Iranian of the Day

DariushA

Reminds me of the man-daravordi Westoxification by Jalal Al Ahmad. He was yet another one of these pseudo intellectual xenophobes. Did a great disservice to Iran. 

Please refer to me a VPK

Good link to the kind of

Good link to the kind of thing Reza is talking about //iranian.com/main/2010/aug/can-america-survive-nuclear-iran

veiled

Hopefully Reza Aslan in his next book called; "Weslamisim" will give you more statistics and explanations.

DariushA

I have heard this thing about Islam being the fastest growing religion. But I do not buy it. This is an example of bending fact. What numbers are you using:

• Most of the population growth in the USA is from Latin immigrants. They are overwhelmingly Christian.
• Most of the Muslim "growth" is due to birth not conversion. All it means is that many people follow their parent's lead. That is changing among Iranians in the West. I know *many* who have left Islam either openly or defacto.
• Muslims count anyone who was  born to an even nominally Muslim family. They do not accept leaving Islam. Therefore the numbers are inflated. A Muslim should at the minimum agree that he or she is one!
• Much of the Western Muslim population belongs to the lowest in socioeconomic. That means the least influential; productive and in general relevant portion of the population.

A better measure is what people produce in terms of: Literature; Science; Arts; Noble  Prizes; University Papers; World Leaders. In general people who matter! Muslims are way behind in these. Compare o Jewish people Muslims are way behind. Give a 100 to one  population advantage they are still unable to even get close in actual numbers. 

Sure if you want to count just the masses there are plenty. But not in terms of people of high achievement.

MM / Reality-Bites

For the most parts I remember what happened. He issued jihad and he was told he doesn't have the authority to do so and clerics didn't back his request and among some reasons given, your statement could have been one of the reasons. 

Let us just change Jihad to crusade. That should be appealing to west and pleases the weslamists too. 

Reality-Bites, this is from your previous posting,

And while we are at it, before Bush got in Iraq and Afghanistan killing "millions", there some lovely people like Saddam and Taliban killings tens of thousands of Muslims in those countries, and there wasn't much complaining from other Muslims like YOU about those killings then

The fact is, Iran has been against both Saddam and Taliban. When US has been supporting both of them. You cannot deny that!!!!!!!!

Then you contradict yourself and wrote,

when the right thing, for any government who cares for the people of Iran, would've been to stop sticking its nose in the affairs in other parts of the Middle East,

Yes, that is exactly what west and Israel like to see. Less obstacles on their way.  I wonder why they themselves don't listen to your advice.

Then you wrote, even one dead is too many, then you argue that the numbers were not millions, were 100,000 to 600,000.

I have read reports from number of sources that said, 1,350,0000 if they have exaggerated that is not my fault and even several hundred thousands are more than enough to charge the west with crimes against humanity.

I can tell you disagree because you are not a supporter of Bush policy!!!  I see the confirmation to my claim in your opinion on Iran, US, Israel, Lebanon and Palestine, Taliban and Saddam.

You sound like another commentator calls himself Fair. whom I call Unfair.

Dariush A. - Ben-idiot relied on a Shaikh to issue fatwas

After 9/11, the only objection the religious elite had for Ben-Ladan was that he did not warned the infidels and did not invite them to become Muslim and in later video-cassettes, Ben-Ladan did just that.

Daruish

To address a number of points in your last post.

First, in the link YOU provided there is no mention of "millions" (your assertion in the earlier post) being killed by US forces. Nor did I see the 1.35 million that you say now (and I presume you mean people, not currency, since you've typed $).

This is what it says in your link:

Iraqi Civilians Killed, Estimated - A UN issued report dated Sept 20, 2006 stating that Iraqi civilian casualties have been significantly under-reported. Casualties are reported at 50,000 to over 100,000, but may be much higher. Some informed estimates place Iraqi civilian casualities at over 600,000.

So the estimate ranges from 100k to 600k (which are still not verified) for civilians casualties and casualties includes more just those who have lost their lives. The estimates from different sources used in wikipedia also go along a similar range.

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

Again, no mention of the "millions" you asserted by any reliable source.

Second, regardless of the actual number, since even one innocent life being lost is too many, you bypassed my point that in Iraq most of the civilians have actually been killed and continue to be killed at the hands of fellow Muslims, not Americans, whose combat troops have now pulled out, and were not that active in the past two years anyway.

Third, I didn't say anything about the Iran/Iraq war. I was talking about the mass murder of Iraqi Shias and Kurds by Saddam, that people who now rage at the Americans and shed crocodile tears about their Muslim victims, were silent about.

But since you mention the subject of Iran/Iraq war, no doubt that Saddam was to blame for its start and many braves Iranians, including two of my own uncles (daeis) and a very close friend of my family lost their lives defending Iran. I was too young to have done much anyway. Not that I need to justify myself to you.

But what your Khomeini - who didn't stand against anyone (the young souls who gave their lives did) - did was to prolong the war for another six years after the Iraqi forces were driven out of Iranian territory in 1982 and Iraq was prepared to accept ceasefire. You Imam didn't want ceasefire because he wanted to export his Islamic revolution and ordered the Iranian forces to fight on until 1988, which needlessly cost the lives hundreds of thousands of more Iranians, and also drew the West in to support Saddam, till Khomeini was (in his own words) forced to drink the poisoned chalice and forcibly agree to end the war.

Forth, so you agree with Iran's International stance, do you? The stance that for the past 30 years has very openly declared its “marg bar Israel” (as well as "mar bar Amrika") the cornerstone of policy against a country, which previously had no problems and no hostile intentions towards Iran? The stance that has effectively been running a proxy war against Israel by funding and arming Hamas and the Lebanese Hezbollah in their intermittent conflicts with the state of Israel?

The stance that has the current president of the IRI declaring his wish to see Israeli regime “removed from history” and branding Israel’s regime a “stinking corpse” and “on its way to annihilation"? the stance that throws the money, that belongs to the people of Iran, on the likes of Iraqi extremist Mulla Moqtada Al-Sadr and his Shia Militia, as well as the aforementioned Hamas and Lebanese Hezbollah?

That's fine, you carry on supporting that stance that has needlessly made Iran a potential target for military attack and possibly another war, when the right thing, for any government who cares for the people of Iran, would've been to stop sticking its nose in the affairs in other parts of the Middle East, and start treating its own people decently and improve their lives.

Five, whether you agree or not, the reality is that nowadays Muslims die mostly at the hands of fellow Muslims than by anyone else. In addition to what has happened in Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan/Darfur, also keep in mind how Muslims are killing other Muslims in Pakistan (with Shias and Ahmadis constantly murdered and having their mosques blown up by the Sunnis, who also kill each other), as well as Muslims killing each other in Somalia and Yemen etc. But hey, let's only talk about Americans killing "millions" of Muslims, shall we?

Reality-Bites

If you take your time and google you will find out. I have read reports of $1,350,000 dead.  Here are some statistics for you. However, common sense tells me the numbers are more. There were no killings prior to Americans invasion and just who supported Saddam for his killings and crimes? US

//usliberals.about.com/od/homelandsecurit1/a/IraqNumbers.htm

When Khomeini stood against Saddam, you and your type blamed him for it and gave right to Saddam to attack Iran and helped him in any form and shape. Now you are saying, why I didn't do anything about Saddam?  Perhaps you should look in the mirror and ask yourself that.  As for me, I was fighting in the war, while you probably had left the country or were running away. 

About Darfur and any other crimes against humanity. I have always been against it. So am I against what is happening internally in Iran. However, I agree with Iran's international stance.

Daruish

Not that that I liked Bush or cared for his policies (in fact quite the opposite), but what is the verifiable basis of this "millions" killed by Bush claim, that is continuously used by some on this site, come from? How did you arrive at this estimate of millions? And how many millions exactly?

There is no doubt that many people have been killed in the Iraq (and Afghan) conflicts, but I've never seen any credible and verifiable estimates anywhere near the millions that you are claiming. And, in any case, most of those killed in Iraq and Afghanistan have been killed and continue to be killed at the hands of fellow Muslims, not Bush. Almost every week there are suicide, car and road side bombings carried out by Muslims killing scores of fellow Muslims.

And while we are at it, before Bush got in Iraq and Afghanistan killing "millions", there some lovely people like Saddam and Taliban killings tens of thousands of Muslims in those countries, and there wasn't much complaining from other Muslims like YOU about those killings then. In fact, when Muslims commit mass murder in other places, like Darfur, this too rarely gets mentioned by people like you? Why is that?

Surely, it can't be because it only matters to you guys when Infidels kill Muslims, not when Muslims kill Mulisms, can it?

MM / Veiled

I don't recall any Mojtahed giving Jihad. Do you? The only one giving Jihad Is Ben and he is not a Mojtahed.  Bush ordered a crusade and killed millions and still continues for years. Why is that not a problem, but Jihad that is for self defence is?  Is crusade not a Biblical word?

There is a big difference between outlawing Jihad and stoning.

As I said, these issues will be resolved once the religion is separated from government and people are educated. We need to learn more about what we don't know or think we know. 

Veiled,

Why then Islam is the fastes growing religion in the west and they are so worried? That contradicts your claim.  If you got favor, do it to yourself. 

Dear Mr. Reza Aslan We Welcome Your Signature

and Support to this Campaign against the Death Penalty of Sakineh Mohamadi Ashtiani:

To Sign Petition Go Here

FYI/List of International & French Celebrities Supporting Sakineh

From Website of La Regle Du Jeu   Premiers signataires :

Elisabeth Badinter, Juliette Binoche, Rachida Dati, Sussan Deyhim, Mia Farrow, Bob Geldof, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Milan Kundera, Bernard-Henri Lévy, Patrick Modiano, Taslima Nasrin, Yann Richard, Ségolène Royal, Marjane Satrapi, Jorge Semprun, Wole Soyinka, Simone Veil, Jody Williams

Premiers soutiens :

Victoria Abril, Isabelle Adjani, Sylviane Agacinski, Woody Allen, Armand Amard, Armin Arefi, Martine Aubry, Fernando Arrabal, Ariane Ascaride, Yvan Attal, Edouard Baer, Josiane Balasko, Christophe Barratier, Marie-Christine Barrault, Kate Barry, Guy Bedos, Monica Bellucci, Samuel Benchetrit, Yamina Benguigui,Pierre Bergé, Charles Berling, Stéphane Bern,Yann-Arthus Bertrand, Jane Birkin, Marie-Louise Bischofberger, Biyouna, Dominique Blanc, Bertrand Blier, Luc Bondy, Romane Bohringer, Carole Bouquet, Peter Brook, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, Valéria Bruni-Tedeschi, Sophie Calle, Philippe Calvario, Jean-Claude Carrière, Robert Carsen, Arlette Chabot, Alain Chamfort, Cali,  Patrice Chereau, François Chereque, Jeanne Cherhal, Jacques Chirac, Julien Clerc, Hans-Peter Cloos, François Cluzet, Nicole Croisille, Olivier Corpet, Marion Cotillard, Antoine De Caunes, Maria De Medeiros, Rossy De Palma,Vincent Delerme, Catherine Deuneuve, Gérard Depardieu, Martial Di Fonzo Bo, Laurent Dispot, Claire Diterzi, Lou Doillon, Arielle Dombasle, Placido Domingo, Léa Drucker, André Dussolier, Brigitte Engerer, Enzo Enzo, Marianne Faithfull, Golshifteh Farahani, Mylène Farmer, Thomes Fersen, Jean-Louis Foulquier, Sami Frey, Charlotte Gainsbourg, Nicole Garcia, Christophe Gayral, Costa Gavras, Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, Grand Corps Malade, Juliette Gréco, Arthur H, Françoise Hardy, Jacques Henric, Anne Hidalgo, Lucas Hemleb, Jacques Higelin, Isabelle Huppert, Angélique Ionatos, Jeremy Irons, Marianne James, Agnès Jaoui, Elfriede Jelinek, Lionel Jospin, Gérard Jugnot, Marthe Keller, Ludovic Lagarde, Valérie Lang, Matthias Langhoff, Chantal Lauby, Bernard Lavilliers, Claude Lelouch, Roch Leibovici, Micha Lescaut, Michael Levinas, Justine Lévy, Didier Long, Ibrahim Maalouf, Amin Mahdavi, Abd Al Malik, Noël Mamère, François Marthouret, Kad Merad, Macha Méril, Daniel Mesguich, Julia Migenes, Radu Mihaileanu, Patrick Mille, Catherine Millet, Claude Miller, Frédéric Mitterrand, Misia, Yann Moix, Mathilde Monnier, Carmen Moravia, Jeanne Moreau, Wadji Mouawad, Anna Mouglalis, Nana Mouskouri, Isabelle Nanty, Catherine Nay, Florence Parisot, Laurent Pelly, Nicole Philibert, Michel Piccoli, François Pinault, Denis Podalydès, Patrick Poivre d’Arvor, Michel Portal, Charlotte Rampling, Robin Renucci, Natacha Regnier, Dominique Reymond, Jean-Michel Ribes, Laurent Ruquier, Emmanuelle Seigner, Sanseverino, Véronique Sanson, Dominique Sopo, Alain Souchon, Sylvie Vartan, Marie Vialle, Lars Von  Triers, Elie Wiesel, Lambert Wilson, Gabriel Yared, Roschdy Zem

DariushA; MM

I have heard Jihad explained as a "personal" struggle. A struggle that is meant to be a person fighting his or her own demons. In that context of course it does not need to be abolished. It is the violant war part of it that has to go. In reality it will go one way or other. The violant Jihadi lack the power to win. They will pick a fight and be defeated. They will keep doing this until the world is truly sick of them.

DariushA: I am doing you a favor. Giving you the truth about how the world is seeing Islam. If your religion is not reformed it will lose its religion status. Just watch the Mosque contraversy. Without 911 this would not be an issue. Thanks to a bunch of criminal Jihadi now you cannot even build an Islamic Center without a national fight. If there are any more like 911 I promise it will get tougher.

As I said: either get mad or deal with it. It does not need to be all the leaders. Just a single respected Islamic leader could start a reform. Too bad all the sane ones in Iran are in jail or house arrest. That leaves the ones in the West to take a lead. Unfortunately they are not doing it. 

That is why I question whether reform is possible. People like DariushA are too rigid. 

Mr. "I wrote a dissertation" Aslan

... should go back to the library to study, because it seems he knows nothing about Iranian history. It is Islam which was born from Irano-phobia. If the west has become Islamo-phobic, or even the Iranian people, maybe it's because of what it's done to Iran and every other nations is has infested. Maybe it's something about Sharia Law being in direct conflict with liberties of modern states that allow this Aslan whore make his self-indulgent videos while Iranians are being stoned, hung, and imprisoned for opposing Islamic governance.

It's time for Iranians to start treating the Islamic Republic backers like this with some hard hits. It's time to free our civilization.

Dariush A.

No one is asking to re-write Quran or bible.  We just ask to shelf the parts not applicable to the 21st centuray.  As I said before, in the Old Testament, there are 18 offences punishable by stoning, offenses that are mondane in modern age such as "criminal conversation" with an engaged virgin or blasphemy, but you do not see Christians or Jews rush to stone someone for blasphemy.

Fine, if you want spiritual Jihad, then go ahead.  In the west, religions have retreats that are supposed to bring one back up with ones' spirituality.  But, have a conversation with the mojtaheds on these little buggers who declare Jihad for the littlest reasons and commit hyaeous crimes.  Jihad has become a 5-letter word, and for obvious reasons.

MM

I am sure you have read this, but I am surprised you only look at jihad as the means to engage in warfare. The most important part of jihad is the spiritual struggle within a person which is referred to as the greater Jihad, then come jihad in different aspect of society and then the lesser Jihad, that is the struggle to defend your rights and freedom.  What is the problem with that?  Islam calls it Jihad. the modern society calls it the bill of rights, patriotism, nationalism and etc.

First of all, no one will outlaw such an important pillar of Islam. Secondly, those who misuse the word jihad, will use many other words and do as they wish. then what? Are we going to outlaw them too? Education is the key!  What can we expect from west, when some of us don't even know what Jihad means?  If religion is separated from state/government, that will solve most of the problems and no need to rewrite Quran or Bible.

Of course, I could very well be wrong, this should be debated among scholars and intellectuals.

//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#Distinction_of_.22greater.22_and_.22lesser.22_jihad

Dariush A.

As I said, Jihad is supposed to be one of the pillars of Islam, created to protect the "pius" from the "infidels".  I ask you, in the modern world, how many true jihads will you find?  Honestly, the bulk of the Arab world could not even defeat Israel, in several wars.

However, you will find self-righteous little nobodies who will announce Jihad on a drop of a hat and resort to suicide bombings, cutting off heads and barbaric acts.  Let's put it away since no body will honestly be able to declare a Jihad today, tomorrow or ever.  Unless, of course, one is a believer in Mehdi and the belief that a Jihad will start from......

Count me out then.

MM

What is your understanding of Jihad?  Suicide bombing?

There are different aspects to Jihad. Jihad is one of the best parts of Islam that differentiates Islam from other religions in a positive way. You are suggesting to outlaw that and some other core aspects to create westlam, so it can please the west/modern world?  Let us leave jihad alone and outlaw the crimes against humanity. This way there will not be any use for Jihad/defence against aggressor.  Why not educate the west about Jihad, instead of neutering Islam?  Besides, this modern world you want to please has committed much more crimes against humanity than those who use Jihad. Now, which one is more dangerous?

I think before some intellectuals give Fatwa to make changes, they should understand it first. I am sure there are some parts that if debated, they will be outlawed.

Dariush A / VPK

A strong leader who supports the written core-beliefs related to democracy / human rights is vital to the unification of the opposition towards a free Iran.

Reforms have to be implemented in the current form of Shari'a / hadith which were written in 7th century mentality.  As I have stated before, there are 18 "sins" in the old testament which carry the death penalty by stoning.  But, those "godly laws" were dismissed as barbaric by the modern man.  Many religions have moved on beyond the stone-age.

Additionaly, Jihad, which has become a "5-letter-word" in the west is one of the pillars of believing in Islam, and the leaders of Islam have to come together and issue a finding outlawing Jihad in the modern world.  Unfortunately, even Islamic sects cannot agree on many core issues and I do not see this issue going away.

DariushA

I am only just telling the harsh truth. Islam has become badly tarnished in non Islamic world. It has also got a very bad reputation in some majority Muslim nations: Iran. Muslims need a lot of damage control. They have an uphill battle. 

This is a true message. Now you can either get mad at the "messenger" or  do something about it. Something would be to denounce the worst practices. Many people have suggested a "reform". I personally don't think it is possible. But Muslims could try. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe they will reform it and route out the violence and other problems. It is your religion to save not mine. If not then this will be a long slide into oblivion. Religion like other things must adapt to time or perish

Good luck; you will need it.

veiled

This question must be from your book? The Book of BS by veiled prophet of khorasan.

The Big

question here is: whether Islam is a real religion or a terrorist cult. Some argue Islam should be reclassified and no longer afforded the protections of a religion.

That will solve the constitutional problem. The reality depends on actions of Muslims. They will determine how this will play out. In 1979 Islam took a turn to the worse. Khomeini decided to turn Islam into a terrorist cult. He was helped by Dihimi Carter. Now Muslims have to clean up the mess. If not other people will do it instead.

VPK

DK

You posted a video and wrote: 

Now You tell me if there is a direct Corrolation or Not between such behaviors and Islam ? ...

I don't have the answer ... Do You ?

I think you do have the answer and your answer is, NO.  

And I agree with you. The answer is, NO.

I have seen many in US that have done the same and worse, even priests. None of them are in direst or indirect correlation with Islam or Christianity. They are psychopaths scattered all over.  

This video reminded me of  an old Farsi Expression that says, "BEFORE YOU STICK A NAIL TO OTHERS,  STICK A NEEDLE TO YOURSELF".

Even though this expression is using nail and needle to cross its point.  It would have been the exact prescription for the psychotic behavior of that heartless Saudi family.

If everyone practiced this expression, world would have been a much better place. That is IF.

MM

Great suggestion. And if that is backed with a leader who enforces that constitution and people who learn to respect each other's rights, then the problems will be resolved.

Downtown Islamist

  Sure it's all legit and everything to build the mosque.It's a free country.You're free to build it.People are also free to say and think whatever they want about it.

The reason I don't have a problem with the people protesting is because Mosque's can lead to terrorism and it's two block's away from a place where a very large historical act of terrorism happened.I am aware of that.

That is a cool saying

That is a cool saying Doctor X,it make me think of how not much has ever been accomplished by mankind it seems that wasn't a necessity.We usually need a push.By the way,do you have a twin?

VPK

Hopefully, the people of Iran have learned not to gather around a person or a flag, and next time, they will first ralley behind a written constitution that guarantees the rights of its citizens.

Re: Bait and Switch

MM jan you are absolutely right. People of Iran got fooled by a pack of lies. They voted for one thing and got something very different. They voted for freedom and prosperity. They got slavery and poverty as well as misery and hell.

Of course they should have known better. I did and I expected others to also know. In 1979 Iranian people got offered two sets of lies:

1. The lies of Khomeini
2. The lies of Marxists

Both were transparent and easy to tell. But people led on by BBC and its propaganda machine opted for Khomeini's lies. Intelligent people should know:

• Never trust a priest of any religion. Lying is their trade since live off superstition and ignorance.
• Specially never trust a Mullah since they are the worst of a the priests.

This is one lesson that Iranian people should remember for generation. We must never again put our trust in the clergy. Or hope for something that have never happened before: an honest priest; specially an honest Mullah. Honesty is not in the Mullah nature.

Sargord Pirouz - bait and switch comes to my mind

The people of Iran voted for an Islamic Republic based on the description of Islamic Republic that Khomeini gave under the apple tree in Paris.  I wonder how many of those 50 lies were included in the constitution that was written after people voted for an Islamic Republic, and more importantly, how many of the written laws are adhered to in practice?

//iranian.com/main/blog/david-et-41

پنجاه دروغ آيت الله خمينی زير درخت سيب

1.  بشر در اظهار نظر خودش آزاد است. اولین چیزی که برای انسان هست آزادی بیان است.

2. مطبوعات در نشر همه‌ء حقایق و واقعیات آزادند

3. در جمهوری اسلامی کمونیست‌ها نیز در بیان عقاید خود آزادند.

4. یکی از بنیان‌های اسلام آزادی است… بنیاد دیگر اسلام اصل استقلال ملی است.

5. برنامهء ما تحصیل استقلال و آزادی است.

6. حکومت اسلامی یک حکومت مبتنی بر عدل و دموکراسی است.

7. دولت اسلامی يک دولت دمکراتيک به معنای واقعی است. و اما من هيچ فعاليت در داخل دولت ندارم و به همين نحو که الآن هستم، وقتی دولت اسلامی تشکيل شود، نقش هدايت را دارم.

8. اسلام یک دین مترقی و دموکراسی به معنای واقعی است.

9. ولایت با جمهور مردم است… نظام حکومتی ایران جمهوری اسلامی است که حافظ استقلال و دموکراسی است.

10. اما شكل حكومت ما جمهوري است، جمهوري به معناي اينكه متكي به آراي اكثريت است.

11. حکومت جمهوری است مثل سایر جمهوری‌ها و احکام اسلام هم احکام مترقی و مبتنی بر دموکراسی و پیشرفته و باهمه مظاهر تمدن موافق.

12. شکل حکومت جمهوری است. جمهوری به همان معنا که در همه جا جمهوری است. جمهوری اسلامی، جمهوری است مثل همه جمهوری‌ها.

13. در اين جمهوري يك مجلس ملي مركب از منتخبين واقعي مردم امور مملكت را اداره خواهند كرد.

14. عزل مقامات جمهوري اسلامي به دست مردم است. برخلاف نظام سلطنتي مقامات مادام‌العمر نيست، طول مسئوليت هر يك از مقامات محدود و موقت است. يعني مقامات ادواري است، هر چند سال عوض مي‌شود. اگر هم هر مقامي يكي از شرايطش را از دست داد، ساقط مي‌شود.

15. رژيم ايران به يک نظام دمکراسی‌ای تبديل خواهد شد که موجب ثبات منطقه می‌گردد.

16. اختیارات شاه را نخواهم داشت.

17. من هیچ سمت دولتی را نخواهم پذیرفت.

18. من در آینده [پس از پیروزی انقلاب] همین نقشی که الان دارم خواهم داشت. نقش هدایت و راهنمایی، و در صورتی که مصلحتی در کار باشد اعلام می کنم… لکن من در خود دولت نقشی ندارم.

19. ما به خواست خداي تعالي در اولين زمان ممكن و لازم برنامه‌هاي خود را اعلام خواهيم نمود، ولي اين بدان معني نيست كه من زمام امور كشور را به دست بگيرم و هر روز نظير دوران ديكتاتوري شاه، اصلي بسازم و علي‌رغم خواست ملت به آنها تحميل كنم. به عهدهء دولت و نمايندگان ملت است كه در اين امور تصميم بگيرند، ولي من هميشه به وظيفة ارشاد و هدايتم عمل مي‌كنم.

20. علما خود حكومت نخواهند كرد. آنان ناظر و هادی مجريان امور مي‌باشند.اين حكومت در همه‌ء مراتب خود متكی به آرای مردم و تحتِ نظارت و ارزيابی و انتقاد عمومی خواهد بود.

21. من نمي‌خواهم رياست دولت را داشته باشم. طرز حكومت، حكومت جمهوری است و تكيه بر آرای ملت.

22. مردم هستند که بايد افراد کاردان و قابل اعتماد خود را انتخاب کنند و ليکن من شخصاً نمی‌توانم در اين تشکيلات مسئوليت خاصی را بپذيرم و در عين حال هميشه در کنار مردم ناظر بر اوضاع هستم و وظيفه ارشادی خود را انجام می دهم.

23. من چنين چيزي نگفته‌ام كه روحانيون متكفل حكومت خواهند شد. روحانيون شغلشان چيز ديگري است.

24. من و ساير روحانيون در حكومت پستي را اشغال نمي‌كنيم، وظيفهء روحانيون ارشاد دولت‌ها است. من در حكومت آينده نقش هدايت را دارم.

25. حکومت اسلامی ما اساس کار خود را بر بحث و مبارزه با هر نوع سانسور می‌گذارد.

26. قانون این است، عقل این است، حقوق بشر این است که سرنوشت هر آدمی باید به دست خودش باشد.

27. بايد اختيارات دست مردم باشد، اين يك مسئله عقلي است. هر عاقلي اين مطلب را قبول دارد كه مقدرات هركسي بايد دست خودش باشد.

28. حكومت اسلامی بر حقوق بشر و ملاحظه‌ی آن است. هيچ سازمانی و حكومتی به ‌اندازه‌ء اسلام ملاحظه‌ء حقوق بشر را نكرده است. آزادی و دموكراسی به‌ تمام معنا در حكومت اسلامی است، شخص اول حكومت اسلامی با آخرين فرد مساوي است در امور .

29. اسلام، هم حقوق بشر را محترم مى‏شمارد و هم عمل مى‏كند. حقى را از هيچ كس نمى‏گيرد. حق آزادى را از هيچ كس نمى‏گيرد. اجازه نمى‏دهد كه كسانى بر او سلطه پيدا كنند كه حق آزادى را به اسم آزادى از آنها سلب كند.

30. بايد اختيارات دست مردم باشد.هر آدم عاقلی اين‌ را قبول دارد که مقدرات هر کس بايد در دست خودش باشد.

31. ما که می‌‌گوییم حکومت اسلامی می‌خواهیم جلوی این هرزه‌ها گرفته شود، نه اینکه برگردیم به 1400 سال پیش. ما می‌خواهیم به عدالت 1400 سال پیش برگردیم. همه‌ی مظاهر تمدن را هم با آغوش باز قبول داریم.

32. ما وقتی از اسلام صحبت مي‌كنيم به معنی پشت كردن به ترقی و پيشرفت نيست. ما قبل از هر چيز فكر مي‌كنيم كه فشار و اختناق وسيله‌ی پيشرفت نيست.

33. دولت استبدادی را نمی‌توان حکومت اسلامی خواند… رژیم اسلامی با استبداد جمع نمی‌شود.

34. در حکومت اسلامی اگر کسی از شخص اول مملکت شکایتی داشته باشد، پیش قاضی می‌رود و قاضی او را احضار می‌کند و او هم حاضر می شود.

35. ما حکومتی را می‌خواهیم که برای اینکه یک دسته می گویند مرگ بر فلان کس، آنها را نکشد.

36. حکومتی که ما می‌خواهیم مصداقش یکی حکومت پیغمبر است که حاکم بود، یکی علی و یکی هم عمر…

37. حكومت اسلامي، حكومت ملى است. حكومت مستند به قانون الهى و به آراء ملت است. اين طور نيست كه با قلدرى آمده باشد كه بخواهد حفظ كند خودش را. با آراء ملت مى آيد و ملت او را حفظ مى كند و هر روز هم كه بر خلاف آراء ملت عمل بكند قهراً ساقط است.

38. تمام اقلیت‌های مذهبی در حکومت اسلامی می‌توانند به کلیه فرائض مذهبی خود آزادانه عمل نمایند و حکومت اسلامی موظف است از حقوق آنها به بهترین وجه دفاع کند.

39. اقلیت‌های مذهبی به بهترین وجه از تمام حقوق خود برخوردار خواهند بود.

40. تمام اقلیت‌های مذهبی در ایران برای اجرای آداب دینی و اجتماعی خود آزادند.

41. از یهودیانی که به اسرائیل رفته اند دعوت می‌کنیم به وطن خود بازگردند. با آنها کمال خوشرفتاری خواهد شد.

42. اسلام جواب همهء عقاید را بعهده دارد و دولت اسلامی تمام منطق ها را با منطق جواب خواهد داد.

43. در حکومت اسلامی همهء افراد دارای آزادی در بیان هرگونه عقیده‌ای هستند.

44. جامعهء آيندهء ما جامعهء آزادی خواهد بود. همهء نهادهای فشار و اختناق و همچنين استثمار از ميان خواهد رفت.

45. ما یک حاکمی می خواهیم که توی مسجد وقتی آمد نشست بیایند دورش بنشینند و با او صحبت کنند و اشکال‌هایشان را بگویند. نه اینکه از سایه او هم بترسند.

46. این که می گویند اگر اسلام پیدا شد زنان باید توی خانه بنشینند و قفلی بر آن زده و دیگر بیرون نیایند تبلیغات است. زن و مرد همه آزادند که به دانشگاه بروند. رای بدهند. رای بگیرند. ما با ملعبه بودن زن و به قول شاه “زن خوب است زیبا باشد” مخالفیم.

47. اسلام با آزادی زن نه تنها موافق است بلکه خود پایه گذار آزادی زن در تمام ابعاد وجودی زن است.

48. زنان در انتخاب، فعاليت و سرنوشت و همچنين پوشش خود با رعايت موازين اسلامی آزادند.

49. زن‌ها در حكومتِ اسلامی آزادند. حقوق آنان مثل حقوق مردها است. اسلام زن را از اسارت مردها بيرون آورد و آنها را هم رديف مردها قرار داده است. تبليغاتی كه عليه ما مي‌شود برای انحراف مردم است.

50. اسلام همه‌ء حقوق و امور بشر را تضمين كرده است.

Reality-Bites - see my earlier post before video

The point you bring up are discussed there before the video.  Also, although I personally do not want the mosque built there due to the effect it has had, I do not like the consequences of yielding to Fox news and politicians who have taken advantage of this situation.  And, besides, we are not talking about the rule of majority here (be it 90%), but the rule of law should prevail here.   Again, the fact are:

* the mosque-site is 2 long NY blocks away from ground zero.

* the developers are following zoning laws (personal property laws).

* the developers are excercising their 1st amendment right to build a house of worship where they think they have followers to attend.

* the city council has approved the plans and the Jewish mayor of NY is behind it.

I have a feeling that the mosque will be moved due to its negative effect, but again, the rule of law is more important to me than my personal feelings towards the mosque and the people who represent it.

Reality Bites

Your post is nonsense.  Just because people are victims does not give them the right to be irrational.  The NYC Muslims cannot surrender to bigotry.  Using this incident as a precedent, should black churches never be built in white neighborhoods?  No synagogues in christian areas?  I guess that should never happen, because it may offend a lot of peoples feelings!

Even so, these mosque supporters have gone out of their way to accomodate the sensibilities of 9/11 victims.  They have come out strongly against the 9/11 attacks.  They have denounced the way of thinking that caused 9/11.  They offered to build a 9/11 memorial in the islamic cultural center.   Yet still they are saying that the mosque shouldnt be there.  damned if they do and damned if they dont...

You mentioned that this mosque offends 9/11 families.  Hundreds of Muslims were killed and wounded in the attacks. Do their feelings count too?  At least one mosque existed in the WTC.   If their feelings count, then surely the mosque should be built.  Especially since this mosque offers an alternative to the Islam that brown down the WTC.  

Now they play the "hallowed ground" card?  Its a burlington coat factory!  There are strip clubs 1 block from the WTC.  If honoring the 9/11 victims was the issue then why is that crap kept there?

This location was chosen because a mosque already exists in that area and it is overcrowded.  They need to expand.  Why should they build the mosque farther away to placate some moronic bigots who also thinks that obama is a muslim, sikhs/hindus/zoroastrians/buddhists are Muslims, and also believes Muhammad was mexican...