap themselves in Islam that promote terrorism, are simply using Islam as a vehical for the justification of their criminal behavior.

You seem to enjoy deep thoughts. Meditate on this…Are the criminals simply just using islam as a vehicle to promote terror?...Or, is islam simply using criminals as a vehicle to promote terror?...OR, perhaps these two premises are not mutually exclusive, but rather synergistic. Perhaps both are true.

Did a light bulb just get turned on above your head? No?..Not yet? Then resume meditation until it does…Don’t worry, it will happen some day….he…he…he…

Quote:
You've been at this what? a couple years? I'm glad you chose to seek your roots, in any case....but your argument is very young minded indeed.

When you've got a decade or more under your belt, then come and talk with me about it.


Yes, I’m very glad I chose to seek my heritage. It has been very fulfilling.

Would you seriously dismiss my arguments simply because I have only been “at this for only a couple of years?” Accept or refute a point based on its merit and validity, not based on its author’s background. Should I dismiss your points about Iran simply because you are not an Iranian? Is that not bigotry? You claim to be a champion against bigotry. But are you really?

I don’t think the specific length of time a person has devoted a subject is necessarily a reflection of that person’s mastery of that subject. Albert Einstein published his special theory of relativity at the young age of 26, after only a few years of “meditation” on the matter. Billions of other humans would have never been able to grasp the subject even if they spent their entire lifetime. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart began composing at the young age of six. How many people can ever compose music, even if they dedicate their entire lifetime to it? And how long do you think a six year old could have possibly “been at this” before grasping the concept?

How well a person grasps and understands a concept is dependant on many factors. Only one of them is the absolute time devoted to its study. Other equally if not more important factors include one’s devotion, true interest and passion, dedication, natural talent, and …well…intellect.

I’m very sorry that it has taken you “a decade or more” to grasp many of the concepts which you think you have a grasp upon. I’m even more sorry to have to inform you that such an understanding can be reached in a far shorter time frame by…others.

Quote:
I don't have the time to indulge you, or your insults, your failure to come to realization about the incorrectness of your premis, or any rebuttal in defense of your bigotry on this subject.

I'm not here to entertain you, and things are moving really fast in the international reaction to the threat the IRI poses to global peace and security.

Suffice to say, I have more specific axes to grind in support of the Iranian opposition, and a lot of work to do to as one small cog in the engine of freedom.


he…he…he…Relax, before you have a coronary.

Your intent may never have been to entertain me, but fortunately you have done so. And I thank you for that.

But seriously, the beauty of a free country such as the one you and I live in is that you are free to do as you wish. Or, refrain from doing something as you wish. Nobody forced you to come in this thread and start debating me about islam. You did it out of your own volition. So why do you now cry to me about wasting your time?

I for one think my discussion here was time well spent for me. I wouldn’t change a thing, and have no regrets. I take pride in each of my posts. I’m sorry that you don’t feel the same way.

But far be it for me to bog you down by keeping you distracted in this discussion. Far be it for me to hinder your contributions to freedom. I hope that the world of freedom will someday forgive me for taking its champion away for a while and engaging him in a silly discussion.

So, please, by all means, resume your spread of freedom and democracy.

Quote:
We can certainly discus other things, and there is much afoot to talk about....but this conversation is hereby ended on this topic.


Any conversation is ended when either party chooses to end it. You have chosen to do so, and that’s fine.

I don’t know about you, but I sure don’t harbor any ill feelings towards you. And I am not at all opposed to discussing other subjects with you in the future. Provided of course, that you maintain our conversations relatively free of threats or insults.

And I completely agree with you in that neither I nor you are the judges of the outcome of this argument. The judge is the “silent audience.”

Finally, I apologize if anything I said today was in any way, shape or form, either in its implied or explicit intention…obtuse.
_________________
I am Dariush the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage

Naqshe Rostam
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oppenheimer



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 1166
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 6:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.tkb.org/Home.jsp


As I said, terrorists come in all colors.

The link will take you to one of the most comprehensive data bases anywhere. Have fun.

Obtuse in the sense that you choose to remain blind to the fact that you are in fact helping to create a war on Islam, which simply plays into, and gives comfort to the enemy that is trying to create a holy war.

Young minded in the sense that it is your intelectual immaturity that allows you to remain blind, and at the same time so very egotistical in your bigotry, well then ...tell me why I should waste my time on your petty illusions of grandure in comparing yourself to einstein? Or waste my time with you as you fondle your illusions?

Oh, was that insulting? Sorry, I was just being observant.

Freedom and Democracy? You can't have it without inclusiveness Amir, and what you are promoting is non-inclusiveness..to do away with anyone's beliefs, simply because you believe them garbage is the number one threat to a free and peacefull post-regime Iran.

There's going to be a serious backlash after 27 years under the mullah, are you seriously prepared to contribute to ongoing hatred and bloodshead in your nation, after the regime falls..by promoting your interpretation of reality?

"Oh, but I'm a man of peace." you say, "how can you blame me?" you ask...

You spout no words of peace, you promote no inclusiveness, nor co-existance, though you say you're all for that....

And that, well....let's just say you have a long way to go before you earn my respect....or prove yourself any kind of a man of peace, promoting peace and inclusiveness in a secular, free Iran that includes all in the premis of "by, for, and of" the people, with government that protects the basic human rights of all, by law.

In fact, you are promoting the opposite, and can't even grok that, for your ego and pride won't let you see that strategic mistake.

Well, it's your nation Amir, soon you'll be able to create your own reality, and so will the rest of the Iranian people as they decide how to rejoin the family of nations.

In soon I mean months, not years.

If you had lived all your life in Iran, never knowing freedom or Democracy, as you've experienced it growing up in the west, I'd have more sympathy for your misunderstanding but none with your abysmal statements.

But you know very well that what you promote is no better than those Muslims you hate and despise so much that are running your nation today.

Those who in fact call western civilization "garbage" ....

-----------

As I said, I've been around a long time Amir,

"If there is one thing about people that's a given, it's that they can only change themselves. You can try to understand them, change their circumstances, try to point the roads to peace, but in the end, they must want it for themselves, knowing what the alternatives are."

"I have chosen to contact you again to caution you all that I believe we have been, and continue to be, manipulated into action that will give rise to the largest mass religious manipulation of people in history. Let the world become aware of the manipulation, and watch as Islam takes a good look at itself. "

"A revolution is fast opon us, not one from without, but from within, it is one of thoughts. Islam is going to change from this just as we going to be changed, in this let us minimize the finger pointing, in this I suggest we all remember why our feet point forward(to walk upright)and why our eyes are at the front of our heads(to not look backwards while walking). "


"Anyone who has witnessed the birth of one's child can tell you that yes indeed you create your own reality, the question is what do we wish to create for ourselves as reality on this planet, now and for our children's, and their children's future? Not just in this country, but the world as a whole, as an international vision.
Inherently, change is viewed with suspicion, as a threat to culture and ways of tradition and ethical belief systems. As it applies to developing countries in this nuclear age, the post-cold war aftermath presents a vast paradox that present no easy solutions, and has culminated in the reality of the war on terrorism as it exists today."

"When I consider the difference (by definition) between a terrorist and a freedom fighter, The targeting of civilians, and the methods employed may serve. The philosophy behind our revolution, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence, was born from resistance to oppression with "live free, or die." being at the core of it. As Hamid Karzai recently intimated, this is the Afghan jihad, the true jihad, to be free to live in correctness with one another. That jihad lies in one's heart, the struggle to live a correct life, in the eyes of the Creator of all. The commonality of the basic truths behind all the major religions of the world, is apparent to me, who could be so arrogant to think that they were the only ones chosen by God?"

""I have been considering issues surrounding nuclear weapons all my adult life, on the flyleaf of my grandmother's book about Los Alamos, that I gave to Bill Clinton the day he was first elected President, I wrote,
" This is a slice of times past, to give perspective on the present, so that in the future we can eliminate the threat of nuclear war. The greatest threat we face today is that terrorists will obtain nuclear weapons."
I wonder if he had a chance to read it. "Inside Box 1663" may still be in the Whitehouse library for those interested.""


The most recent quote above was in Feb. 2002, from letters written to my gov. , published by my gov. and well received by, and responded to by senior officials, Senators, a former Ambassador to Afghanistan, A few think-tanks, The Brit gov, The French gov, a former Secretary of State, The Nuclear tech review board, and of course a letter from Clinton thanking me for that book...all before you bothered to seek your roots.

----------------

Now you cherry pick from the Quoran....well then how are you any different in doing so than the mullahs who call for jihad?

I see no difference in that obtuse..."narrow view" you expouse and their own diatribes that have caused you to think in kind, believing that so-called truth interpreted from a book written by man long ago in another age. And you may object, but since you say all you need to do is read the quoran, you have simply proved my statement.

You have simply become a mirror product of their warped vision, if you truly believe what you think and write.

Takes two to tango, and you're dancing with the mahdi, by giving them exactly what they want and expect.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oppenheimer



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 1166
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 7:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

P.S. Amir

Folks that know me well respect the fact that I cut no slack with anyone when an essential realization must be understood...not to make you feel special or anything, or singled out in any way.

I had a real good chat with a fellow at State recently about the following...

(excerpt from another more recent letter)
Quote:

In an interview with the New York Post Editorial Board September 15, 2005, Secretary Condoleezza Rice stated in answer to a question regarding the President’s position in support of the Iranian people’s aspirations for liberty:



“Well, the problem in Iran is that the train is going the other way right now. The hardliners have managed, I think, to – for the time being – silence any organized opposition and you have the sense that it’s difficult for the population, which is (inaudible) deeply dissatisfied with their government, but it’s difficult for the population to find someplace to adhere, you know, you need a focal point and I think they’re having -- there’s (inaudible) trouble in doing that.

But in Iran, we do have some democracy programs that we’re doing. They’re small and they’re doing them through nongovernmental organizations because we don’t want to give the government a reason to crack down on what little democratic activity there is in Iran.

The second point is that the Iranian people would – the United States Government is very popular with the Iranian people.”





Sir,



On one hand Secretary Rice has a point when she says that American support may give cause to the regime for crackdowns, but the reality is they don't need an excuse, and they are actively suppressing any and all dissent in Iran regardless of the level of American support to the point where in a few years there won't be an opposition in Iran because they'll all be in mass graves or in some hell-hole of a prison.

The point I must stress here in terms of American credibility with those seeking and badly needing our support and that of the international community is that there are no halfway measures that may prove effective. Halfway measures don’t produce results, whether that is on nuclear issues or human rights issues, or in regards to state sponsors of terrorism. Standing on principal cannot be with one foot in any case, including support for democracy.



As I look at this in all its aspects with regards to Iran, both with the people and the government as separate tracks, I’ll be very blunt in saying that the war of ideas as it pertains to support for democratic change cannot be won unless full tilt effort in concrete ways to hold the mullah’s regime to account along with total and uncompromising support is given to the Iranian people to effect change from within. Such support begins with a dialogue.


So yes, in fact, I don't have time to play head games with you Amir...the sooner you get a grip and realize you arn't doing your people any favors by your rhetoric, the better.

I don't question whether I can make a difference as an individual, I already know I have, and that realization is humbling indeed, as a simple fact.

It's all about attitude Amir....come to the table with a correct one, and watch miracles happen when they take what you say to heart.

But you won't get there from here with the one you have today.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AmirN



Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
And so now I am done trying, or wasting more of my time on this discussion with you, and you are welcome to your illusions, for all the good that will do you, or anyone else.

We can certainly discus other things, and there is much afoot to talk about....but this conversation is hereby ended on this topic.

By all means, you are welcome to have the last word if you wish....anyone reading this archived thread will hopefully find their own understanding of the issues involved.


he...he…he…

I love it! I absolutely love it! You crack me up, Mr Oppenheimer!

I love how you “ended” the conversation, yet could not resist to come back for more! In fact, I always knew you would. Seems I know you better than you think I know you.

Not only did you come back for more, but you followed it up with a P.S! Like I said, I love it. You said before that you are not here to entertain me. But again, I must thank you for your gracious entertainment.

Quote:
As I said, terrorists come in all colors.

The link will take you to one of the most comprehensive data bases anywhere. Have fun.


I did have fun as always, thank you. The link shows again what I have been saying. The vast majority of the attacks are by islamists. And I am referring to the recent past, within the last decade, not twenty, thirty, fifty years ago. And no database is completely comprehensive. Many of the attacks that were mentioned in the database I referred you to were not present in the one you referred me to. Did those attacks not occur? I don’t think so.

Quote:
Obtuse in the sense that you choose to remain blind…


I just love how you cannot argue your points without describing your opponent with an adjective. I am sure you have a colorful vocabulary, and adjectives are a good part of it.

Stick to the points, kid, and save the adjectives for your thesaurus. Haven’t you seen how when you continuously describe your opponents with adjectives, they only reflect back at yourself?

If not, again I would say that “meditation” is in order…he…he…he…

Quote:
you are in fact helping to create a war on Islam, which simply plays into, and gives comfort to the enemy that is trying to create a holy war.


A war on the teachings and beliefs of islam…absolutely. A war on the idea of islam…definitely. A war on the people and nations that follow islam…profoundly NOT.

I am sure that by now you must understand my point. If not, I would be tempted to describe you with some very colorful adjectives. But then, I would be no better than you. Seems I have more self restraint than…others.

Quote:
Young minded in the sense that it is your intelectual immaturity that allows you to remain blind, and at the same time so very egotistical in your bigotry, well then ...tell me why I should waste my time on your petty illusions of grandure in comparing yourself to einstein? Or waste my time with you as you fondle your illusions?


My goodness!...Adjectives galore! Hold on while I get a pen and paper to write down all these wonderful adjectives…I hope to someday increase my vocabulary to the level of mastery that you obviously have!

If I am immature, why are you debating me? You might as well go debate a five year old. While you are at it, yell some adjectives about him in his ear too. Perhaps you enjoy debating people who you consider “immature,” because you get a sense of domination, and fulfillment. If so, please continue this debate, so you may gain personal satisfaction. As I said, you have offered me tons of entertainment. The least I can do is repay the favor...he…he...he…

But other than that, I honestly don’t have an answer for you when you ask “why should I waste my time with you?” That is a question you must ask yourself. As I said before, this is a free country, and you are free to continue this conversation or abandon it, as you wish. Don’t ask me for advice, if you are torn inside between your different options, and cannot decide whether to continue debating me or moving on. The decision is yours, and only yours.

But I do hope you can stay a while. This is fun.

As far as my use of Einstein and Mozart as examples, no grandeur exists on my part. I simply gave a couple of examples to show you that the length of time someone devotes a subject is not usually relevant. I was only showing the fallacy of your premise, and perhaps your own bigotry. You once told me that “you have a nose for bigotry.” Have you wondered where that smell of bigotry is coming from, no matter where you go?

Quote:
Freedom and Democracy? You can't have it without inclusiveness Amir, and what you are promoting is non-inclusiveness..to do away with anyone's beliefs,


I am not doing that at all, Mr Oppenheimer. I promote complete inclusiveness. I never implied that Moslems should not be included in our free society. Far from it. I promote a society that includes freedom of religion, no matter what that religion. How is that non-inclusive?

If a Moslem preacher got up in front of a podium and spoke volumes about the virtues of islam, you would simply applaud him for exercising his “freedom of religion” and “freedom of speech.” I would never take away his right to “preach.” Yet, if I did the same, but with the opposite viewpoint, you criticize me for being undemocratic and against freedom. I am only exercising my free speech and my freedom of religion, when I point to why I think the way I do. Some of the audience may not agree with me and move on. And that’s fine; they are free to do so. But others may see virtue in what I say, and stay longer. That’s all I want. And I am prepared to offer the same thing to those with whom I disagree, such as a mullah. At the end of the day, whoever wishes to remain Moslem is free to do so, as far as I am concerned. And if only a few see the fallacy with islam and abandon it, then good for them. The next day, I will do the same; no more and no less. The difference between me and the preachers of many other religions such as islam is that I would not persecute those who choose not to agree with me.

So, Mr Oppenheimer, who is the one who is being “non-inclusive” here… me or you? Who is the one that is not adhering to true freedom and democracy…me or you? Who is the one that would allow some to speak, yet silence others…me or you? Who is the one who doesn’t truly understand the nature of free speech and free religion…me or you?

Is any of this…obtuse? If so, again may I recommend some “meditation?”

You seem to be stuck in first gear. You have been stuck in the same gear for the past ten posts now. You keep on raising the same issue…over and over again. To which I then reply over and over again. Get out of first gear, Mr Oppenheimer, and let’s increase the speed of this discussion.

Quote:
There's going to be a serious backlash after 27 years under the mullah, are you seriously prepared to contribute to ongoing hatred and bloodshead in your nation, after the regime falls..by promoting your interpretation of reality?


I have no doubt about the fact that serious backlash will result when the IRI falls. But that will have nothing to do with me, and everything to do with how these monsters conducted themselves. In fact, I almost pity the fate that awaits these mullahs…almost.

Quote:
You spout no words of peace, you promote no inclusiveness, nor co-existance, though you say you're all for that....


Yes, it’s easy to make such CLAIMS. But when asked to show the proof behind your claims, your arguments are very lacking. And however you re-hash the single baseless point you continue to make, the end result is the same. I (and I venture most of the audience here) remain unconvinced.

But by all means, continue your witch hunt. Just follow your “nose.”

Quote:
And that, well....let's just say you have a long way to go before you earn my respect....or prove yourself any kind of a man of peace, promoting peace and inclusiveness…


My dear Mr Oppenheimer, your respect is irrelevant to me. I neither desire it nor seek it. The respect I spoke of in a prior post was in conjunction with courtesy, and only in the sense of refraining from resorting to threats and insults. Short of that, whether you respect me personally or my opinions, I care not.

Furthermore, I have not set out on a journey to “prove” myself, either to you or in general as a “man of peace.” My actions show me for the type of person I am, and the world will be my judge, not you. Your opinion of me, Mr Oppenheimer, is as I said…irrelevant.

Quote:
If you had lived all your life in Iran, never knowing freedom or Democracy, as you've experienced it growing up in the west, I'd have more sympathy for your misunderstanding but none with your abysmal statements.


Looks like your reasoning is as usual, backwards. It is BECAUSE I have enjoyed a life of democracy and freedom that I understand its importance. This is not to say that someone who lived his entire life outside of democracy has no appreciation for it. Each person can appreciate democracy and freedom from their own perspective. Those who have enjoyed it, as well as those who long for it have an equally valid desire for it. We all share an equal appreciation for freedom and democracy, Mr Oppenheimer.

Funny…what’s that smell again?…could it be bigotry?

Quote:
But you know very well that what you promote is no better than those Muslims you hate and despise so much that are running your nation today.


Do I? Do I really, Mr Oppenheimer?

-Do I promote the brutal execution of a teenage girl for defending herself against rape?
-Do I promote the amputations of body parts?
-Do I promote gang rapes of virgin girls with an opposing political view, so that when I execute them their souls don’t go to heaven?
-Do I hold public hangings?
-Do I pour acid on uncovered faces and hair?
-Do I throw young mothers together with their infants in jail for not adhering to my religion?
-Do I shut down newspapers that dare criticize me, and throw their journalists in jail to rot?
-Do I oppress and torture religious and ethnic minorities?
-Do I call the army to besiege and shell indiscriminately a Kurdish minority city, killing the young and old until the morgue cannot handle the volume of the dead?
-Do I creed the age that a girl is ripe for sexual penetration to be 9?
-Do I half bury an adulteress and throw stones at her until she dies a slow, painful, humiliating death?
-Do I publicly flog teenage boys and girls for holding hands in public, and displaying their most humanistic nature?
-Do I recklessly devastate the economy to the point that millions escape to drug addiction out of desperation?
-Do I use the vast oil revenue to export Iran’s wealth in my own pocket, making myself, my family and collaborators overnight millionaires and billionaires?
-etc, etc, etc

Do I promote the same thing, Mr Oppenheimer? Do I really?

Or is this list also…obtuse?

Quote:
"I have chosen to contact you again to caution you all that I believe we have been, and continue to be, manipulated into action that will give rise to the largest mass religious manipulation of people in history. Let the world become aware of the manipulation, and watch as Islam takes a good look at itself. "


he…he…he…

Whatever your reason for re-contacting me, despite your vow not to do so, I welcome you with open arms. I welcome you back, as I would a prodigal son. Welcome home, son…

Furthermore, I thank you for your genuine concern in trying to “caution” me.

But I think you should direct that caution inwards, instead of outwards. If you feel you are being manipulated by a “religious manipulation,” by all means take steps to save yourself from it. I, however, am confident in not feeling any kind of “manipulation.” I am neither a subject to manipulation, nor a promoter of manipulation. I simply state my opinions, mixed with and based upon many facts. People are free to either accept my views and adopt them, or deem them garbage and move on. I will take no offense at the latter, and will simply carry on.

Quote:
"A revolution is fast opon us, not one from without, but from within, it is one of thoughts. Islam is going to change from this just as we going to be changed, in this let us minimize the finger pointing, in this I suggest we all remember why our feet point forward(to walk upright)and why our eyes are at the front of our heads(to not look backwards while walking). "


Revolutions are always upon mankind. That never changes, if you recall history. There is always something that needs to be changed. This is nothing unique nor spectacular.

If islam changes, great. It would then just be semantics, whether we call it islam anymore or refer to it by a new name, as it would be a new entity. For me to judge the “new, improved islam” it has to exist first. I will judge it based on its merits. For now, the only islam we know is the islam that exists. Sorry, buddy, but that islam is garbage.

Oh, oh!...I said the “G” word again…can you ever forgive me?

Perhaps apologies can also be...obtuse…he…he…he…

And since you like biology so much, I'll enlighten your knowledge of anatomy and physiology. Our feet don't point forward so that we may walk upright. They point forward so that they balance our gait and allow us to WALK FORWARDS. The evolutionary step that allowed us to WALK UPRIGHT was a change in the pelvic girdle, with the position of the femur switching to a position directly below the pelvis, thereby transmitting the weight of the body to an axis along the length of both femurs. Also, our eyes are not at the front of our head so that we may simply look forwards. Many creatures' eyes are more towards the side of their heads which gives them almost an equal view of forwards as backwards, even though their locomotion is distinctly forwards. The reason our eyes are distinctly at the front of our heads is because we are predators. Two eyes in the front of the head allow for the double vision of the same object from two different angles, leading to stereoscopic vision. This leads to an accurate judgement of distance, and better predation. Prey animals, on the other hand, have their eyes positioned somewhat to their sides. Stereoscopic vision is not important to them. A broader field of vision, which allows them to sooner spot predators is more important.

Since you entertain me so much, I feel compelled to repay the favor in any way I can. In this case, tutoring you in biology.

Quote:
The most recent quote above was in Feb. 2002, from letters written to my gov. , published by my gov. and well received by, and responded to by senior officials, Senators, a former Ambassador to Afghanistan, A few think-tanks, The Brit gov, The French gov, a former Secretary of State, The Nuclear tech review board, and of course a letter from Clinton thanking me for that book...all before you bothered to seek your roots.


clap…clap…clap…

That’s the sound of me clapping for you. Bravo!

Here I thought I was debating specific ideological points, and judging them based on their merits. I had no idea I was talking to an accomplished author, whose works some very important people have read. And a thank you letter from Clinton himself!...Wow! Dare I dream what that must be like? Please don’t tell me someone very important has also shaken your hand…I don’t think I could handle that!

Why didn’t you say so from the beginning? I would have conceded before our debate had ever started. You are very tricky, laying this bombshell on me at the end! You could have saved a lot of your “wasted time” by informing me of your magnanimity earlier, Mr Oppenheimer.

Knowing that, I guess I’ll have to go back to the drawing board and re-think my opinions and views on islam. Looks like I was wrong all along! Because, it makes no sense for me to be correct, if my opponent has received a thank you letter from president Clinton in the past. Congratulations to you, Mr Oppenheimer, for this final “check mate.”

Quote:
Now you cherry pick from the Quoran....


I’m not cherry picking from the Quran. I point out the founding principles of the Quran. I point to how the message of the Quran is an instrument to its own survival…the spread of islam, by force if necessary.

If a divine book such as the Quran is filled with hate, violence, rape, torture, murder, piracy, and terror, does that not make the whole thing evil and a sham? If its basic premise is conquest and the destruction or conversion of the infidel, mixed in with the occasional message of “brotherhood” among Moslems, does that not vilify the whole thing? Are we to accept evil, if it is mixed with occasional non-evil? Is that really cherry picking, Mr Oppenheimer?

Quote:
I see no difference in that obtuse..."narrow view" you expouse and their own diatribes that have caused you to think in kind, believing that so-called truth interpreted from a book written by man long ago in another age. And you may object, but since you say all you need to do is read the quoran, you have simply proved my statement.


Really? Was Mohammad simply another man according to Moslems? Is the Quran just a simple textbook, according to Moslems? Islam IS the Quran. Islam IS following the path of Mohammad, its creator. If one denies the Quran, or Mohammad in any way, one is denying islam itself. Just ask any Moslem, you seem to know many. Anyone who has denied the Quran or Mohammad is no longer a Moslem.

Quote:
Takes two to tango, and you're dancing with the mahdi


And here I thought I was dancing with you, my tango partner in debate. Unless…you think you are the mahdi…it’s good to see you come out of that well just to debate me on islam, your holiness.

Oops…sorry…obtuse again…

Quote:
So yes, in fact, I don't have time to play head games with you Amir...the sooner you get a grip and realize you arn't doing your people any favors by your rhetoric, the better.


Head games? Is that all I am to you? Here I thought we had something more special than that.

And again, I’m sorry you have “time constraints,” and my wish was never to waste your time. If you feel so, use your “free will” and stop responding to me…it’s that simple. But since you keep coming back for more, it is a reasonable deduction that you think your time talking to me must be…well spent. Unless of course, you have an addiction. In which case I can happily refer you to a center which can help.

Yet again I hope that the free world will forgive me for having tied down its champion in this fruitless debate. By all means, Mr Oppenheimer, resume your mission.

Quote:
I don't question whether I can make a difference as an individual, I already know I have, and that realization is humbling indeed, as a simple fact.


On a serious note, I don’t wish to belittle your claim to make a difference as an individual. We all make our own differences, to the best of our abilities. No matter how small, what’s most important is that we try. I think that everyone who either posts or simply visits a wonderful site as this is making an attempt to make a difference, each in his own way. And that is all any of us really want…to make a difference.
_________________
I am Dariush the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage

Naqshe Rostam
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oppenheimer



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 1166
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2006 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Goodby Amir, have a nice life, if you bothered to read the quote, I wasn't "choosing to contact you again"....I was addressing folks in government.

But I didn't want you to have any illusions about me, regardless of your insulting way of dealing with me on this subject. See, Blank tried much the same tactics you've used and got called on them...naturally you'd say he was correct in his response....as it suits your style.

If you spout negativity, you create negativity....try creating something positive, it's not nearly as easy.

lot's of folks think along your lines, and that is why the world is such a mess, and it's reaction on reaction, eye for an eye till we all go blind.

You don't need to coach me in biology, the quote wasn't a bilogical lesson , but a metaphor which you either failed to understand, or simply are using, twisting around it's intent to be not just obtuse, but insulting to the point that you have indeed become a total and complete waste of time.

Quote:
A war on the teachings and beliefs of islam…absolutely. A war on the idea of islam…definitely. A war on the people and nations that follow islam…profoundly NOT.


Quote:
Really? Was Mohammad simply another man according to Moslems? Is the Quran just a simple textbook, according to Moslems? Islam IS the Quran. Islam IS following the path of Mohammad, its creator. If one denies the Quran, or Mohammad in any way, one is denying islam itself. Just ask any Moslem, you seem to know many. Anyone who has denied the Quran or Mohammad is no longer a Moslem.



Ah, here you have stated where your "war" lies....yet if Islam is the quoran, and you are at war with the teachings and beliefs in the quoran, then you are in fact at war with Islam, and therefore dancing with the mahdi , giving those who promote holy war comfort, as I said.

the mullahs will have their day of justice no doubt, hanging from lamposts on the main street of tehran (if one taxi driver has his wish...)

My point was the average folks that are muslim will be at risk of folks of your mindset who would not discriminate between Islam and mulims and are at war with Islam...

On one hand you attempt to differentiate, and then you say there is inseparatability....

Quote:
If I am immature, why are you debating me? You might as well go debate a five year old.


It appears that I have been....oh well, even five year olds need an education.

We both wish to see a free and secular Iran Amir, we just have different methods of making that happen, but I for one haven't seen any effort on your part.

I keep telling you the same thing because until that point is driven home and parked in the garage of gray matter you have in your head, you won't be an effective contributor to positive change.

So please don't insult my efforts on your people's behalf....there was no courtesy in those remarks of yours, but again you base reasoning on false premis....

Quote:
If a Moslem preacher got up in front of a podium and spoke volumes about the virtues of islam, you would simply applaud him for exercising his “freedom of religion” and “freedom of free speech.” I would never take away his right to “preach.” Yet, if I did the same, but with the opposite viewpoint, you criticize me for being undemocratic and against freedom. I am only exercising my free speech and my freedom of religion, when I point to why I think the way I do.


See, freedom of speech carries with it responsibility....one is not free to preach hate...or insite violence. By caling Islam "garbage" you are no better in your words than the Imman who preaches that westen civilization is "garbage". The Immans who practice the things you listed (by Sharia law) are truly contemptable, but they cherry pick from the Quoran just as you do to justify their beliefs, so there is no real difference in the specific reference to "garbage"....

You put out negativity into the world, you promote negativity and receive it in return, this is part of creating your own reality. you of course are free to choose to do this, but any action has an equal and opposite reaction....thus was my sole and single point that my teaching you about was intended.

It took ten years after I met ( yeah I did shake hands ) Clinton for 9.11 to drive my point home about nuclear weapons being the gravest threat today....10 years Amir.,..
I hope it's not too late.

this is why i said get back to me in a decade....maybe then you will understand.

Seems I've been quoted on this a lot over the past few years....and now it's a given in people's understanding of the threats all people face.

I'm not asking you to concede your beliefs about Islam, you are free to believe what you wish, but there is a better argument to make other than the one of negativity you've chosen.

I have this tendancy to go directly to the source with an issue of concern, and I find it far better to offer solution with the complaint, because it gets people thinking about the solution, rather than simply dismissing the complaint.

This was part of an assesment and proposed solution sent to the American Muslim community, as well as my gov.

-----------------------------------

Pakistan clerics explain 'jihad'
By Aamer Ahmed Khan BBC News, Lahore

URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4711003.stm

(Excerpt)

Circumstances for jihad
Mufti Rafi Usmani heads Darul Uloom Karachi, one of Pakistan's most respected religious schools, or madrassas.
Jihad is not incumbent on all Muslims and a call for jihad can be given only under special circumstances Mufti Rafi Usmani
"Islam does not allow killing of innocent civilians and non-combatants under any circumstances," he said in an interview with the BBC News website.
Asked to explain the concept of jihad as expounded in mainstream Islamic thought, Mufti Usmani said it had been laid down in great detail precisely to avoid any confusion.
"To begin with, jihad is not incumbent on all Muslims and a call for jihad can be given only under special circumstances," he said.
Islamic scholars - or ulema - agree that injunctions explaining the circumstances for jihad and the people's conduct during jihad constitute the core principles of the doctrine.
According to three top scholars interviewed by the BBC News website, jihad can only be called in the following circumstances:
· If a Muslim community comes under attack, then jihad becomes an obligation for all Muslims, male and female, in that community
· If that particular community feels it cannot fight off attackers on its own, then jihad becomes incumbent on Muslims living in nearby communities
· If a Muslim ruler of a country calls for jihad, then it is incumbent upon the Muslims living under that ruler to join the jihad.
Jihad 'not obligatory'
Mufti Usmani says that even in such circumstances, jihad is obligatory only on as many Muslims as are required to defend the community under attack.
Mufti Akram Kashmiri: Rising tide of Muslim anger
"If Pakistan is attacked but its army is sufficient to deal with the threat, then Pakistani civilians are under no obligation to join jihad," he said.
The second principle relates to the conduct of the jihadis. Under no circumstances are Muslims allowed to attack women, children, the old and the meek, the sick, those that are praying and civilians, say these ulema.
Muslim militants argue that if innocent Muslims are killed in enemy action then Muslims are allowed to kill innocent people in retaliation.
But clerics strongly disagree with this line of thinking, arguing that Islam does not allow Muslims to respond to "a mistake" by another mistake.
"Islam is absolutely clear on this issue. Two wrongs do not make a right," Mufti Usmani said.
"If they feel that the US or the UK are killing innocent civilians in Iraq or Afghanistan, it does not give them the right to kill innocent citizens in London or New York," he said.
(End Excerpt)


When one examines this through the eyes of logic, there are a number of things that are revealed.


1. Terrorists, in their methodology have been killing innocent Muslims, In Iraq, London, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Indonesia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kashmir, USA, (9/11), Kenya, Lebanon, and a host of other nations in many attacks over the years.


2. These attacks against civilians…innocents, regardless of any so-called intended target or purpose, political or otherwise are in direct violation of the Islamic code of conduct of Jihad. (Defined above.)


3. These attacks have placed Muslim communities at risk, both directly and indirectly, taking innocent life, and causing political unrest within the religion of Islam.
4. The targeting of Mosques, the division attempted between Sunni and Shiite sects of Islam, as well as the direct threat to the teachings of Islam, also represent a threat to “the community” as a whole.

5.
· If a Muslim community comes under attack, then jihad becomes an obligation for all Muslims, male and female, in that community
· If that particular community feels it cannot fight off attackers on its own, then jihad becomes incumbent on Muslims living in nearby communities
· If a Muslim ruler of a country calls for jihad, then it is incumbent upon the Muslims living under that ruler to join the jihad.

6. The community is under attack. Jihad is an obligation.

7. It is self evident that all communities are being attacked, all peoples, all civilization. Jihad becomes incumbent on Muslims living in all communities.
8. Muslim rulers of Afghanistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, and many others have joined the “war on terrorism” the global jihad against terrorists which includes as it’s allies, and brothers in arms those nations that are not Muslim, but have significant Muslim populations within their sovereign boundaries.
9. These non-Muslim nations, recognizing the risk to all peoples in their lands, including Muslims, have called for solidarity in this fight from all Muslims of true heart and mind.
10. Let there be no ambiguity in this logic. Let their be no hiding place, no sanctuary given, no sponsor of terror, no terrorist left once this jihad is justly called for by all Muslims of true faith, and finished.

Perhaps it takes a Buddhist to place objective logic in its proper perspective, without bias toward Islam, or cultural tradition.

-------------

You asked once why muslims should listen to a Pakistani Imman rather than Mohammed.

The answer was so obvious that I didn't bother to respond...figured you would figure it out yourself.

But the fact is that that Pakistani Imman can offer feedback to someone with a question. Mohammed can't exactly discuss anything being dead, now can he?

So all he can teach, being dead, is the words written down by man in an age of war with the Israelites, and naturally those words would reflect the mood of those times and the practices of that culture.

The world today is different, just as cannibalism has gone the way of the past, so shall brutal practices that no longer serve the times.

You concede that Islam is capable of change...good, that's a start.

"You spout no words of peace, you promote no inclusiveness, nor co-existance, though you say you're all for that.... "

A simple observation....yet you jump to a very far-fetched conclusion..



Quote:
Yes, it’s easy to make such CLAIMS. But when asked to show the proof behind your claims, your arguments are very lacking. And however you re-hash the single baseless point you continue to make, the end result is the same. I (and I venture most of the audience here) remain unconvinced.

But by all means, continue your witch hunt.


You've provided the proof yourself for that observation Amir, therefore I don't need to. And I fail to see why you are so threatened by the points I make to you, that you'd call it a "witch hunt".

If it takes a hundred posts for you to undserstand the validity of a single point, then I might not be wasting my time dealing with your "five year old" mentality, childish insults and baseless insinuations.

And you have the gall to acuse me of using adjectives...LOL!

I ignored your so-called "apology" because is was incincere, a sham...just as your rationale is a sham in trying to disguise bigotry.

A rationale that in fact will only result in negativity being futher promoted in the world ...whereas the way I have chosen to address a coimplaint and offered solution above is not an "attack" on islam, but a perscription for the healing of Islam....yes, "thank you doctor" may have been very appropriate.....take two asperin and call me in a decade....(chuckle).

If you wish to continue being rude Amir, I have a solution for that too.

Here's another P.S. You couldn't possibly have spent enough time searching that data base in the time it took you to respond to my post.
I posted it as a resource for you....not to make a point really, but when one asks why the trend is toward Islamic terrorism, it is primarily because the underlying root causes of IRA terrorism (as just one example) have been pretty well resolved.

That's why there's such a push for democratic reform in the mideast today.

Time has proven me correct on more than one occasion, and I'm a very patient fellow ( even though I authored the "impatient patriot's" wish list for '006) ....patient enough to give you just one more chance to be an idiot, or finally come to a realization that if you are to be effective on behalf of a future free Iran, then you must never give the mullahs reason to point to you and scream "islamaphobe!"

There is a better way than the approch you are deluding yourself into thinking will work.

And a much better way of interacting with me if you choose it, for we are on the same team, with one common goal....a free Iran. Free from mullah's political control, free to worship in peace, and an Iran at peace with the world and itself....

Try dancing with the mahdi like this:

Quote:
To a very obvious pro-Ahmadinejad caller who stated that
the Islamic regime will exist till the apparition of the
Shias' Hidden Imam 12th, Pirouznia responded: " I invite
the Islamic regime to pull off its Occupation Forces from
the streets of Iranian cities and stop killing or
executing. Then you'll witness its downfall much much
sooner than the need of apparition of Mahdi - the Hidden
Imam - who's supposed to come fighting injustices."


http://www.voanews.com/mediaassets/persian/2006_01/Audio/ra/Biparva01Jan05.ra
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AmirN



Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Goodby Amir, have a nice life


You begin the post by saying goodbye to me, and then proceed to openly engage me in conversation. I know that “parting is such sweet sorrow,” but this is ridiculous. But it is ridiculous so much as it again entertains me, so again…a thank you is in order.

Quote:
lot's of folks think along your lines, and that is why the world is such a mess, and it's reaction on reaction, eye for an eye till we all go blind.


When did I ever push for the “eye for an eye” justice? Earth to Oppenheimer…are you still with us, Mr Oppenheimer?

Quote:
You don't need to coach me in biology, the quote wasn't a bilogical lesson , but a metaphor which you either failed to understand, or simply are using, twisting around it's intent to be not just obtuse, but insulting to the point that you have indeed become a total and complete waste of time.


he…he…he… I know you don’t NEED a lesson in biology. I just thought you might enjoy one. Like I said, I was merely trying to repay you for your entertainment efforts in any way I could. It seemed you might appreciate free tutoring in biology, even though you may not really NEED it.

I guess that as a tutor, you also find me…obtuse…he…he…he…

Quote:
Ah, here you have stated where your "war" lies....yet if Islam is the quoran, and you are at war with the teachings and beliefs in the quoran, then you are in fact at war with Islam,


he…he…he…Why do you sound like you just had an epiphany? You have a true talent for stating the obvious. I clearly said in my post:

Quote:
A war on the teachings and beliefs of islam…absolutely. A war on the idea of islam…definitely. A war on the people and nations that follow islam…profoundly NOT.


That sounds very self explanatory. Why do you feel like you just had an epiphany? I state clearly what it is that I oppose.

I know I recommended meditation to you, but maybe in this case you have over-meditated. My dear fellow, you seem to meditate too much when you shouldn’t and not enough when you should.

Quote:
My point was the average folks that are muslim will be at risk of folks of your mindset who would not discriminate between Islam and mulims and are at war with Islam...


You sound like a broken record. Keep on insisting that I don’t differentiate between the idea of islam and the people who are Moslems. I’ve already explained myself adequately.

Is this the only point you can keep making? I already answered you on it. So what else you got? Anything?...

Quote:
We both wish to see a free and secular Iran Amir, we just have different methods of making that happen, but I for one haven't seen any effort on your part.


We all have our own paths, and our own methods. In that way, we all make our own efforts. But you fail to recognize any path other than your own as legitimate. I for one do not criticize others in this forum for not making an effort simply because their efforts are not following the same road as mine. But I think that’s because some of us are more open-minded than others.

Quote:
I keep telling you the same thing because until that point is driven home and parked in the garage of gray matter you have in your head, you won't be an effective contributor to positive change.


Or, perhaps you keep saying the same thing because you have no other point to make. But I don’t see why you are so attached to this single point. No other point you make could possibly be any more a “hallucination.” If you insist on being incorrect, at least throw in some variety in there for…entertainment…he…he…he…

Quote:
By caling Islam "garbage" you are no better in your words than the Imman who preaches that westen civilization is "garbage".


Calling a certain “civilization” garbage is perhaps too broad. But if someone picked out a certain specific ideology or belief from western civilization and called it garbage, I would be at least curious to what he has to say, and why. If he specifically picked a certain religion (say Christianity), I would ask why. If he picked a certain specific form of government, I would ask why. If he picked out a cult, I would ask why. He may or may not have good reason. If he does, I’ll continue to listen, and perhaps agree. If he does not, I’ll move on.

For your information, I never said “eastern civilization” is garbage. I specified…islam.

What do you think…less obtuse?

Quote:
You put out negativity into the world, you promote negativity and receive it in return


Opposing that which is evil…is that “putting out negativity?” If opposing evil is negative, call me negative all you want.

By contrast, according to your reasoning, supporting evil is a “positive act.” By supporting islam, one is supporting evil. Thus, according to you, he is putting out positivism into the world. I hope you enjoy this positive force you are helping unleash upon the world. Never mind its nature. Sleep better at night, thinking you have done a “positive” act.

Quote:
but any action has an equal and opposite reaction....


Thank you…Sir Isaac Newton.

By the way, this is not an invitation for a “physics” tutorial, is it? If it is, don’t be shy, just ask…he…he…he…

Quote:
It took ten years after I met ( yeah I did shake hands ) Clinton for 9.11 to drive my point home about nuclear weapons being the gravest threat today....10 years Amir.,..
I hope it's not too late.


I begged you not to rub that in my face…I told you I wouldn’t be able to handle it, knowing you shook hands with Clinton…You had to shatter my world…he…he…he…

It took you TEN years to convince your audience that nuclear weapons are a grave threat?...I don’t even want to know how long it took you to figure that out yourself, before spending ten years trying to convince others!

Any teenager already knows that!

Seems you not only have a talent for stating the obvious, but a recurrent desire for it.

Quote:
this is why i said get back to me in a decade....maybe then you will understand.


OK, I’ll look you up again in ten years. But promise me I won’t have to wait in line just to talk to you. Because maybe by another decade you’ll have shook hands with Bush, and you’ll be even more famous…known as “the man who shook the hand of two presidents.” Promise me you’ll make time for me…he...he…he…

Quote:
I'm not asking you to concede your beliefs about Islam, you are free to believe what you wish, but there is a better argument to make other than the one of negativity you've chosen.


Again, please refer to my paragraph above, which addresses “negative” and “positive” thoughts.

As usual, meditation is highly recommended. Consider…lighting a candle this time.

Quote:
You asked once why muslims should listen to a Pakistani Imman rather than Mohammed.

The answer was so obvious that I didn't bother to respond...figured you would figure it out yourself.

But the fact is that that Pakistani Imman can offer feedback to someone with a question. Mohammed can't exactly discuss anything being dead, now can he?


Mozart may be dead, but his compositions exist for all to see. They can be played in their entirety, note for note. Newton is dead, yet F=ma exists, and is quite clear. Einstein is dead, but his theory of relativity, as well as E=mc2 are as undeniable as ever. Cyrus the Great is gone, yet his cylinder is testimony to his ideals and recommendations.

If you wish to erase some of the notes in Mozart’s composition and replace them with your own, go right ahead. If you want to now call it “Oppenheimer’s” composition, go right ahead. But don’t mock us by calling it the “Magic Flute,” for no one will acknowledge it as such. And don’t use Mozart’s lack of a pulse as an excuse to swindle us, for we will not be swindled.

If you think these examples are still…obtuse, I have plenty more.

Quote:
And I fail to see why you are so threatened by the points I make to you, that you'd call it a "witch hunt".


Threatened? I wouldn’t call it that. I’d call it…amused. Why do I call what you do a witch hunt? Because, dear friend, you walk around with a huge chip on your shoulder regarding what you call “bigotry.” You are so preoccupied and obsessed with it that you are ready to fire in the dark even before you know what you are shooting at. Shoot first, ask questions later, like a cowboy. You refuse to recognize that at least half the time you are shooting at a “friendly.”

My honest advice to you is to find a balance in your mind regarding this issue which obviously has given you some demons. Bigotry is not acceptable, my friend. But attacking anyone and everyone because you THINK they are harboring bigotry is detrimental as well. You are so obsessed with it that you “follow your nose” instead of your reason and mind.

You have become consumed with this obsession. Always looking for the next bigot…”Could he be at the door?”….knock…knock…”Could he be the person who is calling me on the phone?”....ring…ring…”Could he be the person down the street?”….”Could he be the next person who places a post in this forum?”….Bigots….bigots….bigots…..everywhere….

What’s ironic is that in your “quest” to rid this world of bigots, you have a preconceived notion of “tell-tail” signs of a bigot. And you are ready to jump on anyone who you THINK even faintly exhibits any of those tell-tail signs. In doing so, you have become that which you despise most…a bigot. It’s sad, really.


Deny this if you wish, but it is my honest observation. Find that balance, my friend, find that balance. And I say this with all sincerity.

Quote:
.....take two asperin and call me in a decade....(chuckle).


There you go…there’s that chuckle I’ve missed so much…glad to see it’s still there!

I have been only teasing you a bit because I want you to relax a little. Drop your frustrations and anger, and take a deep breath. I wouldn’t want you to suffer a myocardial infarction on my account. Life is too short, my friend.

Quote:
If you wish to continue being rude Amir, I have a solution for that too.


Now, now, Openheimer…what did I tell you about making threats? Whenever you feel like making a threat, just take deep breath…and count to ten. I promise you, by then you’ll want to give me a hug instead…he…he…he…

Quote:
Here's another P.S. You couldn't possibly have spent enough time searching that data base in the time it took you to respond to my post.


My dearest Oppenheimer. Did you not grasp anything from the examples I gave you regarding the processing and understanding of information not being the function of time? Do you honestly think it takes everyone the same amount of time to navigate and understand certain information as long as it takes you?

I certainly don’t consider myself a genius in relation to the general population. However, when two individuals are contrasted, genius becomes….a relative term.

Quote:
See, Blank tried much the same tactics you've used and got called on them...naturally you'd say he was correct in his response....as it suits your style.


You keep on bringing up BLANK. You took the same attitude with him, and he simply ignored you. Perhaps that is the fate that awaits you with me as well, but not just yet. I even noticed you tried to re-contact him, to no avail. Perhaps some day he may choose to forgive you and resume a conversation with you. Or perhaps not. I cannot guess, since the only one who knows that is blank himself. Perhaps you keep referring back to blank because you have regrets at the way things turned out between you and him. Or perhaps you keep doing it to gloat…”look at the lesson I taught him.” If it’s the latter, you would be ill advised. Because there is nothing to gloat about.

There comes a time, Mr Oppenheimer, when you must objectively look at yourself. The fact that you keep having so many unfriendly exchanges here in this forum with different people. Is it that you are always correct, and everyone else is a bigot? Or does the problem lie closer to yourself?

This is something that requires truly deep meditation on your part, probably in front of a mirror.

Quote:
And a much better way of interacting with me if you choose it, for we are on the same team, with one common goal....a free Iran. Free from mullah's political control, free to worship in peace, and an Iran at peace with the world and itself....


Now that is the only sensible thing I heard you say since our debate started.

I cannot help but agree with you entirely in regards to this last statement. Really, this is what I have wished all along, even though we are bickering here, you and I.

I now place the ball in your court. You can either continue your inflammatory stance with me, and I will return it with jest and ridicule; or, you can resume our relationship and conversation as it once was, based on courtesy, and devoid of threats and mockery, and leave the “audience” to be the judge of this debate.

The choice is yours. All I can do is offer my hand.
_________________
I am Dariush the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage

Naqshe Rostam
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oppenheimer



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 1166
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico

PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
But realize that whether you know this or not, sometimes you tend to deviate into slinging mud at your opponents. If you continue down that path, it is a path I cannot follow, and I will reluctantly be forced to cease my discussions with you.


then you say....

Quote:
I now place the ball in your court. You can either continue your inflammatory stance with me, and I will return it with jest and ridicule; or, you can resume our relationship and conversation as it once was, based on courtesy, and devoid of threats and mockery, and leave the “audience” to be the judge of this debate.



There's a difference between slinging mud as you have been doing, and holding up a mirror to you to allow you to take a look at the inconsistacies of your arguments. In fact it has been many times I've held up that mirror to folks and they have reacted as badly as you have....not my problem....they either get it or not.

I made you a promise Amir, not a threat, yet you would deliberately edit my quote to suggest to those who'd not seen the original that that was what I was doing....more intellectual dishonesty as far as I'm concerned.

Quote:
Threatened? I wouldn’t call it that. I’d call it…amused. Why do I call what you do a witch hunt? Because, dear friend, you walk around with a huge chip on your shoulder regarding what you call “bigotry.” You are so preoccupied and obsessed with it that you are ready to fire in the dark even before you know what you are shooting at. Shoot first, ask questions later, like a cowboy. You refuse to recognize that at least half the time you are shooting at a “friendly.”


HA< HA HA HA LOL! More assumtion and inconsistancies....as I said you seem to be guilty of what you acuse others of, you think you have the corner on correctness? You are quite consistant Amir....predictable in fact....and now you have devolved into personal attacks....see, I teased you about a position you took on history, implored you to think long and hard about the shotgun approach you take in relation to Islam, where you need to use a sniper rifle and be target specific in order not to hurt those friendly Muslims that are in fact allied in the war on terrorism with free nations against those that have hijacked their religion.

Among other valid reasons why is the fact that it makes you out to seem like a bigot....see, it maters not how you interpret the words you write, it matters most how they are recieved and interpreted.

So you say I have a lot of problems with people....not at all in fact...none with Blank either. Blank's honest enough to say what he thinks if he has a problem with someone, and if he had one with me, I'm sure he's gotten over it.

You may not be a bigot...and I never intentionally placed you personally in that catagory, but when you use a shotgun to attach a society, a civilization....or a large number of people who believe in a certain way of life and belief system...then those words used as that shotgun can be said to be biggoted for they attack the innocent as well as the guilty.

And so you fire in the dark at Islam, hoping to hit some random target that may just agree with you, have an epiphany, and become non-muslim as a result. Lol! You are simply fooling yourself Amir, and in all of this I find it quite sad....you could be a pretty good writer, a strong force for positive change and an asset to the opposition community if you chose to channel the obsession you have with Islam, into fighting the SOB's that have as individuals, ruined your nation....Islam didn't ruin it, it had existed in Iran for a long time before the mullahs twisted its intent and purpose and then used that to come to power.

Insted now you seem to be obsessed with targeting me personally because I have been holding up a mirror to you.

As it happens, you say you now offer me your hand. All I have seen of it is the back side....and you wish to be my tutor? LOL! this is what I meant by you choosing to be an idiot or not.

Ok I'll ask the question for once....how many cheeks do I have to turn?

I have none left Amir, and I am simply resonding to let you know the promise has been kept.

My work with the opposition is succesfully complete a well. In being asked by members of the opposition to become a "bridge between cultures". I have honored the request, done all that I can at this point in time to help establish a dialogue between a cross-section of the opposition and my government, along with other free nations concerned and supportive of the Iranian people's legitimate aspirations for liberty.

Part of that work was to offer contribution of ideas, ghost writing, and addressing incorrect assumptions about US intent among the opposition...You may review my posts over time here to see this for yourself, or at least a part of the story...I don't go public with everything I do, for obvious reasons.
Those among the opposition that needed a mirror held up to the incorrectness of their stance, if it failed to serve a constructive purpose, and held progress back, got a mirror held up to them....I make no apology for that, nor should I to you.

The friends I have among the opposition have proven themselves worthy of being called friend, or they have gone by the wayside having proved otherwise.

It is you that are targeting a "friendly" and again, you are guilty of what you acuse me of....way to go Amir! Proving yourself by your words, a complete and total hypocrite on that point.

As I said I have no time to play head games with you...there's much I need to do in my personal life after having put much of it on hold over this past year or two on behalf of folks that have had no voice in the matter....well now that I've helped deliver the message of the Iranian opposition, and the international community has heard it loud and clear.., taking it to heart and discussing "next steps",.. I too am considering next steps, and there's a lot of research and prep work to make that as succesful as this last year was.

Cyrus talks of an "inflection point", I suggest you review it, because we are there right now on the world stage.

The quiet diplomacy between the US and EU in support of the Iranian people is ongoing, and you will see the results of mine and other's efforts in this regard soon....very soon.

Back in Nov. 1991 when I met Clinton, (and I've done a lot of searching through public record), there was only one State Dept paper that even came close to refering to terrorists getting their hands on nuclear weapons....and it was in reference to loose nuclear material in the former Soviet Union possibly getting into terrorist hands, 6 months prior to that meeting.

Today of course any teenager can make that conclusion that it is the gravest threat we face today....but back in 91 it wasn't generally accepted as the biggest threat the US faced...or the world faced for that matter.

Why did I grok that then? intuition, logic, and my family's personal and extensive involvement in the Manhattan Project...My granddad was the division head of the Chemical and Metalurgical division under Oppenhiemer.

Suprised? Don't be, If you'd have reviewed my posts to date you would have already known that...as well, there should have been no suprise on your part at all about any aspect of my writings, or contacts.

I have a personal stake in seeing that Iran is free, secular , and no longer a threat to world peace. I think that threat more than justifies my solid support for the Iranian people. But it extends to supporting human rights and fighting terrorism as well on every level Amir....you call that a chip on my shoulder?

Fine,

So go right ahead and make fun of that Amir, I think folks will see you in a way you may certainly regret because of it.

So which side of your hand are you holding forth? I won't take it until I see proof, and know for a fact your apology is sincere.

I'm going to leave you with this example of what I referenced above, as the original topic was about Israel, just for (chuckles).


----- Original Message -----
From: (oppenheimer)
To: israel-un@newyork.mfa.gov.il
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 10:34 AM
Subject: Re: "In Larger Freedom" a public letter by the Iranian opposition


To: Ambassador Dan Gillerman Permanent Representative

Dear Mr. Ambassador,

Shalom,

Comes now this US citizen humbly requesting you keep these two things in mind about me personally as you read further.

1. My grandfather was division head of the center for chemical and metallurgical research LANL, under Oppenheimer at the time of the Manhattan project.
2. I have been considering issues surrounding nuclear weapons all my adult life. On the flyleaf of my grandmother's book about Los Alamos that I gave to Bill Clinton the day he was first elected President I wrote, "This is a slice of times past, to give perspective on the present, so that in the future we can eliminate the threat of nuclear war. The greatest threat we face today is that terrorists will obtain nuclear weapons." Not to be partisan, this is just fact.
3. I firmly stand beside those standing up for their liberty, and with those who support those aspirations and inalienable rights to live in dignity and freedom, globally.

It took America just 3.5 years, from 1942-45 to build an industry from scratch, based on designs from scratch, building a city from scratch to build a bomb from scratch, with only theories to go on, in the middle of the largest and most costly war in history. Yet we did this and ended that war that had cost 50 million lives up to that point with the weapon that no one knew would even work at the time it was being produced. Just 3.5 years, from theory to reality (3.5 years from the time FDR read a letter signed by Einstein till the Trinity test).

Everyone who worked on the first bomb, being as uncivilized a weapon as it is, believed it would cause mankind to forever choose peace instead of war after it ended WW2. Unfortunately, that direction was not taken, at the expense of the environment, and to the continued threat to all life on this planet.

I stress here the biggest "what if?" is what we might have accomplished as the Human species had we chosen to live in peace, instead of fear after WW2.

Truly the abysmal statements of the unelected president of the Islamic Republic of Iran, do not reflect the majority, as the majority of Iranian people view this terrorist regime as a threat to themselves, and to their children's future. A regime that rules them by fear only.

In the enclosed public letter to US Ambassador John Bolton, you will find ideas and solutions put forth by the Iranian democratic opposition, and a bit of Persian history that is deeply rooted in Jewish history as well. It is my thinking that this historical connection may be also of importance to Israel should her policies reflect the prayers of suggestion contained in this letter. As from a historical standpoint, supporting the Iranian people's aspirations for liberty through Israeli policy, may be publicly welcomed by the people of Iran as "repayment" of a very old and ancient debt of freedom, in kind.


I hope this personal perspective may aid you (as I believe it has my government) in understanding and assessing the grave and urgent issues surrounding the activities of the IRI, and their intent at this time, and solutions.

There are those affected who have no voice in the matter, and so in solidarity I offer the following public letter in the same spirit of common cause. Thank you for reviewing it.

Sincerely, and with Best Regards,

(Oppenheimer - personal info edited for posting)


Note: SMCCDI's website is down at the moment, but the contact info included is still good.
http://www.daneshjoo.org/article/publish/article_3326.shtml

The "Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy
in Iran" (SMCCDI)
_____________________


September 7, 2005

The Honorable John Bolton,
United States Ambassador to the UN
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Via Federal Express & Fax (202) 647-0244


Dear Mr. Ambassador,

On behalf of the membership of the "Student Movement
Coordination Committee for Democracy in Iran" (SMCCDI), and
the people of Iran who have striven so long for freedom of
speech, worship, assembly, a free press, civil liberties,
woman's rights, the application of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, and the rule of law; We
congratulate you on your nomination as America's Ambassador
to the UN.

Comes now this Iranian opposition group, to apprise you of
the facts, the conclusions and suggestions we have been
given to put forward herein this letter, as context to the
2005 UN Summit, and the pending address to the UN of the
Islamic Republic regime's appointed president, Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, with the gravest concern for the welfare and
common good of all people, and generations to come...


"In Larger Freedom"

The body of evidence compiled over the long history of
the Islamic Republic's systemic methodology of torture,
political repression and murder of journalists and
dissidents; crimes against humanity including the past and
current crackdown on ethnic and religious minorities, and
"troublemakers" (i.e.: political dissidents of the regime);
applying a Gender Apartheid policy and sexual
discrimination against women; sponsoring and officially
engaging in terrorism (internally and externally), by its
leadership and proxy; suppression of the press, closing of
TV and newspapers as well as confiscation of satellite
dishes, the arrest of "bloggers" and the shutting down of
internet sites, arbitrary arrest and lack of "due process";
the denial of requested information to the UN Commission on
Human Rights (and its sub committees), the denial of access
and information to the IAEA, false declaration to various
UN committee; The failure to uphold the tenants of the UN
Charter signed by Iran in 1948 (in multiple aspects,
consistently and premeditative, and the long history of
denial, subterfuge, bribery, and false public statements on
the record in the UN we believe must be addressed in
totality, before the Security Council, along with other
issues and recommendations brought before the council
regarding this regime, to obtain a holistic solution to a
common threat.

We understand that the UN Commission on Human Rights
mandate covers only one aspect of the larger picture that
must be addressed, and while the "1503 procedure" states, "
No communication will be admitted if it runs counter to the
principles of the Charter of the United Nations or appears
to be politically motivated." and further states, "As a
rule, communications containing abusive language or
insulting remarks about the State against which the
complaint is directed will not be considered."

We believe it is essential that you and the Commission
understand that SMCCDI's intent is not "politically
motivated" in seeking greater freedom for Iran's people,
nor does any member aspire to become a representative of
any new political structure that may exist in a future free
Iran. It is important for us that you and the UN understand
the nature and precepts of SMCCDI as well as the long road
that has brought the opposition in general to the
conclusions and suggestions expressed herein.

While the 1503 procedure states that no "insulting
language" be used, the truth is different from opinion, and
evil is as evil does. Therefore, while the Islamic regime
will no doubt claim insult and injury to its reputation,
one must in all honesty; call it like one sees it being
manifest in action. Using logic over emotionalism, truth
over viewpoint, and ethics over all.

This is one of the reasons we welcome your tenure as UN
Ambassador, as you have the reputation of manifesting
tangible results, whether it be on UN reform, proliferation
of WMD, or state sponsors of terrorism. We wish to inform
you as a courtesy that a copy of this letter will be hand
delivered to the door of the UN, on September 14th, for
your kind inspection, while thousands of freedom loving
Iranians outside the UN protesting this regime cheer you on
as well as cheering on other free nations' representatives
as measures are taken to address the theocratic regime's
abysmal activities before the UN general assembly.

As you may face the incarnation of boycott and the
regime's answer to the aspirations of the Iranian people's
desire to self determination in the form of an evil man who
has come to power illegitimately; who comes to usurp the
chair of membership in the UN which is by right the chair
belonging to the Iranian people; Usurped by an unpopular
regime that has never held credence to the premise of the
UN charter, or the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in
word or deed; we urge you, and all free nation's
representatives to address this issue of , and consider
wisely the matter of the regime's membership, as a matter
of UN reform.


Sir,

Our opposition movement (SMCCDI) is bound by a charter
formed on principals such as; Human Rights, Democracy,
separation of church and states, and free markets. We
believe these principals represent the most fair and
efficient means for humanity to realize its potential.

Ultimately, no repressive, intolerant regime can withstand
the spread of these ideals.
The Islamic Republic regime currently in power in Iran or
any Islamic variances that may exist there in the future
are no exception. By staying true to these values our
people's triumph is absolutely, positively, and undeniably
inevitable.

It is these precepts voiced by Secretary General Kofi
Annan; "Today, our challenge -- as it was for the founders
of the United Nations -- is to pass on to our children a
brighter legacy than that bequeathed to us. We must build
a future as envisioned in the UN Charter -- a future in
larger freedom"; that the Iranian opposition, and the
democracy movement in Iran is based upon, referencing the
Universal Declaration on Human Rights, so often among the
various opposition groups over these past years.

The horror of this evil regime's hypocrisy, and methodical
atrocities can only be likened to a daily Auschwitz for the
stain it brings on the honor of those who appease and
support and lengthen the life span of this barbaric and
tyrannical regime through silence, economic incentive,
"engagement" and illusion. Blind or not as they may be of
what is taking place in our country, or the intent of the
regime in many aspects that threaten the security of the
international community.
Nor can the international community, or any member of any
government that holds in their heart the values of freedom
continue to turn their back on these long standing issues,
and still call themselves human. Or allow this regime,
along with other human rights abusers to block necessary UN
reform of the human rights commission, or the draft
measures in reference on "responsibility to protect".

As a "test case" for UN reform, the Islamic Republic
regime qualifies in every conceivable way.

It is our hope placed in trust that you (as have the US
President and his Secretary of State and many members of US
Congress in the past) will illuminate the plight of our
people that have struggled to shrug off the oppressors and
theocratic chains which have bound the Iranian people for
so long. Chains which have silenced the voice of the people
in utterance, and stilled them with overwhelming force.
Chains denying the Iranian people a better future for our
children, and our children's children for over a generation
in this process

Speaking in regard to "International Woman's Day, March 8,
2005" the US Secretary of State said, "Freedom, the
protection of fundamental human rights, economic
opportunity and prosperity, equality and the rule of
law...these are all elements of the democratic process.
Women are integral to the process of building responsible
governments and democratic institutions. Women's
participation and empowerment at all levels of society will
be key to moving these new democracies forward."

It is the women, who represent a large part of the
opposition and will make a major contribution through their
degree of knowledge and political and civil maturity to the
democratic and peaceful revolution we seek to manifest, as
well as to a future democratic Iran. We cannot carry such
baggage or the individuals who continue to deny women their
place in society in this process of regaining our freedom
and their equality in the process.


Mr. Ambassador,

When one considers the IRI in totality, the abysmal human
rights record, its long-standing support for terrorism,
it's WMD programs in violation of signed agreements; logic
dictates that with or without referral by the IAEA, this
ideological and unelected regime should not just be
sanctioned, but booted out of the UN altogether for gross
violation of the UN charter, which the Iran Nation is a
signatory to, believing it to be criminally negligent for
any nation to support the continuance and aspirations of
the Islamic Republic system one day longer, and remaining
"seized of the matter." As Churchill put it, "Given the
choice between war and dishonor, Chamberlain chose dishonor
and got war."

To this point, the only leader of free nations who's had
that alternate vision of an Iran existing within the
community of nations..."in larger freedom", and had the
guts to voice the option is President George W. Bush...."..
and to the Iranian people I say tonight, as you stand for
your own liberty, America stands with you." The man
presented possibilities to people in so doing, as a
president will on occasion.

Those words of hope to our people must now be joined in
chorus among all free nations, standing in solidarity with
the tenets and premise of "in larger freedom". The freedom
from fear, from want, the hope to raise our children in
dignity and in religious freedom in a nation that is truly
secular and representative of the people's will.

We shall see if the UN honors the precepts of its founding
Charter, whether the EU, Russia, China and India will
continue to trade and negotiate with a tyrannical and
terrorist regime, and whether the UN membership comes
together in solidarity of it's founding principals to honor
the words of President Bush to the Iranian people.

If the UN cannot see fit to honor the tenets of its
founding by enforcing its Charter on members signatory to
it, we in the Iranian opposition will briefly bow our heads
in shame being witness to this, but only briefly as time is
short, and our heads will rise looking only forward, as our
feet continue to trod the path of freedom in process,
whether the international community supports us or not. But
whether this popular movement is successful, or crushed,
depends now upon free nation's support for the aspirations
of Iranian liberty.

It is self-evident that the international community cannot
live with terrorists, nor terrorist regimes in its midst.
There is but one solution to common security in larger
freedom.

To prevent war and/or civil war, the Islamic regime must
be disavowed by the UN as not legitimately representative
of the People of Iran, and held accountable for its
activities.
Nor can its newly unelected leader, self confessed to
having fired coup de grace bullets into political prisoners
after being tortured; under investigation for hostage
taking and other murders outside of the territory of Iran;
claim any "diplomatic immunity", nor be afforded any claim
by the regime under the rules of UN membership, nor be
granted same by the UN, or host nation, if the
investigation warrants prosecution.

We ask very simply that America, and every democratic
member nation of the United Nations, and their
representatives and leaders stand united with the Iranian
people now. Not as diplomats or representatives neither of
nations, nor even as members of the UN per se, but simply
as Humans. For this, and the hope of liberty and justice is
what binds all people, and the UN together in unity, under
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the premise
of the UN Charter.

Indeed, the Islamic Republic regime is engaged in terror,
torture and atrocity on a daily basis, and this
illegitimate regime dares to call itself Democratic, an
advocate of human rights, and protector of the oppressed
throughout the region. A cruel joke added onto the injury
to our nation's pride and heritage, as reportedly the
regime via a dam, will submerge the founder of Persia,
Cyrus the Great's tomb and the archeological sites of
Pasargad and Persepolice under water.
The only way our people can regain our honor, civil
liberties and the trust of the world for a WMD-free Iran
that seeks to provide a safer future for the world and
adheres to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is by
providing us, the people of Iran, the support for our
legitimate aspirations of liberty necessary to restore hope
to the land that Cyrus the Great brought Democracy to over
2500 years ago.

Those ancient precepts regarding freedom of worship,
individual right to own property, freedom from slavery,
representative government in a democratic "federalist"
government that respected the states rights to determine
local laws so long as they were consistent with the
inherent rights of the people, respecting territorial
integrity in the process, have proven themselves over time
and among many cultures. The UN has a replica of this vital
document on display in the entrance lobby. It is as if to
us, the regime intends to submerge the very tenets that
civilization was founded upon, honored and recognized in
the UN, on display. This is not just Persia's heritage
that is at stake, but mankind's, and we hope that a
resolution will be tabled and mandated to protect and
preserve this historical legacy for future generations.


Sir,

With the firm unanimous voice of the UN, and the pressure
that may be applied "in greater freedom" The UN may honor
the precepts of its founding principals, and reform itself
into an effective, cohesive, transparent instrument for the
common good of all men and women. But if not starting with
the "test case" the regime poses, where will, and when
will, UN reform becomes manifest in action and intent, "
being seized of the matter"? All reform must have some
gage or measure to assess its merit; we propose this as a
means to that end.

1. Implementation of full international economic and
military sanctions on the Islamic Republic regime via UN
Security Council resolution based on human rights, support
for terrorism, and this to be tabled with or without IAEA
board recommendation on the nuclear threat the theocracy
poses. These two issues alone should be viewed as
circumstance the world cannot turn it's back upon, at risk
of civilization itself.

Such measures should include coordination with oil
producing nations to ensure stable world supply while
sanction persists, as well as the halting of any and all
arms transfers to the Islamic Republic regime via the
Proliferation Security Initiative.

2. Full diplomatic sanction and closing of Islamic
republic's embassies worldwide, removal and deportation of
regime representatives, their agents and spies from all
nations.
Diplomatic sanction by the UN, revocation of UN membership
and removal of representation from this international forum
till such time as a legitimate interim government can be
established in Iran.

Note: We ask that concerns regarding lack of consular
functions as a result of this action be cooperatively
addressed, so as to continue to allow emergency visas to be
issued. (i.e. family emergencies, etc.) It may be possible
to retain the minimum consular functions, under tight
supervision, but they are well known in their recruiting
of, and issuing visa to potential martyrs and terrorists.

3. Freezing of any and all financial assets of the Islamic
Republic system, current and former leadership, and
corporate interests worldwide, till such time as a new
interim government can be established.

As well as allocation of portions of these assets now to
legitimate non-violent opposition groups inside and outside
Iran, to provide the tangible support needed while civil
disobedience becomes manifest in action. Only in this way
can this action be self-sustaining till it succeeds. Poland
couldn't have become free without support, nor can we, as
this is much to expect of a people under the boot of
repression for over a generation.

4. Repeated statements by world leaders publicly calling
for the leadership of the Islamic Republic regime to step
down peacefully, and to relinquish the government to the
hands and will of the Iranian people, and a UN monitored
"direct" referendum to choose a legitimate, representative,
secular government structure.

5. The coordinated post-regime rebuilding of vital social
institutions and infrastructure of democracy should be
implemented now in preparation, along with he training of
judges, civil servants, police, etc. The Iranian exile
community can provide some of the talent initially, and
there are many more inside Iran supporting the opposition
who will answer the call to service as the situation
permits. This will speed up the post-regime stabilization
process, and greatly enhance institutional development in
the interim government, and constitutional process.

In addition, while SMCCDI does not speak for other groups
in the opposition, we believe it is vital for our efforts
to become coordinated in the formation of a working group
among leaders of opposition groups, in conjunction with
free nation's representatives to help facilitate and
coordinate all of the above measures in a roundtable "Forum
for the Future" of Iran.

The coordination of economic and military sanction,
freezing of assets, closing of embassies, banishment from
the UN General Assembly and other UN related institutions,
such as UNESCO, and other non-violent measures as may be
found worthy under international law will be overwhelming
to the Islamic Republic of Iran, providing solid legitimate
purpose and support among the people of Iran to effect
change from within.


Mr. Ambassador,

We have striven in our legitimate aspirations for liberty
for over two decades, and often frustrated as the pace of
those aspirations seem to be like that of traveling on the
back of a snail. The vast majority has therefore concluded
that any real democratic reform though legitimate election
or national referendum on the people's choice for a secular
political structure in Iran cannot be possible so long as
this evil ideological regime continues in power. Nor can
the international community relegate terrorism to the
dustbin of history while this regime remains in power.

While our aspirations include taking our future into our
own hands, we are convinced after this long in a most
pragmatic way, that those aspirations cannot be obtained in
isolation or silence, we need the entire international
community firmly by our people's side in word and deed if
the agenda the US president has laid out for global freedom
is to become manifest in Iran.

This noble endeavor in common cause does not require
military intervention, nor do we ask for, or seek this in
any form. The method of civil disobedience has a long
history of painful success throughout history, and with
international support will serve to liberate our people
from tyranny and the world from the blind ambitions of the
theocratic regime in a rather short period of time, if they
are implemented in full now, and in a coordinated and
simultaneous manner.

We in the opposition movement see the strong two-faced
diplomacy the Islamic Republic regime is engaged in, that
has not only caused nations to appease the regime with
offers of economic incentive, but that has caused others to
support their blind ambitions, through various means,
including silence and abstention of action on Human Rights
within the various mechanisms of the UN, sale and smuggling
of arms and WMD technology, and economic trade.

We see the effects of this diplomacy and blatant
propaganda on some members of the US Congress, various
governments and international think tanks, as well as the
IAEA. We see the confusion in policy that has been proposed
by former members of various governments, as well the many
cases in which the UN Commission on Human Rights failed in
the past to be unanimous in their condemnation of the
Islamic Republic regime's human rights record and we
strongly urge you and other free nations' representatives
to address their perceptions in this most grave and
dangerous illusion of providing "political benefit of the
doubt" that some members have apparently been following, as
soon as possible.

We, the membership of the Iranian opposition, among all
the various groups have no doubt of the regime's intent, or
continued activities as described and documented over a
long period of time. There are no "rogue elements" of the
regime involved in the transport of shaped munitions into
Iraq, no "rogue elements" of the regime training martyrs
for terrorism operations, recruiting them through public
advertisement, no "rogue elements" committing crimes
against humanity among our people. No "rogue element"
harboring al-quaida. These are fully supported by,
instructed by, and funded by the Islamic Republic of Iran
in whole, not in part, nor independent of its appointed
president's knowledge, and done so by mandate of the
Guardian Council.

Failure to address these grave issues now will be a
dereliction of the UN's founding mandate, and those member
states that fail to recognize this must answer to history.


In conclusion Sir,

It would therefore be in our opinion (reflective of the
1503 procedures), criminally negligent for members of the
UN Commission on Human Rights, and the UN Security Council
to fail to act on the body of evidence regarding security
issues and threats the IRI poses at this time to the
international community and of systematic human rights
abuse (in all aspects) by the Islamic Republic regime; due
to "political considerations" within their respective
nations who's Human Rights records are not the best, or
economic factors in trade with the regime playing a part in
debate, threat of veto, or abstention of moral
responsibility.

It would be quite logical therefore were the UN to
disavow any vote that was deemed "politically motivated" in
the Security Council, calling for a two-thirds majority
vote in the General Assembly to implement any resolution
not achieved in SC decision, along with GA voting on ending
any and all participation, membership and communication
from the Islamic Republic regime (other than answering to
charges brought), for the regime itself is in consistent
and conscious violation of multiple aspects of the UN
Charter, and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights that
the UN is founded upon.

It is for these reasons described herein (as well as the
fact that while Iran is an original signatory to the UN
charter, the current regime flaunts the tenets and is not
legitimately in an of itself, a signatory to it.), that we
have suggested revocation of UN membership through the UN
General Assembly by a two-thirds majority vote as may be
done under the governing rules of the UN, until such time
as a new interim government is established in its place
which will re-ratify Iran's adherence to the UN Charter and
rejoin the family of nations in good standing.

Whereas: "a consistent pattern of gross and reliably
attested violations of human rights and fundamental
freedoms exists." in multiple source documentation
independent of this letter.

Whereas: "communications may be submitted by individuals
or groups who claim to be victims of human rights
violations or who have direct, reliable knowledge of
violations."

Whereas: "each communication must describe the facts, the
purpose of the petition and the rights that have been
violated." And we have striven to do so.

Whereas: "domestic remedies have been exhausted", and it
is convincingly apparent that "solutions at the national
level have been ineffective" - "over an unreasonable length
of time."

We therefore respectfully ask that this letter also be
taken in this context as such a petition to provide proper
perspective to you, the Whitehouse, the UN member states,
President of the General Assembly Ping as well as to
Secretary General Annan on the issues we have addressed
herein with the gravest concern for the welfare of
humanity.

Regarding the security risk the regime poses to its
citizens through its WMD programs and intent in acquiring
this capability. We believe this too, constitutes a
violation of our basic civil liberties (having no voice in
the matter) and poses an unacceptable risk to the
population of Iran and the region through potential and
perhaps unavoidable catastrophic conflict, if the UN does
not act accordingly to prevent further tragedy now.


With gratitude

On behalf of SMCCDI,


Aryo B. Pirouznia (Movement's Coordinator)




SMCCDI
5015 Addison Circle #244 Addison, TX 75001 (USA)
Tel: +1 (972) 504-6864; Fax: +1 (972) 491-9866;
E.Mail: smccdi@daneshjoo.org
www.daneshjoo.org ; www.iranstudents.org
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AmirN



Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Sun Jan 15, 2006 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is no inconsistency, Mr Oppenheimer. I never began slinging mud at you, as you did to me. I didn’t threaten you, nor did I start calling you many colorful “names” as you did to me. I still have not followed that path.

But I did jest and ridicule you. Actually, a more correct statement would be that I simply pointed out how you ridiculed yourself. I just presented it in a funny way. Because like I said, you do entertain me.

Quote:
I made you a promise Amir, not a threat,


Funny, I’ve heard that before. But where?....Oh, yes! I’ve heard it from any and every bully who has ever tried to push his point across using fear and intimidation. Yet, wishing to appear as though simply stating facts. “Oh, I’m not a bully,” he says, followed by “but don’t you step out of line, or else…” Call it what you will, Mr Oppenheimer, but those who can think for themselves can realize the truth without you trying to reword it.

Quote:
it maters not how you interpret the words you write, it matters most how they are recieved and interpreted.


My words have been nothing less than crystal clear, despite your efforts to make them murky. Like I told you before, you may TRY, but you will not DO so. And like I also said before, the readers here can judge that for themselves, thank you very much.

Quote:
So you say I have a lot of problems with people....not at all in fact...none with Blank either. Blank's honest enough to say what he thinks if he has a problem with someone, and if he had one with me, I'm sure he's gotten over it.


Whether blank has gotten over it or not, I’m not sure. I guess we’ll find out if and when he starts to talk to you again.

As for the rest of what you say, let me just say that……hold on a second…..there’s a call coming in…..oh, it’s for you……hold on……yes, it appears to be “reality” holding on the line for you, Mr Oppenheimer….shall I patch you through?....

You say:

Quote:
I don't have the time to indulge you, or your insults, your failure to come to realization about the incorrectness of your premis, or any rebuttal in defense of your bigotry on this subject.


as well as:

Quote:
Young minded in the sense that it is your intelectual immaturity that allows you to remain blind, and at the same time so very egotistical in your bigotry,


Furthermore:

Quote:
Among other valid reasons why is the fact that it makes you out to seem like a bigot....


But then you back-pedal:

Quote:
You may not be a bigot...and I never intentionally placed you personally in that catagory,


So which is it, Mr Oppenheimer? Am I a bigot, or not? Seems you yourself are undecided. How can you help convince anyone else of your arguments, when you yourself don’t know what you want to say.

This precisely illustrates my point, that you shoot in the dark. Shoot first, ask questions later. You first shoot by calling me a bigot, then say “you may not be a bigot.”

Quote:
....you could be a pretty good writer, a strong force for positive change and an asset to the opposition community


There’s no COULD about it, young Oppenheimer. I already know what I am, what I believe, and what it is that I can do and am doing. Thanks for your half baked compliment, but none was solicited. But if in the future I ever feel unsure of my abilities, I’ll be sure to give you a call for reassurance…he…he…he…

Quote:
if you chose to channel the obsession you have with Islam, into fighting the SOB's that have as individuals, ruined your nation....Islam didn't ruin it, it had existed in Iran for a long time before the mullahs twisted its intent and purpose and then used that to come to power.


You are correct that islam was around long before it totally ruined Iran. It was always a parasite slowly eating Iran for 1300 years, but ruined it completely in 1979. I have priorities for my goals. The highest priority I have is for the freedom of Iran. But even when Iran is freed, my feelings for islam will not change. Nor will my message regarding the truth behind islam. There is overlap in these two goals (freeing Iran and exposing islam for the evil that it is). But the accomplishment of one goal does not render the other irrelevant. I seek both.

Even though islam didn’t completely ruin Iran as it has until 1979, islam has been a scourge on humanity for 1300 years. And although I care most about Iran, I care for the world as a whole as well. So, my fight with islam doesn’t end with Iran. Nor did it start with Iran.

See…I’m trying to be less obtuse. I really am.

Quote:
As it happens, you say you now offer me your hand. All I have seen of it is the back side....and you wish to be my tutor? LOL! this is what I meant by you choosing to be an idiot or not.


Which side of the hand you wish to look at is entirely up to you. I simply offered a hand, with no catch. It’s not my fault if your personal demons force you to see everyone as a bigot, as well as instill you with a sensation of paranoia.

This reminds me of the poor abused puppy in the animal shelter. Even when a good person goes to adopt him, and simply reaches out to pet him, he cringes with fear and cowers. I guess it’s understandable. The only hand that has ever approached him has been a hand that beats him. It will take him a long time before he will accept the hand that wished to pet him. Such is the cruelty of this world….

Nevertheless, I blame not the puppy. He is cute and innocent, and doesn’t know any better. I will simply try to pet him another time.

Quote:
Ok I'll ask the question for once....how many cheeks do I have to turn?


Wait…wait…don’t tell me….is this your discrete way of asking for a mathematics tutorial?...he…he…he…

No, no point there...just having fun. Sometimes it’s fun to be…obtuse.

Quote:
It is you that are targeting a "friendly" and again, you are guilty of what you acuse me of....way to go Amir! Proving yourself by your words, a complete and total hypocrite on that point.


Oh Booh Hooh! You attack, belittle, and threaten me because you don’t agree with my viewpoint. And when I simply jest with you, pointing out humorously the error of your ways, you cry me a river. I haven’t even stooped down to your level of bullying, anger, and name calling. I didn’t do this to you; you did it to yourself. I’m only holding up the echo of your own voice up to your ear. It seems you don’t like what you hear.

But like I said many times, don’t blame me. Look a little closer to home.

Quote:
As I said I have no time to play head games with you...there's much I need to do


It’s comments like these that continue to keep me entertained. If you think it’s just a head game, and if you don’t have time for it, why do you return promptly whenever “dinner is served?” You hear the bell, and you come running.

Well, I just rang the bell again….I expect you to be seated promptly before serving you that which you obviously cannot do without: more head games….he…he…he…

Quote:
My granddad was the division head of the Chemical and Metalurgical division under Oppenhiemer.

Suprised? Don't be, If you'd have reviewed my posts to date you would have already known that...as well, there should have been no suprise on your part at all about any aspect of my writings, or contacts.


I have priorities in life. I research and review subjects and information based on their importance and their yield for my time. I have never felt, nor do I now feel the need to sieve through all the archives for all your posts. I have no interest, nor do I see a reward in trying to get to know you. What I know about you is from some of the many posts you have put up. I feel no obligation nor compelling reason in researching your background. If there is anything about you that you wish me to know, just tell me.

As far as the element of “shock and surprise” regarding your contacts or “hand shakes,” in case you didn’t grasp the concept from my prior posts, I simply don’t care.

Not only did I not care, but I also found it pitiful that you had to respond to my arguments in a debate by pointing to what you consider your own limited magnanimity. When in fact, who you know, and whose hand you have shook is quite irrelevant to a debate and the issue. It just showed another sign of your own frustration at your failure to prove your viewpoint.

But like I said, I’m not here to frustrate you. And it is also sad that when you get frustrated you tend to get angry, make threats, start name calling, etc.

Like I said….deep breath….count to ten….I’ll still be here when you want a hug instead…

Quote:
But it extends to supporting human rights and fighting terrorism as well on every level Amir....you call that a chip on my shoulder?


No….The chip on your shoulder was in relation to you viewing everyone in your path as a potential (and probable) bigot. Where did the human rights and fight on terror get mixed up in there? Read my post again.

I’m not sure what it is during your past that gave you this psychological scar, this chip on your shoulder about bigotry. Maybe it’s there somewhere in your archived posts, but I don’t feel like searching them just to get this answer. In fact, it is not really important to me. I’m sure there is a sad story there, as is the case always with bigotry. In any case, no matter what the underlying cause, the effect is self-evident. That chip can be spotted a mile away, my friend.

Like I said, find a balance; everything in moderation.

Quote:
So go right ahead and make fun of that Amir, I think folks will see you in a way you may certainly regret because of it.


As I said before, the only thing I make fun of is your intolerance for others’ viewpoints. I make fun of your pitiful attempt at bullying and insulting your opponent. I make fun of your paranoia….bigots…bigots…everywhere!

I don’t make fun of any of your self described noble ventures. I only make fun when you try to honk your own horn by pointing to your ventures as if they will buy you a free pass with me in your arguments. If you delude yourself by thinking that, perhaps it is you who is really making fun of yourself.

I also will make fun of you if you claim that “the world awaits mahdi Oppenheimer,” and I am wasting your time here. But again, the way you are making fun of yourself is by coming back for more…he…he…he…

But, I don’t expect any less from you.

Quote:
So which side of your hand are you holding forth? I won't take it until I see proof, and know for a fact your apology is sincere.


First, don’t misinterpret the offer of my hand for an apology. It was presented only as a gesture of resumption of courtesy, which would hopefully lead back to a friendship. It was never an apology. I don’t see a need to apologize. Equivalently, I do not seek your apology, nor is it at all necessary. I have no regrets about anything I said, nor do I expect you to have any.

Life is too short to pout, or wait for an apology which will never come (or at least, won't come before the mahdi shows his face).

Second, I offered my hand because I agreed with you that our common enemy is the mullah regime, and we would do better to focus back that way. I agreed with that assessment from the very beginning, and it never left my mind. I still agree with it. And that is why my hand is out there always, whenever you choose to grasp it. And it doesn’t matter which side is viewed by you. You know which side to grasp, and that’s all that matters.
_________________
I am Dariush the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage

Naqshe Rostam
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Oppenheimer



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 1166
Location: SantaFe, New Mexico

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://activistchat.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6479&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight

----------------

The mark of a good writer is not the use of vocabulary, syntax or prose, per se....but whether the words written are remembered by those who continue to value their common sense, long after they are written.

Let's take it by the numbers for a minute.

Cyrus and others in the opposition (and independent researchers) have correctly assessed that between 70-80% of the Iranian population (some 70 million souls total) are in opposition to the mullahs and the current ruling regime.

Demographics (by last census taken) indicate a majority of the population are Muslim.

Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that a majority of that 70-80% in opposition are in fact Muslim.

Now think about this objectively for a moment.

There are probably as many reasons for those Muslims to be in opposition with the regime as there are Muslims opposed to it, for each individual has come to their individual rationale in opposition.

But, if they were to come to this opposition site, hoping to find friends, support, conversation, news, and solidarity....they would only have to read your posts to see that their belief is considered "garbage", they would not have respect for this site (for what is allowed to be posted), and would then have doubts of the intent and purpose of the external based opposition running this site here in the US.

This would be exactly what the IRI would be more than happy to see happen.

So, again, in every aspect your "war on Islam" is playing into the mullah's hands....

However you choose to slice it, the result is the same....what I find most curious is that you have been informed by me of this in a number of ways, yet you persist in your methods that detract from this site, the opposition as a whole, and potentially drive a large percentage of those who would stand with the oppsition in it's democratic ideals into doubt and despair , due to your (and other's) ignorance and verbal garbage.

The one thing the IRI does is to have an agent weasle into a site like this, pretending to be a member of the opposition, expousing some viewpoint that is subtly (and sometimes not so subtle) discrediting to the opposition, or the site itself.

Note well that I am not accusing you of being one, at this time....

Nor is this a witch hunt as you claimed....

Pattern recognition is a specialty of mine, as is probability theory....I make no claim to be a great writer, but I am an effective one, and folks in the opposition have depended on me to help get their message across to folks in my gov.

What I am essentially is a very good analyst....an independant researcher that has the respect of my gov, and the ear of various agencies.

Why is that? Because I have a very accurate track record over a long period of time.

It also takes a lot more than personal insults to piss me off to the point I end up making a phone call or two. That matter of your personal insults was addressed with the site admin. and the phone calls I could make would not be to him, nor would it concern any personal insults, or be instigated by them...

What would really make me question your intent on this site, now that you have been put on notice, is your failure to modify your behavior on it that threatens the credibility of this site.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in saying you might not be a bigot....but your words are those of a bigot...and you continue to stress that you stand by them....so I must conclude that you are in fact ignorant to the fact that you are. The question that remains is whether you have been ingnorant to the fact that those words harm the credibility of the opposition, as well as this site.

And now Amir, you have no excuse, and there is no "chuckle" from me about this.

I posted above, a topic thread you may choose to review....this line of reasoning you have that Islam is "garbage" is nothing new to me....

Your opinion really means nothing to me, but the effect of your words on the credibility of the opposition, and my friend's site does. And I always have the opposition's back against all threats to it.

The choice is your's, I'll make my assessment and act accordingly.

Using this site to promote your "personal war on Islam" is in direct conflict with the tenets of a free Iran, and the future democratic society that incorperates freedom of worship....in peace.

Understand me well, Amir....the following is not only a more correct path to trod to achieve the goals of the opposition, but proof positive that I stand in correctness and solidarity with the opposition in addressing your malfunction in reasoning and intent....so don't allow me to continue to question your intent of being on this site anymore....just correct your malfunction of reasoning.


----------------------------

VOA interview of January 1st with INSP Chairman

SMCCDI (Information Service)
January 1, 2006

Another interview was made, today (January 1, 2006), by the
Persian Service of "Voice of America" (VOA), with Aryo B.
Pirouznia on the "Iranian National Secular Party" (INSP)
and its goals.

The INSP has been founded based on the SMCCDI's activities
and gained experiences, of the last several years, in
promotion of "Secularity" and "Iranism". These principles
are establishing the notions of Separation of Religion &
State, the Separation of Constitutional Powers, and a deep
believe in Iran's National Interests and Territorial
Integrity while contributing to the world's peace and
prosperity. Iranism carries also Iran's Renaissance and
establishing Iranians' deep aspirations for Freedom,
Equality, Humanism & look toward Modernity in all its
aspects.

Several other abroad based Iranian Radio or Satellite TV
networks had made interviews, in the last days, with
Pirouznia who's also the coordinator of the SMCCDI and the
Chairman of the newly founded party. These interviews and
the articles published by several foreign media sources,
such as, Il Foglio and l'Opinione in Italy, as well as, the
American Daily, MichNews and the Post Chronicle, in the
U.S.A., have resulted in a welcoming by many Iranians and
the expression of fear by some circles of the Islamic
republic.

The Friday's Editorial of the www.fardanews.com - an
Islamic regime's official website affiliated to Ahmadinejad
- has expressed this fear of "the future victory of
secularism if the split among Islamic regime's faction
become deeper".

In parts of the today's interview and answering to Ebrahim
Biparva, the VOA anchor, and several pro-regime callers,
Pirouznia stated: "... INSP is not seeking to fight any
religion contrary to some wrong believes disseminated by
the Intelligence circles of the Islamic regime.
Secularism
means that the structure of the future Iranian State should
be free on any religious interference and Vis versa. There
are today many of the initial founders of the Islamic
republic and some Ayatollahs who are echoing on the need of
Separation of State and Religion...Such thing would avoid
more harm done to Islam as surely it would avoid more harm
done to our country and people...

....In other word, we want to give back to God what belongs
to it and to the People of Iran what belongs to
them....Such formula has contributed to a correct balance
and the creation of great countries, such as the USA, as it
has helped the progress of countries like France or
Japan....

...Even a look to Turkey, which is a much closer example to
Iran, and how secularity was able to accept the
participation of the religious party of Erbakan in the
democratic process, would demonstrate this well funded
claim. His religious party participated in the affairs of
state without being allowed to change the structures of the
state or to disregard the rights of minorities of every
kind.... "
To a question on what a party in exile can mean or what can
be the extent of its activities, Pirouznia responded: "Few
might argue that the idea of a party in exile is an
oxymoron. But, I need to tell them that we should avoid
being blocked by some old clichés. The world's trend and
progressist opinions are not what we can qualify as
immobile factors. If not, we would have stay at the cave
age...

...How can some of us, at any stage, believed in the
slightest possibility of some so-called 'reforms' within
the structures of an ideological and theocratic frame and
then reject the notion of the creation of a secularist and
nationalist party in exile. Principles that are the
remedies of what we have been witnessing for the last
twenty seven years...

...Are we real? Or are we afraid of something or have
another agenda?

...In reality and if we want to avoid being just a laxist,
or an always idealist looking for a kind of Messiah, or if
we are not a kind of apologist of the current regime or of
one of its factions, we need to have a sense of innovation
along with political morality, a long term vision and a
correct game plan, for the sake of our country and and
being able to respond to popular aspirations...

...I think we should open up our minds and respect the
decision of those intending to do something by creating the
necessary structure for, if we're sincere when claiming to
believe in human rights or democratic process....

...We should know that nothing is impossible when logical
and when there's the existence of a collective will behind.
In that line, INSP has its members and its ideas have for
sure many supporters, inside the young Iranian society, who
are fed up with what's going on inside and outside and are
looking for the victory of our goals...

...These goals are not only to promote and work for the
overthrow of the totality of the Islamic republic, but also
and in the tomorrow of Iran's liberation and in case of
obtaining the trust of Iranians, to send parliamentarians
to a future Iranian National Assembly. Their task would be
to push for the application of Secularism and Iranism in
the Iranian society of tomorrow which must respect all's
freedom and the world's peace and prosperity no matter of
what type of secular political frame Iranian would
choose....

.. I need also to remind that there have been many
associations formed in exile which have been able to create
decisive changes in the political course of their country.
They had to born and have their management abroad due to
the existing context and the repressive situation while
having their members and supporters in the masses...
Parties, groups or fronts in exile which became later an
official party inside the country based on the very same
principles they fought for......

...Our Party is looking for an ideology-less Iran where
each Iranian is equal and happy. An Iran which will be
reconnected with the family of nations and which will be
promoting global stability... To that end, my comrades and
I have founded the INSP and will be working for achieving
our goals!"

To a very obvious pro-Ahmadinejad caller who stated that
the Islamic regime will exist till the apparition of the
Shias' Hidden Imam 12th, Pirouznia responded: " I invite
the Islamic regime to pull off its Occupation Forces from
the streets of Iranian cities and stop killing or
executing. Then you'll witness its downfall much much
sooner than the need of apparition of Mahdi - the Hidden
Imam - who's supposed to come fighting injustices."

This interview can be listened, till January 2nd (01:00 PM
US EST), in Real Audio from the minute 31':45" to 60':00"
of the following link:
http://www.voanews.com/real/voa/nenaf/pers/pers1800a.ram

It will be archived after on the VOA Server at:
http://www.voanews.com/mediaassets/persian/2006_01/Audio/ra/Biparva01Jan05.ra

----------------------------------

Comments / Nazariat:
Tel: +1 (972) 504-6864
Fax: +1 (972) 491-9866
E.mail: smccdi@daneshjoo.org

www.daneshjoo.org www.iranstudents.org

The "Student Movement Coordination Committee for Democracy
in Iran" (SMCCDI) / "Komite e Hamahangui e Jonbesh e
Daneshjoo i Baraye Democracy dar Iran"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AmirN



Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Demographics (by last census taken) indicate a majority of the population are Muslim.

Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that a majority of that 70-80% in opposition are in fact Muslim.


Hmmmm…..You mean, the majority of Iranians are Moslems? Good point. I never thought of it that way. Now that I know that, I suppose I’ll stop criticizing islam.

I told you before that you have a real talent for stating the obvious. You demonstrate that yet again.

Quote:
But, if they were to come to this opposition site, hoping to find friends, support, conversation, news, and solidarity....they would only have to read your posts to see that their belief is considered "garbage", they would not have respect for this site (for what is allowed to be posted), and would then have doubts of the intent and purpose of the external based opposition running this site here in the US.


Different people come to this site for different reasons, I suppose. Whatever anyone’s reasons, I hope they would all be welcome. And except for the occasional IRI agent, from what I’ve seen here I reasonably conclude that everyone has in fact been welcome here in the past. And that is a tribute to the administration here.

Whatever anyone’s reason, he who comes to a forum must accept that there may be views which are an alternate of his. Not everyone here needs to agree. That is the nature of a discussion forum. If we all agreed, there would be no real discussion, just an echo of a single thought. There is a general idea here which is shared by everyone, and that is the need for the removal of the current regime. By what means, and by what alternatives, and the institution of what will be its substitution is and will be open to debate. We may agree with some thoughts, and disagree with others. That’s fine. It’s the basis for a free society, democracy, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion, all of which are perfectly represented in this fine site.

You must understand that the views expressed in this forum are the views of individuals, not that of “activistchat” specifically. To judge the administration or the spirit of this site based on individual comments made by its individual members, such as myself, would be a great mistake. And, that would be your mistake. Others can think for themselves, and will not follow your mistaken path of reasoning.

I said you have a real talent for stating the obvious. Be that as it may, seems that at other times you do not recognize that which is obvious.

Quote:
The one thing the IRI does is to have an agent weasle into a site like this, pretending to be a member of the opposition, expousing some viewpoint that is subtly (and sometimes not so subtle) discrediting to the opposition, or the site itself.

Note well that I am not accusing you of being one, at this time....


Oh oh….Note to myself: “better be careful. Looks like Oppenheimer is on to me. I must appear more discreet, if I wish to continue with my current infiltration of this site…perhaps I’ve said too much…dear Allah, I hope it’s not too late…if I get exposed as the IRI spy that I am, Khamenei and Ahmadinejad will certainly not be pleased…then who will give me my plastic key to paradise?”

He…he…he…Just when I thought you had entertained me to the max, you top yourself. Thanks again.

Quote:
Pattern recognition is a specialty of mine, as is probability theory....


Well, unfortunately I think you must scratch off “pattern recognition” from your resume. If you can’t recognize the obvious, how can you claim to be a “pattern recognition specialist?”

As for your knowledge of “probability theory,” I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt for now, depending on how you answer this question: What do you think is the “probability” that others are also laughing at you as much as I am?

Quote:
What I am essentially is a very good analyst....an independant researcher that has the respect of my gov, and the ear of various agencies.

Why is that? Because I have a very accurate track record over a long period of time.


honk….honk….

That’s the sound of noble Oppenheimer blowing his own horn. But you left out the part about your handshake with Clinton.

Quote:
It also takes a lot more than personal insults to piss me off to the point I end up making a phone call or two. That matter of your personal insults was addressed with the site admin. and the phone calls I could make would not be to him, nor would it concern any personal insults, or be instigated by them...


You are used to meditation by now (I should hope). So that you understand where I’m coming from, use your meditation techniques to comprehend this. Close your eyes….relax….go to your “happy place”…..breathe deeply and slowly….Now, try to imagine how little I care about your phone calls or grievances.

Quote:
now that you have been put on notice


I’ve been put “on notice,” but by whom?... Administration?.... No…. Someone of any authority?.... Certainly not….. Someone of even minimal importance?....Absolutely not….

So give me all the notices you wish, as they matter not.

Quote:
I gave you the benefit of the doubt in saying you might not be a bigot....but your words are those of a bigot...and you continue to stress that you stand by them....so I must conclude that you are in fact ignorant to the fact that you are.


Did you finally decide what it is you’re trying to say? Good. Just stop flip flopping, because it just serves to confuse yourself.

Now that you’re back to calling me a bigot, it’s evident that the little voice in your head that always begs to be heard is indeed being heard by you loud and clear.

The little voice that always says”….bigots….bigots…everywhere!”

Quote:
And now Amir, you have no excuse, and there is no "chuckle" from me about this.


That’s unfortunate, because you know how much I love and miss the “chuckle.” Oh please, bring back the chuckle.

Quote:
Your opinion really means nothing to me, but the effect of your words on the credibility of the opposition, and my friend's site does. And I always have the opposition's back against all threats to it.


Friends such as you are indeed hard to find. I’m glad that the opposition in general, and specifically your “friends” here can sleep easier at night knowing that you have their back…he…he…he…

Is there anything you can’t do? You can add “ever-watchful sentry” to your list of qualifications in your resume.

Quote:
Using this site to promote your "personal war on Islam" is in direct conflict with the tenets of a free Iran, and the future democratic society that incorperates freedom of worship....in peace.


Actually, it seems you don’t understand the tenets of a free Iran. A free Iran involves a truly democratically elected government with checks and balances. It involves freedom of press and speech. It involves freedom of religion and worship. It also involves the freedom to criticize each and every idea, belief, person, or religion which anyone wishes to criticize. It involves giving the opportunity to everyone to freely speak their mind.

Quote:
....so don't allow me to continue to question your intent of being on this site anymore....just correct your malfunction of reasoning.


By what authority do you proclaim yourself “correct,” and my viewpoint as “malfunctioning?” It is your lack of ability to realize that everyone who disagrees with you is not always “incorrect” that undermines you.

Your inability to understand that there are many different viewpoints in this world other than yours is what actually makes your argument weak. A person who stumps his feet and threatens others each time they disagree with him only shows the weakness and frustration of his own authoritarian position.

Ding….

That was the sound of the bell again. Your dose of “head games” just got served. Come and get it while it’s still hot…
_________________
I am Dariush the Great King, King of Kings, King of countries containing all kinds of men, King in this great earth far and wide, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian, a Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage

Naqshe Rostam
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cyrus
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Jun 2003
Posts: 4993

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oppenheimer wrote:
Cyrus and others in the opposition (and independent researchers) have correctly assessed that between 70-80% of the Iranian population (some 70 million souls total) are in opposition to the mullahs and the current ruling regime.

Demographics (by last census taken) indicate a majority of the population are Muslim.

Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that a majority of that 70-80% in opposition are in fact Muslim.


Oppenheimer wrote:

Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that a majority of that 70-80% in opposition are in fact Muslim.


This is not correct assumption.

Few corrections:
Based on what we knew from 3 years ago 70-80% of the Iranian population were pro American and pro President Bush. That was the highest level of support for US president in any part of the world.

What is this number in past 6 months or today? I don’t know

Due to the support of President Bush Admin for EU3 Nuclear Deal with Islamist regime and the fact that the EU3 was ignoring human rights violation by the regime for making some kind of deal to make US happy, we think the level of support for Bush Admin inside Iran has changed. How Much? I don’t know.

What is the level of opposition to the Islamist regime?
We think it is over 95% and that is why the regime has been increasing the level of repression, fear in the society and looking for new crisis or War to divert attention from their failures, internal problems, jobs …. looking for some kind of scapegoat and external enemy to mobilize their forces ….

All the above numbers are an estimate. I remind you before the fall of Soviet Union no one in the west predicted the level of oppositions to communist government . The Iranian opposition to Islamic Regime is far bigger and much stronger.

Oppenheimer wrote:
Demographics (by last census taken) indicate a majority of the population are Muslim.


By birth majority of Iranian might be considered as Muslim but small minority are practicing Islam ( if someone does not pray 5 times a day it is not considered as good Muslim). Under dictatorship system 95% of society do not express their believe freely therefore we don’t know the exact number until we establish Free Society. What we know clearly today great Majority of Iranian people do not practice Islam. Out of Iranian American population in US less than 1% might consider themselves Muslim and practice Islam. The US government sources, Journalists and NGOs can research and come up with more accurate number…..

After 27 years of Islamic rule in Iran the 70 million Iranian people have become less religious than any country in our planet earth, the reason is very clear .

The Islamist fanatics in Iran that they are controlling the power today (Ahamdinejad Followers) are less than 0.1% of total population of 70 million and they are considered as very dangerous and violent if they have a nuclear Bomb they might use it because they love to create hell, no respect for human life and don’t care about what is going to happen to 99.99% of Iranian people and the country ….

The Executions, Torture, terror, creating fear and terrorism are sign of weakness not strength therefore we can conclude the Islamist regime in Iran is extremely weak and the only reason that they have survived so far, Oil Money, EU, Russia, China and Japan support for the corrupt Islamist regime ….

Creating fear and making threat to others is the sign of weakness not strength .....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    [FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The Great Forum Index -> Noteworthy Discussion Threads All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group