Ahmedinejad's Book on the Holocaust Lie

[habib e najjaar]

Iranian President Ahmadinejad's War on the Holocaust-Lie

Following president Ahmadinejad's new book, we might soon read placards: "The world without Zionist Lies"

It is very well known that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had the Jewish narrative “holocaust” repeatedly branded as a lie. To openly call the holocaust story a lie has caused already tremendous turbulence in world politics. Ahmadinejad's massive verbal resistance to the most harmful Jewish lie in the history of mankind has even triggered Israeli plans to nuke Iran. Many Western leaders supporting since a war against Iran for her holocaust apostasy.

Until recently it was unthinkable, but now the Iranian president has even advanced further into holo-land. He has just completed a factual book slating the Holocaust-Lie. The book is presently being translated into Arabic and English. Some believe a world wonder has just happened. The president of a powerful nation dares to challenge this horrific lie that has hijacked world politics and scientific freedom for so long. What a turn in world affairs.

No great imagination is required to foresee what effect this book will have amongst Moslem nations and the Moslem populace in Europe. Only in Berlusconi’s Italy a newspaper dared to report about Ahmadinejad’s revisionist book. "Il Foglio's" issue of November 18, 2009 referred to Dr. Ahmadinejad's finished book "The Collapse of the Holocaust-Myth". The newspaper revealed that the book (nearly 300 pages) was now being translated into English and Arabic. According to "Il Foglio" more than 300 revisionist books, refuting the holocaust story, were published in Iran since Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took office.

The FrumForum.com was so far the only other English speaking internet source, albeit marginal, that published an article about the president's book (already on 21 September 2009). We quote from FrumForum as follows:

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in July published a new book gathering together his speeches and statements denying the Jewish Holocaust. The Paris-based Aladdin project has now published a translation of the book into English. An excerpt from the book’s preface:

"Let us not forget that for centuries and up to the present time, Al-Quds and Palestine have formed the front of the confrontation between the Land of Islam and the Land of Infidels. To abandon the oppressed nation of Palestine and ignore that importance of Al-Quds would result in the humiliation and weakening of the entire Muslim world… By offering a fresh reading of the lying myth of the Holocaust and explanation of how this was linked to the creation of the bogus regime of Israel, the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran has once again placed the issue of Al-Quds and Palestine at the core of the speeches and writings of Islamists in the region and around the world. With Palestine at the focal point of Islamic thinking and reflection, it was possible to extinguish the flames of many contentions within the Muslim world and focus all minds on the role of the Big Powers in creating a fictitious regime and in the mass expulsion of a historical nation. All around the world, many began to pose important questions about the lying myth of the Holocaust and the legal and legitimate grounds for the existence of that regime."

source: http://globalfire.tv/nj/09en/politics/ahmadinejads_war_on_holocaust.htm

[yousersif]

anyone read this book yet? know where to get it? ive always sat on the fence in terms of the holocaust. neither saying it is an exaggeration nor solid fact. Would be interesting to see what evidence he has against the holocaust happening.

[kadhim]

What a collossal embarrassment this man is. For the sake of my wish to maintain a positive picture of the mental faculties of the Iranian people, I pray that the recent presidential election results were indeed fraudulent as suspected.

[Lester]

noted world war 2 expert mahmoud ahmedinejad

[baradar_jackson]

What a collossal embarrassment this man is. For the sake of my wish to maintain a positive picture of the mental faculties of the Iranian people, I pray that the recent presidential election results were indeed fraudulent as suspected.

Who says the Iranian people are predominantly concerned with making the country "look good" amongst the peoples of foreign nations?

To be honest, I know some people in Iran who hate Ahmadinejad's guts but I have NEVER heard them talk about this non-issue. This [Edited Out] was only reported in the West.

Edited November 23, 2009 by baradar_jackson

[kadhim]

Who says the Iranian people are predominantly concerned with making the country "look good" amongst the peoples of foreign nations?

To be honest, I know some people in Iran who hate Ahmadinejad's guts but I have NEVER heard them talk about this non-issue. This [Edited Out] was only reported in the West.

The Iranian people should be concerned with having intelligent, competent leadership, and with being intelligent themselves.

I cannot believe this man. I actually gave this bufoon the benefit of the doubt many, many times in threads here in response to his incessant gaffes, being a useful idiot, quoting the party line "oh, he didn't really mean that, he was mistranslated by people with an agenda." No more. If this book story is true, I distance myself in the most complete way possible from this bumbling imbecile and whoever voted for him. Let me get this straight: he's leading a politically isolated country with double digit inflation and tonnes of pressing problems, and he finds the time to write a book on denying the @#$%ing holocaust?!?! I wouldn't believe such a character if I read about him in a work of fiction.

Unbelievable. God help Iran. They need all the help they can get, obviously.

Edited November 23, 2009 by kadhim

[baradar_jackson]

The Iranian people should be concerned with having intelligent, competent leadership, and with being intelligent themselves.

I cannot believe this man. I actually gave this bufoon the benefit of the doubt many, many times in threads here in response to his incessant gaffes, being a useful idiot, quoting the party line "oh, he didn't really mean that, he was mistranslated by people with an agenda." No more. If this book story is true, I distance myself in the most complete way possible from this bumbling imbecile and whoever voted for him. Let me get this straight: he's leading a politically isolated country with double digit inflation and tonnes of pressing problems, and he finds the time to write a book on denying the @#$%ing holocaust?!?! I wouldn't believe such a character if I read about him in a work of fiction.

Unbelievable. God help Iran. They need all the help they can get, obviously.

Overreact much?

First of all, I doubt this story is true. Because if it was, the Western media would be all over it.

Secondly, it's irrelevant to the concerns of the Iranian people.

Thirdly, Iran's inflation is 7.4 percent: http://www.tehrantimes.com/Index_view.asp?code=207571

So that's not double digits. Moreover, I think this particular statistic has been abused too many times. Inflation rate is an aggregate of the average price increases of EVERY good and service in the country. Meaning, the price increases are not the same for every product. For example, rent costs have remained stable for the most part. Property costs, meanwhile, have skyrocketed. Bread and lentils are still cheap, while meat has become expensive.

We need to acknowledge this: the people who now cannot afford to eat meat or buy an apartment could never afford to eat meat or buy an apartment. And the people who used to be able to afford those things, STILL DO for the most part. So I think the effects of inflation in Iran are grossly exaggerated. Yes it is a problem but it is not as bad of a problem as many suggest.

And if you want to selectively post an isolated negative statistic (which is not even true, btw), one could easily post an isolated positive statistic. You can use statistics to convey anything you want to convey.

[Qa'im]

(salam)

He needs to just drop this Holocaust stuff all together. I know he's trying to break the legitimacy of the state of Israel, but the creation of Israel had little to do with the Holocaust in the first place. Zionism predates World War 2, and the creation of Israel was almost entirely a separate event. Israel did not even officially commemorate the Holocaust until years later. Read Norman Finkelstein's book "The Holocaust Industry" and you'll know what I mean - the Holocaust was picked up as a pretext for the state much later, as it best convinces the masses that these persecuted people deserved a state. But what happened in Germany should have nothing to do with the Palestinians, they did nothing to deserve any of this persecution they've been facing for 60 years. Ahmedinejad loses more of his credibility every time he denies that the genocide had taken place; instead he needs to focus on talking about how the Holocaust does not matter to Israel, and how Israel is oppressing innocent people.

[A follower]

Kadhim - Could it be possible you are over-reacting especially since you have not even read the book or know of its content? I mean should you not wait at least to read the book rather than judge it by its cover?

[guest 34193]

"Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in July published a new book gathering together his speeches and statements denying the Jewish Holocaust."

So it's a recompilation of addresses and such he's given on the topic in the past (if it exists), not that he's painstakingly taken months out of his presidency and collected together the resources to write a new book.

[kadhim]

Kadhim - Could it be possible you are over-reacting especially since you have not even read the book or know of its content? I mean should you not wait at least to read the book rather than judge it by its cover?

If anything, I'm under-reacting. If, with all Iran's pressing issues, Ahmadinejad found time to write a book about the holocaust, it's time for the people to storm his residence with torches and pitch forks.

"Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in July published a new book gathering together his speeches and statements denying the Jewish Holocaust."

So it's a recompilation of addresses and such he's given on the topic in the past (if it exists), not that he's painstakingly taken months out of his presidency and collected together the resources to write a new book.

Shame on you for trying to rationalize this. God guide you.

[guest 34193]

Shame on you for trying to rationalize this. God guide you.

Would you be this outraged if the topic had been the Armenian genocide (reserving judging on its historicity)?

[Lester]

Qa'im - agree. if someone were to somehow disprove the holocaust it would not mean the end of israel, which the israelis claim using reasons of the bible, genetics, and the entirety of historical persecution, not just the holocaust.

you can't disprove pogroms or the dreyfus affair or the validity of the old testament to certain people!

[kadhim]

Would you be this outraged if the topic had been the Armenian genocide (reserving judging on its historicity)?

Of course. People with their humanity intact tend generally to get outraged when someone tries to casually and baselessly dismiss the death of millions of people, whoever they may be.

[Haji 2003]

Of course. People with their humanity intact tend generally to get outraged when someone tries to casually and baselessly dismiss the death of millions of people, whoever they may be.

People do it all the time in the case of the Iraqis, claiming that the 1.5 million dead, and counting are because of weapons of mass destruction...or a price worth paying so that the ones who remain can enjoy democracy...

I was interviewing a mental health professional last week and at the end of formal discussion we had a chat about mental health generally. He said that a large percentage (can't remember the number) of the population have mental health *issues*, ranging from those who are just eccentric to those who are patently barking. But according to him the mental health profession does not really concern itself with them, unless they become a threat to themselves or others.

Now if we use the latter criteria, just for the sake of argument. AN could be totally loopy. But does he pose a threat to anyone? Nope. Not in my opinion. Since 1979 Iran has mounted no wars of aggression.

On the other hand you have vast swathes of American politicians and policy-makers etc. who pursued the psychopathic fantasy of the Iraqi threat, the Afghan threat (and now the Iranian threat). We have more or less the same loony-tunes who deny climate change evidence and as a result condemn billions to an early death.

Yep there are mad people out there who need to be locked up. But AN is not one of them.

[Guest Zahratul_Islam]

Would you be this outraged if the topic had been the Armenian genocide (reserving judging on its historicity)?

Surprised would be a more fitting word.

The same people who take the Turkish denial of the Armenian genocide seriously will give credence to Ahmedinejad's denial of the holocaust- people who are willing to deny historical atrocities to further their political agenda. The rest of us will take it with a grain of bs.

I am not irritated about the time it took to compile this book. I am irritated by the fact that he is compiling a book. He is upset by the implications of the holocaust? He feels it is used to oppress the Palestinians? All his concerns are arguably valid and can be debated academically without sounding like a moron. However his outright denial of the holocaust is ludicrous and only defend able by people who are so blinded by their political agenda that they refuse to be rational. What once had the potential of being an academic debate degenerates into a ranting fanatic who has absolutely no idea what he is on about and who does nothing but take away credibility on an international scale.

I was interviewing a mental health professional last week and at the end of formal discussion we had a chat about mental health generally. He said that a large percentage (can't remember the number) of the population have mental health *issues*, ranging from those who are just eccentric to those who are patently barking. But according to him the mental health profession does not really concern itself with them, unless they become a threat to themselves or others.

Now if we use the latter criteria, just for the sake of argument. AN could be totally loopy. But does he pose a threat to anyone? Nope. Not in my opinion. Since 1979 Iran has mounted no wars of aggression.

I might be reading this wrong, but it sounds like you are saying Ahmedinejad is a loony whose mental instability is irrelevant because he poses no threat internationally?

1) I agree he is unstable

2) I believe his instability has its implications

Edited November 23, 2009 by Zahratul_Islam

[shiasoldier786]

The FrumForum.com was so far the only other English speaking internet source, albeit marginal, that published an article about the president's book

Lets all start our anti-ahmadinejad rant.

[Marbles]

Who says the Iranian people are predominantly concerned with making the country "look good" amongst the peoples of foreign nations?

To be honest, I know some people in Iran who hate Ahmadinejad's guts but I have NEVER heard them talk about this non-issue. This [Edited Out] was only reported in the West.

The Holocaust might be a 'non-issue' for some Iranians or others in the Middle East since not only it doesn't concern them but they have more mundane matters to worry about BUT, on the other side, it is pretty relevant to the recent historical conscience of Europe. It is reported in the West because it is directed at the West and it has implications for the West.

It is just not about making your country 'look good' as you put it. It is more about the lack of sensitivity to the horrific crime of the last century and no desire on the part of the president to honour the history and support his cause at the same time. Here is a leader of an influential Muslim state in the ME running his mouth like a bloke in a pub down the road. Just as ardent Zionist take delight in misusing the Holocaust [refer to Finklestein's book], Ahmadinejad derives pleasure in labelling it a hoax. Not difficult to see how political agenda taint one's perspective. He could support Palestinian cause without insulting the millions of dead. His so-called Holocaust conference held in Tehran in [was it?] 2005 included participants like David Duke, the white racist and former Ku Klux Klan leader and David Irving, a Holocaust denier and a known adherent to the cult of Hitlerism. The latter has claimed that Hitler prophecised that an Englishman [irving] would come to 'clear' his name against the 'lies' told.

I am happy for Iranians if they are happy with - to borrow from Robert Fisk - 'crackpot president' but don't expect the world, including Muslims in and outside the ME, to take him seriously.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Marbles

[Haji 2003]

it sounds like you are saying Ahmedinejad is a loony whose mental instability is irrelevant because he poses no threat internationally?

1) I agree he is unstable

2) I believe his instability has its implications

Ha ha. You missed the bit which said "just for the sake of argument". Anyway you say his mental state has 'its implications', my point was that with AN the dangers are hypothetical. Would you agree that in the case of American politicians they are proven? Yes or No?

[Guest]

Great to see another day of fellow Shias (none of whom live in Iran or have extensive understandings of Iranian society) bashing on their own Muslim leaders in the harshest terms, simply because some Western power centers are uncomfortable, ignorant, and are not pleased with how our discussions and considerations are moving along. It is after all our duty to make sure the West is pleased at all times. We must engage in the debates, arguments, and questions they want us to have in the way they want to have it.

I don't understand this, is this really how we treat our own pious brothers? Calling them crazed lunatics because, being thousands of kilometers away, you are failing to comprehend the complex and dynamic discussion that people are struggling to frame and redefine? Maybe if he attended lavish world economic forums and copied some Western speech manuscript verbatim, drank tea with Western leaders on comfy chairs, and posed for the camera in some nice gardens, would he then be an acceptable leader? Is he just too outside the mold for people to comprehend? Or is the fact that he won the election fairly with a majority of the people simply forgotten as a mental blockade?

Let's just all be a bunch of crusaders, fight against the "man", and crawl towards the West for our intellectual and cultural salvation. We can keep up some phony cosmopolitan image, drunk with our own self-idealized intellectualism, and parade around like we are the enlightened "Martin Luthers" of Islam and Muslim societies, putting it through some kind of progressive reformation, where apparently Western and Islamic values and interests will be in some perfect harmony and we will be the masters of Western political correctness.

The only thing people need to worry about is to stop demanding instant perfection and just let free societies and free men take their course in their own hands. God willing, it will all smooth out in the end, with or without people's helpful "words of wisdom".

Edited November 23, 2009 by Mahdaviat

[kadhim]

Great to see another day of fellow Shias (none of whom live in Iran or have extensive understandings of Iranian society) bashing on their own Muslim leaders in the harshest terms, simply because some Western power centers are uncomfortable, ignorant, and are not pleased with how our discussions and considerations are moving along. It is after all our duty to make sure the West is pleased at all times. We must engage in the debates, arguments, and questions they want us to have in the way they want to have it.

I don't understand this, is this really how we treat our own pious brothers? Calling them crazed lunatics because, being thousands of kilometers away, you are failing to comprehend the complex and dynamic discussion that people are struggling to frame and redefine? Maybe if he attended lavish world economic forums and copied some Western speech manuscript verbatim, drank tea with Western leaders on comfy chairs, and posed for the camera in some nice gardens, would he then be an acceptable leader? Is he just too outside the mold for people to comprehend? Or is the fact that he won the election fairly with a majority of the people simply forgotten as a mental blockade?

Let's just all be a bunch of crusaders, fight against the "man", and crawl towards the West for our intellectual and cultural salvation. We can keep up some phony cosmopolitan image, drunk with our own self-idealized intellectualism, and parade around like we are the enlightened "Martin Luthers" of Islam and Muslim societies, putting it through some kind of progressive reformation, where apparently Western and Islamic values and interests will be in some perfect harmony and we will be the masters of Western political correctness.

The only thing people need to worry about is to stop demanding instant perfection and just let free societies and free men take their course in their own hands. God willing, it will all smooth out in the end, with or without people's helpful "words of wisdom".

It's not complex or dynamic at all, Mahdaviat. It's actually stunningly simple, and it's sad that you're going so far out of your way to avoid getting it. It says a lot about the state of Muslims that this sort of psychosis is so warmly greeted.

"God will not change the state of a people until they change what is in themselves."

Edited November 23, 2009 by kadhim

[Guest Zahratul_Islam]

Ha ha. You missed the bit which said "just for the sake of argument". Anyway you say his mental state has 'its implications', my point was that with AN the dangers are hypothetical. Would you agree that in the case of American politicians they are proven? Yes or No?

I thought I had missed something :P

I don't agree with you about Afghanistan not being a threat to America's security after 9/11. We can have a debate about whether or not American politicians pursued their interests in that region ethnically or even critically, but we can't deny that they were responding to an attack on American soil. I think discussing this would be a great digression that will get us into the same debate we usually find ourselves in..

With the case of Ahmedjinejad just because the dangers he pose are "hypothetical" does not mean they can be dismissed or downplayed by other international actors. I am not saying preemptive strike is rational or effective, but all actors on the international stage are simply trying to protect their interests and he presents a threat. They emphasize his mental instability because their foreign policy interests are threatened by his anti American rhetoric and his alliances with those whose goals conflict with that of America's ally.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Zahratul_Islam

[Marbles]

Great to see another day of fellow Shias (none of whom live in Iran or have extensive understandings of Iranian society) bashing on their own Muslim leaders in the harshest terms, simply because some Western power centers are uncomfortable, ignorant, and are not pleased with how our discussions and considerations are moving along. It is after all our duty to make sure the West is pleased at all times. We must engage in the debates, arguments, and questions they want us to have in the way they want to have it.

Oh come on bro give us a break will you.

How many of the pro-Ahmadinejad posters in this thread are Iranian born and bred and carry an Iranian passport save baradar_jackson, ignoring for a while that he is out of residence these days? As far as I know, Haji2003, macisaac, shiasoldier786, and you too, are not Iranian [either by ethnicity or nationality] AND/OR do not live permanently in Iran, both or whichever is true. How the named posters qualify to discuss Iran but people like kadhim, Zahratul_Islam, Lester and I don't? Most people on SC wouldn't be allowed to discuss any country in the ME if your proposals were taken seriously. As for the knowledge of Iran, I wonder how did you equate the lack of understanding of Iranian society with disapproving Ahmadinejad? Perhaps Mousavi, Rafsanjani et al also don't have enough understanding of Iranian society.

I don't understand this, is this really how we treat our own pious brothers? Calling them crazed lunatics because, being thousands of kilometers away, you are failing to comprehend the complex and dynamic discussion that people are struggling to frame and redefine? Maybe if he attended lavish world economic forums and copied some Western speech manuscript verbatim, drank tea with Western leaders on comfy chairs, and posed for the camera in some nice gardens, would he then be an acceptable leader? Is he just too outside the mold for people to comprehend? Or is the fact that he won the election fairly with a majority of the people simply forgotten as a mental blockade?

His piety is between him and God. I see things as they appear. AN in his capacity as the president of a majority Shia Muslim country has been a total fiasco. I am more concerned because I am a Shia. I would laugh my backside off at Ahmadinejad's fiery rhetoric if I were a Shia hating Salafi.

Let's just all be a bunch of crusaders, fight against the "man", and crawl towards the West for our intellectual and cultural salvation. We can keep up some phony cosmopolitan image, drunk with our own self-idealized intellectualism, and parade around like we are the enlightened "Martin Luthers" of Islam and Muslim societies, putting it through some kind of progressive reformation, where apparently Western and Islamic values and interests will be in some perfect harmony and we will be the masters of Western political correctness.

Bro, sorry to say but this is just a string of words, meaningless and irrelevant to the topic at hand.

[Guest Zahratul_Islam]

Great to see another day of fellow Shias (none of whom live in Iran or have extensive understandings of Iranian society) bashing on their own Muslim leaders in the harshest terms, simply because some Western power centers are uncomfortable, ignorant, and are not pleased with how our discussions and considerations are moving along. It is after all our duty to make sure the West is pleased at all times. We must engage in the debates, arguments, and questions they want us to have in the way they want to have it.

Discussion and debate? Where are these intellectual conversations so discreetly hidden? His forums are filled with guests that include former KKK members (surprise surprise they deny the holocaust too) who do not present a conflicting side of the argument or a challenging academic debate. No academic or intellectual takes these discussions seriously because they are a joke. You want to deny the holocaust ever happened, have at it.. but please refrain from framing your denial as the product of intelligent discourse and debate.

When Katie Couric asked him about denying the holocaust and his proof for doing so, he responded by re framing the question to "well it happened in Europe so why are they in Palestine?" Sure, lets discuss why they are in Palestine. What does not require discussion is whether or not the incident ACTUALLY OCCURRED.

I don't understand this, is this really how we treat our own pious brothers? Calling them crazed lunatics because, being thousands of kilometers away, you are failing to comprehend the complex and dynamic discussion that people are struggling to frame and redefine? Maybe if he attended lavish world economic forums and copied some Western speech manuscript verbatim, drank tea with Western leaders on comfy chairs, and posed for the camera in some nice gardens, would he then be an acceptable leader? Is he just too outside the mold for people to comprehend? Or is the fact that he won the election fairly with a majority of the people simply forgotten as a mental blockade?

Yes. My qualm with Ahmedinejad is that he is a pious man who does not sit in comfy chairs and drink tea. :huh: Trust me, there are many political leaders I have admired who were also "outside the mold." The deal breaker with Ahmedinejad is that he is also an idiot. I don't care how long his beard is or how many times he mentions Allah (swt) in his speeches.. that does not command my respect. What commands respect is a thoughtful man who offers more than rhetoric in the place of academic debate.

[Guest]

It's not complex or dynamic at all, Mahdaviat. It's actually stunningly simple, and it's sad that you're going so far out of your way to avoid getting it. It says a lot about the state of Muslims that this sort of psychosis is so warmly greeted.

So I'm an apologist for "psychosis"? To each his own.

As far as I'm concerned, the discussion about the Holocaust and its after effects can be studied and interpreted from many angles. The multiple angles makes it a complex and dynamic discussion.

"God will not change the state of a people until they change what is in themselves."

I agree completely, and I have had that consistent message throughout.

1. Muslims must stop having an inferiority complex.

2. Look up to Islamic, not Western values as a source of guidance and inspiration.

3. Muslims must frame your own debates and discussions instead of having outsiders frame it for you.

4. Sometimes you have to step on glass to get things done, not for the heck of it, but for a greater purpose.

[Mahatma]

Good post by Qa'im.

I wouldn't say that i am outraged by this book, or won't say that i am happy to see such a book. Its just that denying Holocaust will give Iran nothing. Israel is a reality on a world map and Iran and other nations should get over this fact. If someone started saying that Iran shouldn't exist, should it not exist?

[Haji 2003]

We can have a debate about whether or not American politicians pursued their interests in that region ethnically or even critically, but we can't deny that they were responding to an attack on American soil. I think discussing this would be a great digression that will get us into the same debate we usually find ourselves in..

Well this is pretty much the crux of the matter and all roads lead to it. Your post sums it all up pretty neatly.

The American position you say is one that *cannot be denied* and indeed you apply that statement to a war whose legality was so questionable that British generals sought assurances from the British government's leading counsel in order to make sure that they would not be tried for war crimes. That legal advice has never been made public.

In addition:

An operation as big as an invasion of a country would normally require equipment to be ordered and experts in reconstruction to be consulted well in advance. But because the planners couldn’t tell anyone, they couldn’t do that. “In Whitehall, the internal operational security regime, in which only very small numbers of officers and officials were allowed to become involved in Telic business, constrained broader planning for combat operations and subsequent phases effectively until Dec 23, 2002,” the documents say.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6625534/Iraq-report-Secret-plans-for-war-no-plans-for-peace.html

It was because the legality and morality of the American position was so weak that the planning had to be done in secrecy and as a result post-war reconstruction was so poor.

Sorry but if you can't recognise criminal behaviour that has ALREADY taken place, how can you credibly assess the possible mad behaviour that might take place?

[Mahatma]

Sorry but if you can't recognise criminal behaviour that has ALREADY taken place, how can you credibly assess the possible mad behaviour that might take place?

If you are not willing to accept the war crimes done against a nation, would you expect them to even care about what you say ?

If holocaust didn't happen, then so did not any crimes against these non-existent palestinians you speak of. The land belongs to Israel now and it was theirs when Jesus was around. There were no arabs in that area back then either.

[Guest Zahratul_Islam]

Well this is pretty much the crux of the matter and all roads lead to it. Your post sums it all up pretty neatly.

The American position you say is one that *cannot be denied* and indeed you apply that statement to a war whose legality was so questionable that British generals sought assurances from the British government's leading counsel in order to make sure that they would not be tried for war crimes. That legal advice has never been made public.

In addition:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6625534/Iraq-report-Secret-plans-for-war-no-plans-for-peace.html

It was because the legality and morality of the American position was so weak that the planning had to be done in secrecy and as a result post-war reconstruction was so poor.

Sorry but if you can't recognise criminal behaviour that has ALREADY taken place, how can you credibly assess the possible mad behaviour that might take place?

I think you misunderstood my statement. I said that wee can absolutely have a debate about whether or not American politicians pursued their interests in that region ethnically or even critically, but we can't deny that they were responding to an attack on American soil.

You seem to have interpreted that as a blanket pardon for an actions that took place and the manner in which they occurred, which has never been my position. I have many criticisms regarding how the war was carried out, but unless you are suggesting that 9/11 was an inside job done by the United States to give them a reason to invade Afghanistan, you cannot possibly deny that the United States was attacked and thousands of civilians were slaughtered which was bound to illicit some response, be it militarily or through another show of American strength.

[Guest]

Oh come on bro give us a break will you.

How many of the pro-Ahmadinejad posters in this thread are Iranian born and bred and carry an Iranian passport save baradar_jackson, ignoring for a while that he is out of residence these days? As far as I know, Haji2003, macisaac, shiasoldier786, and you too, are not Iranian [either by ethnicity or nationality] AND/OR do not live permanently in Iran, both or whichever is true. How the named posters qualify to discuss Iran but people like kadhim, Zahratul_Islam, Lester and I don't? Most people on SC wouldn't be allowed to discuss any country in the ME if your proposals were taken seriously. As for the knowledge of Iran, I wonder how did you equate the lack of understanding of Iranian society with disapproving Ahmadinejad? Perhaps Mousavi, Rafsanjani et al also don't have enough understanding of Iranian society.

I actually am an Iranian national. Yes, I do concede I do not live in Iran at the moment, but I do supplement that by having extensive links to family and friends, listen to university lectures, watch media, reading books/newspapers on politics and philosophy, etc.

Seeing as how you have already created a distinction between "your" people and "my" people, you have already framed the discussion as some kind of fighting match between two different groups of people. It's disunity where it shouldn't be, but this cannot be helped.

There is nothing wrong with people giving their opinions and viewpoints, but in the end, the most honest opinion is one that best matches the opinion and viewpoints of most people in that country. If they are drastically different, you have to justify why your opinion is more or less valid than people in that country, and if you are inclined, explain why your opinion should supersede theirs.

But when one's opinion better matches that of the majority of the people (and I truly believe mine does over yours), than less of a burden is on me to have to explain the above.

I try to be objective, and simply describe, explain, and defend, what I read, watch, see, and feel.

His piety is between him and God. I see things as they appear. AN in his capacity as the president of a majority Shia Muslim country has been a total fiasco. I am more concerned because I am a Shia. I would laugh my backside off at Ahmadinejad's fiery rhetoric if I were a Shia hating Salafi.

Piety and virtue is important more than ever in the field of public office and is important for social cohesion. Again, I think there is this fundamental disagreement where you seem to emphasize only the individual aspect of faith and tend to downsize the collective, social, and political importance.

Bro, sorry to say but this is just a string of words, meaningless and irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Absolutely not. It's my feeling, impression, and opinion on what I have observed and what I truly believe I have observed. It is not meant to corner anyone or put anyone on the defensive. It is simply reflective words of thought for those who are interested.

If I am wrong in anyway, and I still maintain it, than I am the fool. Simple as that. I have no ego to maintain. I am only interested in the truth and in fair and honest assessments. I refuse to jump on this kind of "let's bash him" bandwagon for some self-righteous "good of the Shia world". No way.

If I am branded as being some kind of sick apologist with no sense of "modern enlightenment", than fine. It certainly shouldn't be the first time for any of us.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Mahdaviat

[Mahatma]

http://www.projetaladin.org/en/homepage.html

Islam and Judaism both teach us that each person is a universe, for whoever saves a single life, it is as if he or she has saved the entire humanity, just as whoever has killed a single person, it is as if they have killed the entire humanity. As human beings, we are each, wherever we are, the guarantors of each other's destiny. As many other righteous gentiles who risked their lives to save the Jews in the midst of the Holocaust, the brave Muslims who in different parts of the world rescued them were acting on the basis of this human responsibility.

Many Muslims consider the Holocaust, the extermination of six millions of European Jews by Nazi Germany during World War II, a taboo subject. Some believe it was this event that led to the creation of the Jewish state. Others believe that acknowledging Jewish suffering in the Holocaust would be equivalent to supporting Israel and a betrayal of the rights of fellow-Muslim Palestinians. Thus they believe that through their rejection of the Holocaust, they serve the Palestinian cause.

On the contrary, we believe that Muslims' show of respect and compassion for the victims of the Holocaust could only contribute to restoration of mutual trust and confidence; an essential pre-requisite for durable peace.

The Holocaust was unquestionably one of the greatest catastrophes of our times; a landmark event in history. We, as human beings, have an obligation to tell the truth about historical events, even when it is not politically convenient to do so.

So it is our responsibility, as intellectuals, historians, teachers, academics, writers, and anyone who has a tongue to speak or a pen to write, to break down the walls of indifference, silence and prejudice.

At this point, the Holocaust will cease to be a history of "them and us", but a common history of all humanity; a history that Muslims and non-Muslims alike need to study and learn from.

It is in this spirit that we launch this Web site.

[Mahatma]

http://www.frumforum.com/ahmadinejads-holocaust-denial-book

All around the world, many began to pose important questions about the lying myth of the Holocaust and the legal and legitimate grounds for the existence of that regime.

My reaction to these words written by Ahmadinijad :

Why are muslims so obsessed over a single country ? Its just a very small country which happens to exist. The arabs SOLD THEIR LANDS TO THE JEWS, and now they want it back?

[Marbles]

Seeing as how you have already created a distinction between "your" people and "my" people, you have already framed the discussion as some kind of fighting match between two different groups of people. It's disunity where it shouldn't be, but this cannot be helped.

No, I'm not creating distinction here. I am responding to your point that you have to either live in Iran or have extensive understanding of Iranian society to express your opinion on the mental stability, or lack of it thereof, of the current president. It is clear that Iranians born, bred and permanently living in Iran without the leisure of having multiple nationalities are best suited to have that level of understanding of the Iranian society. Applying your criteria and taking it to its conclusion, I stated that none of us except baradar_jackson is qualified enough to express their opinion.

Let's revert to the topic.

I actually am an Iranian national. Yes, I do concede I do not live in Iran at the moment, but I do supplement that by having extensive links to family and friends, listen to university lectures, watch media, reading books/newspapers on politics and philosophy, etc.

;)

[shiasoldier786]

Why are muslims so obsessed over a single country ? Its just a very small country which happens to exist. The arabs SOLD THEIR LANDS TO THE JEWS, and now they want it back?

Sold their lands to the jews?? lmao

This is the lamest and most pathetic excuse that I have heard the usurping zionist sympathizers to come up with.

[Guest]

No, I'm not creating distinction here. I am responding to your point that you have to either live in Iran or have extensive understanding of Iranian society to express your opinion on the mental stability, or lack of it thereof, of the current president. It is clear that Iranians born, bred and permanently living in Iran without the leisure of having multiple nationalities are best suited to have that level of understanding of the Iranian society. Applying your criteria and taking it to its conclusion, I stated that none of us except baradar_jackson is qualified enough to express their opinion.

Let's revert to the topic.

Did you bother to read what I typed in depth? You are not obligated to, but just curious.

I have typed quite a lot and I'm very saddened that you disregarded most of it, and you just repeated what you said before, like my words were invisible.

What can you do?......sigh.

I stand here in honesty and sincerity, untainted and not Westoxified.

Edited November 24, 2009 by Mahdaviat