Bruce –
If Slate, WaPo or any reputable publication could nail Bush to this quote it would have happened by now.
As it is editors like Wiesberg nibble away at it in the comic margins of their mags.

4th Watch. Nothing to retract. "The Complete Bushisms" by Jacob Weisberg of Slate Magazine

Bruce M Smith
Whether Mr. Ettefagh received his journalism training on the Isle or in Egypt is irrelevant.
When a journalist attributes a quote to another person it must be true and verifiable, this is the foundation of journalism sir.

I repeat, Mr. Ettefagh not to question your veracity but will you produce this direct quote that you and so many others allude to. If not please retract it for journalisms sake.
Sincerely

OK Robert.
You are right, you win the prize for the absurd and the disturbed! ...now can you grow up? Can you buy a clue at a dollar store? Can you fast forward to the 21st century and civilised debate instead of taking on the world with your skewed views?
Just like other readers, you get to have one vote! Not more. And no body really cares about your religious beliefs.

The moderators of WashPost should do a better job of enforcing the rules governing comments and discussions.

First, "sock puppetry" alert - Balancing Act, What A Futile..., Voice of Isfahan... all are probably the same writer, maybe I think Dr. Ali, since they make no point except that he can't possibly be criticizing his own country.

Bruce, great debate but such bigoted vitriol and fallacious ad hominem language (lunacy, lunatic, nonsense, hateful (how hypocritical), low IQ, etc) against my presumed faith.

Huh, sending embattled but devout Jews to heroes welcome and a ability to practice an orthodox life freely in Israel - how again do Christian groups expect to get converts???? Huh, you don't believe in His Second coming or in giving His good news to others, what is it about Jesus that you believe that is left to be hijacked????

My point about Chalabi is actually an admission against evidence (oops you may guess my profession where low IQ is disincentivized but maybe not moral compass).

I comes from where I have read another Iranian (at this very site --- Global Power Barometer -- Aug 7 2007 - A unique perspective on Iran; an interview with Kaveh Afrasiabi; Posted August 8/9, 2007 "The Bush administration's 2003 invasion of Iraq under the pretext of Iraq's WMD threat resonated with Iran's perception of Iraq's threat and that explains Iran's tacit consent to the invasion") just about come out and say that Iranian agents promoted the case against Saddam. Uhh, that would be Chalabi and Curveball (are they the same??), at least at the time, I think.

On Bush quote, a link please of him saying it not of Palestinians secondhand translations of private discussions.

Reading the comments above leads me to a serious conclusion that people in America are really living in a bubble, a thick one. It proves the writer's point about the Hollywood creep in people's psyche in America.

The article of Dr. Ettefagh is a persona view and a small piece of advice to an American politician. It has no nexus with what is going on in another country, Iran.

4th Watch:If I took a wild guess last night Dr. Ettefagh never was on a breadline, I take another one today for you, Robert of Los Angeles, and Shiveh. He's got professional journalism training..probably British. Out of advertising myself, he's using a style of writing I'm quite familiar with, but it ain't for the 40 IQ crowd. You 3 are trying to 'read' something into this style that doesn't exist. 4th Watch is disecting that quote out of Bush like a frog, which is a very important part of the essay, and beautifully constructed. If you were serious about finding that outlandish and stupid quote from Bush, it's at CNN: I've watched it a dozen times. BBc has it also. Rob of LA has also not botherd to research Chalabi or 'Curveball'. They are the main reason France and Germany refused to support our illfated adventure. Rob of LA, another insight: I'm Christian 'lite', and have NO USE for those self-elected "Evangicals". One of the reasons I'm now on these blogs is because I believe they are part of the problem, not the solution. I recently denounced one so ferociously (Brit)- every word came out right- I had a laugh. Don't think for minute these lunatics are giving Jews 10G's to move back to Israel out of the goodness of their stone hearts. They're trying to convert them to Christians, and scare them with 2nd Coming 'Book of Revelations' nonsense. Not only are they corrupting my religion, they're insulting Jews, which I consider a very valid religion. But I took the time to read some of this filth they foisted on me, and I also figured out the 'formula' for conversion to this hateful trash: 1.Confusion and self doubt, and weakening of self esteem. 2. Someone/something to hate. Happiness is not allowed except on the shallowest terms. 3. Control and power. They all smirk, 'know' something you don't. Guess my "higher father" was in the room that day when I threw this garbage back. Underneath they're very weak, yet meanspirited. As they ran out the door, I reminded them in 2000 years 'fundamentalists' have not produced one decent picture, play, book or good building. And today I can say, not one decent President.

Wow....some energy wasted in having debate in a wrong way by Shiveh and Robert of Los Angeles.....what do you people eat for breakfast?

Those that have a bone to pick with the government of Iran ought to go there and argue in person. Ditto for those that wish to challenge, tell them the way it is, etc. in China, Vietnam, Burma, etc.

This article is about the opinion of a man with experience and in answer to a question put to the panel of writers from around the world. It is not about the home country of the writer!

Kam-korder, not the first time your thought fly immediately to marriage

"I just have one comment for her: " Khanoom, siqeh mishi?"" (TPM 7/7/07 - Kam-korder)

May I suggest an old fashioned tribal solution to Robert and Shiveh's bitter rivalry? Get married to each other and let the Middle East stay in peace!

PS Read my earlier comment. See, I was right.

Good call, 4th watch.

Mr. Ettefagh
When you write “So, dear aspirant, if you want to take any bold steps and attack another member country of the UN, please do not tell the rest of the world, once again, that God told you to do it.”

I presume you are referring to a direct quote from Pres. Bush.
Not questioning the veracity of what you say but will you back that up. My searches for a smoking gun quote in good reputable ink have been in vain.
I found that the M.E. and European dailies along with the BBC reoffered the same tabloid sensationalism with no verifiable quotes.
You may be right but I would like to see that quote myself.

Surely we can agree that such remarks on a President, any President, minus evidence are not acceptable.
Regards

Dang extra dash or rather underscore, where it did come from??
" http://pedulipalestina.blogspot.com/2007/04/very-useful-infos-on-iran.html "

Your persistence is commendable. But, you are on your own. I’m out of this one!

Please check your link. The interview is interesting and I would like to read it in it’s entirety.

Regards,

I promise, I'll stop - for awhile.
Bruce, it ain't Islam we're against. Shiveh may be very devout and Dr. Ettefagh drink like a fish, especially on the road, or vice versa, I don't care. It's the "fascism" part of the equation - Sharia and dhimmitude (if you're lucky to be a complacent but practicing Jew or Christian) internally and the hijacking of spiritual struggle, jihad, into eternal war with not only infidels outside but a takfiri civil war against modernity in the Muslim ummah.

The question might be:
Do you trust Ali Ettefagh’s answers where INDEED he is trying to represent the best in Iran? (or are there double meaning here too, Shiveh?)
(from http://pedulipalestina.blogspot.com/2007/04/very-useful-infos-on-iran.html_ )

1) “LA: Dr Ettefagh, You said that religious minorities have equal rights in Iran. How do you explain some restrictions against Jewish people. For instance, Jews are forbidden to be teachers in Iran outside of Jewish schools?
Ali Ettefagh: There is no such law in Iran
(NEED TO FACT CHECK).
The Iranian Jewish population is a very small group as a percentage of the population and especially as more than 1.3 million people enter the job market every year.”

2) Alexandria, VA: Re the earlier questions on arbitrary justice and fashion police: Are you completely oblivious to the existence and activity of the Basij - the religious police who beat and 'arrest' people who violate their idea of sharia?
Ali Ettefagh: I live in Tehran. I see the reality whilst I am afraid you have access to only slices of reality. I also travel frequently to the rest of the world so I try to be very objective.
(SHIVEH - you tell me, a double edged sword comment? I translate - I live in Tehran, you don’t, I want to travel and do business so I have to be “objective”, i.e. don’t make waves )

3) Washington DC: Dear Mr. Ettefagh, Thank you for your thoughtful comments and for joining us here. Many Americans, including Bush, emphasize the liberation of women as part of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, for example. Is this a specious claim? Do you believe Muslim women are treated fairly in Iran?...
Ali Ettefagh: Thank you for your question. The idea of liberating Iranian and Saudi women from Washington sets aside the requirement of respecting local culture. ...As for role of women in Iranian society, it is not comparable with Saudi Arabia. Iranian women have the legal right to a national identity card, driving licenses, and the right to vote, work and inheritance. Women can be seen as police women (even commandoes), teachers, doctors, family judges, lawyers (like Mrs. Shirin Ebadi, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize), reporters, taxi bus and truck drivers, flight attendants and alike.
(Code words - “ Shirin Ebadi” if you want to know the real Iran - find her memoir -- Iran Awakening: A Memoir of Revolution and Hope. She certainly is critical of America and Iraq - but her Nobel Peace Prize is not for Bush bashing, it for defending the undefendable in a theocratic state.)

Addendum - a quick Google search showed the "bounty" is $10,000 which hardly covers relocation costs to another nation, at least in the developed world, and comes from an American Christian led ecumenical organization.
Huh, how surprising to find bleeding heart Christians doing good in the world, imagine that? ( http://jewishrefugees.blogspot.com/search/label/Jews%20of%20Iran )

Do you have other sources??

Bruce - we have more Persian Jews in Beverly Hills than the Ayatollah has in Tehran and yes it would take more than 60 grand to move them. But if I were part of such a small minority of 30,000 remnant in a theocratic state I would make myself even smaller and put myself at the mercy of Supreme Council because you would indeed be and dhimmitude aint so bad after you get used to it (How much cotton you want us to pick, Ayatollah Boss Man?)

Yeah it isn't "Push Israel into the sea" it is the "Destruction of Israel" which may not allow for the safe removal of Jewish refugees from this planned holocaust.

Well Nazi is a dirty word but it fit. I can't help what you termed Orientals but Mao did kill his 30 million and Pol Pot and the "reeducation camps" killed more than GIs and John McCain did by 10 fold. At what point is an insult justified?

To: Robert of Los Angeles
You write: "Ali Ettefagh's (sic) origins are relevant because he calls for unilateral religious disarmament by the new President in the face of a deliberate and consistant Islamic theocratic agenda." Err, what's wrong with that -?- going on the assumption Dr. Ettefagh means that, which I don't think he does. He's actually closer to the American Constitution than you are dividing church and state, so his "origins" mean nothing, except you are deeply prejudiced against Muslems..again going on the blind assumption he is one. (Keep in mind 30,000 Jews are living happily in Tehran, and refusing $60,000 each to emigrate to Israel, is a terrible embarrassment to Israel.) The mis-translated "Push Israel into the sea.." doesn't hold much... water.
Lastly, you also missed what I'm saying: don't worry about "failure" in Iraq, Israel, Lebanon. It already happened, and Bush's worthless trip now is well, worthless. We LOST. I'm Vietnam generation, though no where near as vocal back then as I am today. I've heard it before, many times. They were the "gooks" today the "Islamofacists". Both terrible bigoted words, and same result: LOSS. Only a horror of a humanbeing like Bush and his awful cabinet could think up such a dirty word as 'Islamofacist'. In fact it's turning against them, and I now have no sympathy.
Somethin' tells me Dr. Ettefagh ain't poor, and neither am I. But in successful business, which I've obviously conducted, I've made mistakes. Politics and and wars are no different. We recognise our mistakes early, and cut the losses, and move on. Washington - not Middle East - is the "happy talk" you accuse Dr. Ettefagh of. Write your Congressman & Senator & President, and denounce them for this American tragedy. They lied to you, as did James Baker and swing vote Sandra somethin' or other. They are ruining America, not 19 troubled young men - partially the product of our misguided State Dept. and the friends they keep. Leave "Ali" out of it ...he's just a businessman, like me.... and if you're looking for a party, it's in Dubai. But very expensive...

Alright then, I stand corrected. We misunderstood each other on "coded message". I just meant that it was an "indirect" attack. Hey, we agree after all...good "chewing it over" though and I hope it was a big and juicy American genetically bred hybrid fruit (but not tomatoes!!!) we were "chewing" and not the "old sock" that Voice wants to feed us.

I think you inferred earlier that most all of these featured panelist don't interact with us commenters whether our thoughts are pertinent or outrageous. Maybe they don't pay enough attention to reaction. Amar Bakshi is an exception who keeps his cool but will respond if we make a point or have a pertinent question. The Global Power Barometer also acknowledges reaction quite freely.

Robert,

Ok! now I know where you misundrestood me. "Hitting two birds with one stone" is what you are referring to. "A double edged sword" cuts both your opponent and yourself.

Robert,

What is Dr. Ettefagh being attacked for on that line? Isn't it about his country being a theocracy? I believed he knew he'll be attacked for that line while he was writing it. "A double edged sword" it was.

(I ran afoul of the automatic censors with the ironic use of an insult so I revise...)

I believe Shiveh is from Iran, I am not, though I am flattered that "Voice of Isfahan" (who by his appellation must hail from there) thought I knew enough of the issues to "pass" as such.

I must be getting under the skin of some, by actually discussing issues and not by recycling "spin" on Bush and his Darth Vaderish imperial ambitions.

Ali Ettefagh's origins are relevant because he calls for unilateral religious disarmament by the new President in the face of a deliberate and consistent Islamic theocratic agenda. That is a recipe for "happy talk" followed by failure. Failure not only in Iraq and Israel but in Lebanon, the Gulf States and beyond.

Peace be unto you in the name of Whom you hold sacred and in the name of tolerance and freedom for all.

Bruce, I'm glad you're retired and tired of all these wars. I'm afraid you'll leave us to deal with the consequences of letting real theocrats and totalitarians have their way especially beyond their borders. Bhutto - her faults cannot matter - even the tyrant Julius Caesar was considered a martyr - the Sunni jihadists create martyrs - the suicide bombers themselves are not martyrs just assasins. Whoops, indeed.

Shiveh --
Clearly a "double" edged sword cuts two ways, by which you mean Ali is cutting at Bush AND cutting at his own regime. You further state it is a fair assumption "he knowingly brings into his writing" and the it would grammatically be "playing politics with religion". Therefore you're saying Ali is safe criticizing the US use of religion but we can fairly assume that their is an undercurrent, unstated universal condemnation of theocracy which MUST rebound to the Supreme Council.

Bruce,

Thank you for your input. Saved me some time! And I'll try to watch what I eat more closely from now on.

In respond to Robert's aligation that Dr. Ettefagh writes as part of the regime in Iran, I responded that his rejection of political religion shows he writes his own ideas and not the regimes. Please read that part again and tell me where the "coded message" was implied.
"Dr. Ettefagh’s mention of Devine Intervention and categorical condemnation of playing politics with religion is a double edged sword that he knowingly (fair assumption) brings into his writing. These must be his own believes and clearly not state propaganda."

It always makes me very happy to bring joy to others. Enjoy the wine.

TO: Robert, Shiveh, et.al.:

What I think the author is saying, tongue in cheek, is that our world would be a better place to live without the three Abrahamian religions meddling in our lives.

'Voice of Isfahan': 'Robert of Los Angeles and 'Shiveh' ...Iranians? I'd never guess! They sound as American as a Monsanto GM tomatoe and chalk based McDonald's milkshake.
They also both have their facts wrong, which makes sense, due to the nutritional value of the above. Dr. Ettefagh is pointing his essay directly at the United States, because that's what he was asked to do, along with the other forum members,(ie Ms. Leitao yesterday). Dreaming he is coding some sort of messsage to the Mullahs in, I'd presume, Iran, is past far fetched, but surely worth a hardy belly laugh for the Dr.
As for Rob of LA, living in France from 2002 onwards, you've got all your pertainent facts wrong. Chalabi is a known International Thief over here, as is that nut Germany told us not to trust "Curveball". These 2 thugs have cost America trillions of dollars, soon close to 4,000 US soldiers dead, and even worse to Iraq. But we shouldn't blame them, we should blame ourselves. As for Germany and France's decision not to sign up for invasion had nothing to do with pressure from Russia or China. (Though they also were against invasion) Curveball is a good example for Germany to distrust America's motives for invasion of Iraq. France in fact, provided the Niger 'yellowcake' (nonsense) intelligence, but warned of its vulnerability to truth. They were horrified when Colin Powell presented it as fact in his slanderous UN speech. If you recall, that's when the above 4 ganged up on America at the UN. The only fool, dumb enough to trust Bush and his cronies, was Tony Blair, also full of misinformation. There is no "special relationship" between America and Britain, and never was. This is our worthless medias' invention, to mask the fact of what happened at the UN. We wanted war...and oil. "Special Relationships" don't encounter Presidents (Eisenhower) kicking them out of Suez, and LBJ leaving 10 Downing St. in tears as Britain refused to contribute troops to Vietnam. He knew then the war was lost.
So let's all move on in 2008. Whether you guys are Iranian or Indonesian I couldn't care less. But I'm 62 yo retired, and had enough of wars. I'll denounce it and the folly behind it every chance I get. And face it: We Lost. When you bite that bullet, and bury the lunacy of replacing the corrupt Shah with his son, putting Chalabi in charge of Iraq, and Benazir Bhutto as official thief of her "people", we'll start recovery. (Whoops! One's gone already!)

Robert of Los Angeles

This PostGlobal section of The Washington Post is a chance for all readers to read the opinions of informed and experienced people from around the world. If you cannot be polite in a civilised discussion, then BE QUIET!

I think this is a fair and balanced article from Dr. Ettefagh in which he has articulated rejection of extremism, either from Americans or from cavemen in Afghanistan. This "work of God" stuff by American presidents is stupid and as dangerous as Osama bin Laden's killing people. So, I agree with the writer.

Fascinating to see the exchange of two Iranian exiles (self-exiles, expats, diaspora, estranged...whatever!) hijacking the comment space here with their own peppered opinions about how 72 million people must live! Put a sock in it!

The comments of the writer is in response to a specific question--sending a message to the presidential candidate in USA. It is not about Iran's internal matters, it is not about Iran's leaders and it is not about cheap comments.

Finally, this is in the opinions section of an American newspaper where the writer has been asked to provide his opinion. This also means that the writer's life, his business, etc. are not the subject of the discussion.

Amazing how civility has passed by those Iranians and others abroad!!

Shiveh - the title is "Keep God out of your wars" which seems rather clear - against religious extremism but not against our wars per se.

And Iran except for the presence of so many of our troops so near is the net winner from our Afghan and Iraq adventures - less Taliban Sunnis from the East, ability to go on pilgrimages to Karbala and Najaf for both Iranian and Iraqi Shia and transit of Iraqi Shia to Iranian holy places not to mention no fear of another horrible border war with Iraq.

There's some evidence with Chalabi and others that Iranian spies helped "fix" the intel on Saddam.

UN Security Council Resolution 1441 was unanimous in stating "That Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops in 1991. and "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq’s obligations".

In 2003, France and Germany under Russian and Chinese pressure relented. Further resolutions were withdrawn due to veto powers making it moot but the US had at least six votes for action under the UN maybe more, hardly unanimous condemnation. Around 40 countries contributed at least token forces to the coalition and the presence in Iraq has been approved by UN mandate since 2004.
It was a daring action and has been costly and frustrating but hardly to be categorized as "extremist" as the calls for Saddam's "regime change" had been constant and popular in the US and around the world since 1991.

Robert,

It’s not a fight my friend. Sport? Maybe! If that’s the case, I’m playing for fairness.

The Ideas are Dr. Ettefagh’s not mine. It just happens that this time I can agree with most of them. So, I tried to explain my take of them where I thought your take is different.

I wished all panelists in this forum would sum-up the reactions and post a reply before we moved to a new question. Then I wouldn’t have to jump in on anybody's behalf.

I still do not think he is talking only about evangelical extremism. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and wouldn’t be attacked if there wasn’t a 9/11 tragedy. So, attacking Iraq was an act of extremism (meaning an act that people with mainstream mentality wouldn’t do.) Worldwide condemnation is the proof of that.

We in America are constantly critical of different aspects of our government, but if a foreigner does it, specially if he is from an adversarial country, we take offense. It is understandable.

Shiveh - there is no "world in general", there are only nations in particular. To believe otherwise is a fiction only progressives and media elites accept to the detriment of truth and the progress of the peoples they wish to help.

Wrong on WMDs may be many things but extremism seems not to fit the definition. Even if intelligence was "fixed" which is a matter of dispute, the justification for assault on Saddam which had been left hanging incomplete for 13 years after being approved by the UN in 1991 has no particular connection to the "evangelical" extremism alleged.

Your arguments are getting weaker not stronger. You should give up. My "extremism" is apparently defeating you.

you're lecturing thew wrong people...coward.

"Please keep in mind that an extremist named Osama also believes that he is doing the work of God, whilst the rest of the world never accepted extremism, no matter how it is packaged or alleged."

My undrestanding of this line is that he believes the world(-society) has not accepted extremism, not that there are no extrimists in the world. He is also adding that all sorts of extremism is rejected by the world in general, may it be packaged (idealogy?) or alleged (WMDs that do not exist?)

And just a little on details on Ali's thoughts

"(if you) attack another member country of the UN, please do not tell the rest of the world, once again, that God told you to do it" -- What is referring to in particular. The words that haunted CIA's Plame/Wilson and then the administration had to do with Niger's "yellowcake" and not "God's vengeance" And search Colin Powell's testimony before the UN in vain to find how we should find Iraq accursed before God though there is plenty of reason to do so.

" whilst the rest of the world never accepted extremism" Hah, not Osama's though his brand has franchised, spreading like a cancer everywhere. But I've already discussed Iran. And if you don't call the excesses of Baathism extremism, good God! And Putin is sending Russia back to the dark ages, and China is still a totalitarian state, and where are the narco-thugs Hugo and Evo (Bolivia) taking Latin America?, and even allies like Saudis have no concept of freedom.
Yeah, the world except for the Bush White House is just one moderate happy place.

Shiveh -- Oh, so Dr. Ettefagh by use of "code words" is harshly criticizing his own government on its core religious orientation. May Allah have mercy on his soul!

So you admit attack on Bush is mostly NOT about religion, except for the rather benign ecumenical quotes I have already given.

Except for our man Huckabee, who is still a long shot and is kind of a softie when it comes to Iran (wants to bring back into the world fold, a "disaffected brother", there is no real concern about "evangelical Christians" controlling foreign policy.

What I meant was that for an Iranian inside Iran, this is not a suitable forum to criticize his own government. Dr. Ettefagh’s mention of Devine Intervention and categorical condemnation of playing politics with religion is a double edged sword that he knowingly (fair assumption) brings into his writing. These must be his own believes and clearly not state propaganda.

President Bush has talked about receiving direction from a higher power in state matters. He is mostly blamed for going to Iraq under false pretenses and also for general incompetence. Many people in America also believe that the Islamic threat is blown out of proportion for political gain. Dr. Ettefagh is talking about these same points.

I respectfully disagree that I am "off-topic". He is in effect seeking "unilateral (religious) disarmament" against a determined Islamic revolutionary regime. This is NOT a war against Islam - but it is a struggle against the political implications of Islamic fascism and nihilism and it is ridiculous to assume there will not be aspect of "clash of civilizations" and memories of the siege of Vienna, the fall of Constantinople and the Reconquista of Spain brought up again.

As for Bush, media spin has created its own story.
He has taken much flak in our Republican base for stating that Muslims worship the same Creator God as Christians and Jews. He has been rather consistent in pursuing religious freedom even where it is militarily counterproductive (Shia pilgrimages to Karbala and Najaf for instance).
He diligently, I know because it has become one of the smoother and oratorily striking parts of his halting speech pattern, says "But we also understand that freedom is not America's gift to the world; freedom is the Almighty God's gift to each man and woman in this world". This is about as ecumenically liberal as you will get where our heartland still loves Jesus and as universal in scope when Americans grow tire of the burdens and sacrifices we have made in the past few years and certainly last 100 years in the name of the world's freedoms.

Robert,

You are correct about the situation in Iran. In my view, Dr. Ettefagh is also correct on his evaluation of the situation in America. If you do not agree with his post, I like to read your views. If you believe that he should be telling this to the mullahs instead, I have to say that this is not the forum for it. I did the same with a post from this writer a few weeks ago. It was a mistake.

Yet our man Ali does international business in this regime so I consider him part and parcel of it.

Further, the theocratic regime born in 1978 has remained basically with the same Islamofascist philosophy since then, thru US presidents of various personality and policy, so we cannot blame Bush for creating it. The "reformer" Khatami had fallen out of favor with the Ayatollah and his council already so Mahmoud was the up and coming guy who knows how to bring media savvy to the propagating of religion and petrodollar extortions.

So I say again why should we listen to a spokesman of theocracy and apocalyptic threats on how faith should be handled in our secular democracy???

Robert,

This post is not by Mahmoud, its by Ali and it makes perfect sence to me.

Regards

That's rich, an Iranian telling us to keep religion out of our politics.

We loved Mahmoud's visit to NY where AGAIN he prophesied of the Hidden Imam's soon second coming (Jesus will play second fiddle), spoke in both heartlessness and ignorance about gays and all other suffering groups in your benighted country, and desires our immediate conversion to his brand of Islam to avoid the doom and reverse our decadence.

Excellent!