The Iranian Muslim cleric Mahdi Karroubi is challenging President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for the presidency of Iran. Karroubi says that Ahmadinejad's holocaust denial has harmed Iran and Iranians. Karroubi says of Ahmadinejad that he "offered the greatest service to Israel by raising the Holocaust issue because the whole world stood to support Israel." Did the whole world stand to support Israel? Certain European-leaning nations did. Certainly the whole world didn't. Regardless though, let's not take this one issue in isolation.
Frankly though, the news reporting on this is so poor that one doesn't really know where Ahmadinejad stands. He was recently quoted at The United Nations World Conference on Racism as saying the following:
After World War II, under the pretext of Jewish suffering and by taking advantage of the holocaust, they used aggression and military force to turn an entire nation into refugees. And they transplanted people from Europe, the United States and other parts of the world into their land, establishing a thoroughly racist government in occupied Palestine.
Remember, that too is a translation from Iranian to English.
"...taking advantage of the holocaust..." is an admission that it happened. If he didn't mean it, he should have said, "taking advantage of the alleged holocaust" or words to that effect.
That didn't matter to Associated Press Writer, Ali Akbar Dareini or his editors, in his article, "," May 16, 2009. Dareini didn't mention it. It's better left unsaid to facilitate the mischaracterization or less-than-full characterization of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
I will say though that the alternative news has been successful in forcing some AP writers to admit that Ahmadinejad did not call for Israel to be militarily or terroristically "wiped off the map" but rather "vanish from the pages of time," as did the South African Apartheid regime. To my understanding, Ahmadinejad is president to the largest Jewish community in the Middle East outside Israel. Wouldn't he have started wiping out Jews right in Iran? Why when asked to migrate to Israel by Israelis have those Iranian Jews said, "No"? If Ahmadinejad is so terrible, wouldn't they have jumped at the chance? They aren't all holocaust deniers are they? They aren't all anti-Semitic or anti-Jew are they?
A little more frankness is in order. If Ahmadinejad had not been so verbal, getting the attention he has for his points of view, which many in the world at least partially accept, would Iran have been a much easier political and military target and have already been bombed? Think about it. How many dead Iranian babies in addition to all the dead Iraqi, Afghani, Pakistani, Somali, Lebanese, and Gazan babies would there be? Who's attacking whom?
Everyone knows that there are many issues all culminating. One is the way in which the imperial powers dictated the taking of Palestinian land from Arabs contrary to earlier promises not to do that. Ahmadinejad's point though is that those Palestinians who don't suck up to the Empire should not be made to continue paying for the sins of Hitler and Hitler's German followers who numbered in the tens of millions. He has a point. The sooner the world acknowledges it, the better.
As for all the economic woes in Iran, Iran is under stiff sanctions and the whole world is hurting economically. Let's not blame Ahmadinejad for all of that. He's not a Wall Street or European banker and plutocrat.
It is obvious that American and Israeli false propaganda continues against Iran in the lead up to attacking Iran for Empire.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)