Happiness is an Iranian diplomat
Today, Andrew Bostom notes for the record: "Nuke Deal Ignores Iran's Genocidal Islamic Jew-Hatred." Quite. He proceeds to fill in these gaping holes in both the deal itself and, almost worse, in its schematic reporting with a historical/religious overview of the past half-millenium of theocratic Shiite rule. This was interupted by 54 years rule of by Pahlavis, father and son, whose Western-oriented and secularizing regime (1925-1979) would be overthrown by Ayatollah Khomeini, the inspiration of Iran's current leader, Rohani.
The so-called “Khomeini revolution,” which in 1979 deposed the secular, Western-oriented regime of Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, was in reality a mere return in full (including najis regulations, etc.) to oppressive Shiite theocratic rule, the predominant form of Iranian governance during four centuries. ...
"Najis"? Bostom explains the post-Shah return of crude Islamic supremacism in this uber-offensive theory, the "ritual uncleanliness of the non-Muslim":
The conception of najis or ritual uncleanliness of the non-Muslim was clearly reaffirmed. Ayatollah Khomeini stated explicitly: “Non-Muslims of any religion or creed are najis.” Khomeini elaborated his views on najis and non-Muslims, with a specific reference to Jews:
Eleven things are unclean: urine, excrement, sperm, blood, a dog, a pig, bones, a non-Muslim man and woman, wine, beer, perspiration of a camel that eats filth. … The whole body of a non-Muslim is unclean, even his hair, his nails, and all the secretions of his body…The body, saliva, nasal secretions, and perspiration of a non-Muslim man or woman who converts to Islam automatically become pure. As for the garments, if they were in contact with the sweat of the body before conversion, they will remain unclean. … It is not strictly prohibited for a Muslim to work in an establishment run by a Muslim who employs Jews, if the products do not aid Israel in one way or another. However it is shameful [for a Muslim] to be under the orders of a Jewish departmental head.
Such noxious views underlie violent Islamic aggression (jihad), Shiite-style:
Ayatollah Khomeini’s views were the most influential in shaping the ideology of the revitalized Shiite theocracy, and his attitudes towards Jews — both before and after he assumed power — were particularly negative. Khomeini’s speeches and writings invoked a panoply of Jew-hating motifs, including orthodox interpretations of sacralized Muslim texts, and the Shiite conception of najis. More ominously, Khomeini’s rhetoric blurred the distinction between Jews and Israelis, reiterated paranoid conspiracy theories about Jews (both within Iran and beyond), and endorsed the annihilation of the Jewish state. The pillars of this continuous modern campaign of annihilationist anti-Semitism are the motifs from traditional Islamic Jew-hatred, including Islamic eschatology, grafted seamlessly to jihadism. These deep-seated Islamic theological motifs are further conjoined to Holocaust denial and the development of a nuclear-weapons program intended expressly for Israel’s eradication.
And that's where we came in: "Nuke Deal Ignores Iran's Genocidal Islamic Jew-Hatred."
The deal also ignores Iran's role in 9/11 and other jihad atrocities, as noted in the 9/11 Commission Report, highlighted here.
It also ignores Iran's Islamic laws against Christians and Jews, as Bostom also points out here.
It also ignores Iranian "moderate" Rohani's (as "moderate" as Andropov in another era) Khomeinist views and evidence of his own Shiite fanaticism.
In fact, so sanitized and scrubbed are the diplomatic negotiations, the discussions pro and con, and all of the news coverage, a person might almost begin to believe Iran was a normal country, not a fanatical entity weaponizing eschatogical hatreds to achieve endgoals both cataclysmic and supernatural, as the late Laurent Murawiec pointed out.
Denying the supernatural aspects of Iranian endgoals puts worldly Western negotiators at a continuing disadvantage. But ignoring or dismissing tips toward the cataclysm on earth is evidence of an other-worldly fanaticism all their own.
Shortly after the election of Iran’s current “moderate” President Rouhani, the New York Times published a story on August 2, 2013 that was briefly revised later, and included this observation:
Ahead of his inauguration, Iran’s new president on Friday called Israel an “old wound” that should be removed, while tens of thousands of Iranians marched in support of Muslim claims to the holy city of Jerusalem. Hassan Rouhani’s remarks about Israel — his country’s archenemy — echoed longstanding views of other Iranian leaders. “The Zionist regime has been a wound on the body of the Islamic world for years and the wound should be removed,” Rouhani was quoted as saying by the semi-official ISNA news agency.
ISNA claimed later that they (and not Western editors) had mistranslated Rouhani’s quote and then issued corrections claiming he had merely called Israel a “sore” and had not said it should be removed–though one wonders what he thinks should be done with sores if they are not to be removed. The original Times story was then replaced with a tamer piece. But the argument that the alleged mistranslation should not be used to debunk Rouhani’s reputation as a moderate was undermined by the fact that, as even the revised Times story said, he had denounced Israel “in several books.”
Hassan Rouhani has a lengthy history in Iranian politics, having served as the Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council for more than 16 years.
Citing a defector from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Reza Kahlili has underscored the significance of this council role, reporting at WND last summer that it indicates "Rohani participated in all of its terrorist decision-making."
The fact that Rohani served as the representative of the supreme leader to the Supreme National Security Council since 1989, the defector said, shows that the supreme leader regards him as one of the regime’s most trusted figures. But more importantly, since all of the regime’s actions, from its nuclear activity to arming terrorists and its terrorist activities, are decided by that council, there is no doubt that Rohani participated in all of its terrorist decision-making.
Some of those decisions include the 1994 Jewish Community Center bombing in Buenos Aires, the 1996 Khobar Tower bombings in Saudi Arabia and the 2012 Burgas, Bulgaria, bus bombing.
Back to Bostom:
Until his election to the presidency, Hassan Rouhani headed the Tehran-based think tank, the Center for Strategic Research. Rouhani, in a 2009 monograph published by the Center for Strategic Research, “Islamic Political Thought, Volume I: Theory,” extolled Iranian theocrat Ayatollah Khomeini’s alleged enlightened “vision” for Islamic governance, as follows (translation kindly provided by Amil Imani):
It appears distancing from any fundamental ideals of the Islamic Revolution, would only mean to be held in the prison of western politics, “politics without ethics” or a medieval European dungeon, “backward religious thoughts”…And we all have witnessed and taken notes of the warning of great architect of the Islamic government, Ayatollah Khomeini, that we avoid falling over that cliff…[T]he Islamic Revolution and its theorists, and above all, Imam Khomeini, were exemplary leaders who were the first projected, defined and implemented a superb divine Islamic model for all humans and all times.
With this background in mind, the following WND report from last summer settles right into context.
Drawing from the front page of Kahyan, an Iranian regime newspaper, Reza Khalili reported:
Iran’s newly elected president, Hassan Rohani, attributed his victory in the June 15 voting to the 12th Imam, Mahdi, a statement with ominous overtones in the Islamic regime’s quest for nuclear weapons.
The Shiites believe that at the end of times, the 12th Imam, a 9th-century prophet, will reappear with Jesus Christ at his side, kill all the infidels and raise the flag of Islam in all four corners of the world. Many analysts believe Iran is seeking nuclear capability to bring on that Armageddon.
“This political [election] was due to the kindness of the last Islamic messiah [Mahdi],” Rohani said Friday.
How do we make "deals" with such state actors? How do we imagine that paper promises (in this case, not even decent paper promises) should be taken at their word as part of a process that is not a farce?
Answer: By ignoring everything that makes such deals, such promises untenable, unworkable, and doomed. By pretending deal-breaking-evidence doesn't exist. By thus entering into and remaining prisoners of a fact-devoid, alternate reality.
The question becomes: Who are the real fanatics here?