The mullahs who rule Iran do not care about human life, except for their own. Westerners who die are mere infidels who do not count. Moslems who die are martyrs who will be rewarded in heaven whether or not they intended to give their lives for the cause. Indeed, the religious beliefs of Shiite Moslems include the reappearance of the hidden Imam, the even which will end the world as we know it. The hidden Imam or the Mahdi will reappear when the world has fallen into chaos and civil war emerges between the human race for no reason. Many in Iran believe that causing chaos and war will hasten the day when the hidden Imam arrives to bring justice to the world. In other words, the rulers of Iran do not care about the deaths of people, the commencement of war or the presence of suffering and chaos in the world.
In this context, it is interesting to look at what America's UN ambassador Samantha Power said at the Center for American Progress in a speech last Friday. She talked about trying to convince Iran that it should abandon its ally Syria because Assad had used chemical weapons. Here are Power's precise words:
We [the USA] worked with the UN to create a group of inspectors and then worked for more than six months to get them access to [Syria], on the logic that perhaps the presence of an investigative team in the country might deter future attacks. Or if not, at a minimum, we thought perhaps a shared evidentiary base could convince Russia or Iran – itself a victim of Saddam Hussein’s monstrous chemical weapons attacks in 1987-1988 – to cast loose a regime that was gassing its people.
This is best described as crazy talk. America's UN ambassador tells us that our national policy was to show Iran evidence that Assad was using chemical weapons in the hope that the mullahs would cut its Syrian ally loose? Can Power really be that naïve that she thinks that Iran does not know about Assad's chemical weapons? Does she really believe that the mullahs don't know that Assad was gassing Sunnis and Christians (or, as they are called in Teheran, heretics and infidels)? Can it be that America's UN ambassador is unaware of the truth, horrible as that truth may be?
Someone better explain to Samantha Power the real nature of the Iranian theocracy. It is time to speak truth to Power.
In this context, it is interesting to look at what America's UN ambassador Samantha Power said at the Center for American Progress in a speech last Friday. She talked about trying to convince Iran that it should abandon its ally Syria because Assad had used chemical weapons. Here are Power's precise words:
We [the USA] worked with the UN to create a group of inspectors and then worked for more than six months to get them access to [Syria], on the logic that perhaps the presence of an investigative team in the country might deter future attacks. Or if not, at a minimum, we thought perhaps a shared evidentiary base could convince Russia or Iran – itself a victim of Saddam Hussein’s monstrous chemical weapons attacks in 1987-1988 – to cast loose a regime that was gassing its people.
This is best described as crazy talk. America's UN ambassador tells us that our national policy was to show Iran evidence that Assad was using chemical weapons in the hope that the mullahs would cut its Syrian ally loose? Can Power really be that naïve that she thinks that Iran does not know about Assad's chemical weapons? Does she really believe that the mullahs don't know that Assad was gassing Sunnis and Christians (or, as they are called in Teheran, heretics and infidels)? Can it be that America's UN ambassador is unaware of the truth, horrible as that truth may be?
Someone better explain to Samantha Power the real nature of the Iranian theocracy. It is time to speak truth to Power.
No comments:
Post a Comment