1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

My answers to the Grand Infidel

Reader comment on item: Swiss Minarets and European Islam
in response to reader comment: what, Iran supplying arms?

Submitted by Debanjan Banerjee (India), Jan 7, 2010 at 21:59

Hi Mr. Infidel,

"I told the expert comrades that I need guerrilla groups in Europe to kill whoever they see of them [Kurdish oppositionists]. I will do it, with the help of God. I will defeat them and follow them to Iran. Then I will ask the Mujaheddin to attack them there ." --Mr Al Majid at a meeting of Ba'ath Party leaders ,26 May 1987

My Answer >>>> It does mean that Al-Majid is referring about Saddam's (and now Western) Iranian puppies Mujhahedin-e-khalq as "the Mujaheddin". Remember Al-majid did mention that he will follow them to Iran before he mentioned the words "the Mujaheddin". So I do have proof from your own comments that Al- Majid did not talk about Allah when he said about Mujahedin in the above mentioned quote.

"So you see - it was all done for allah and by the mujahadeen - so everything is OK and you don't have to worry."

My Answer >>>> I can prove you that MEK(Mujhahedin-e-Khalq) is nothing but an atheist group of pro-western(formerly pro-Saddam) terrorist thugs. Now surely they have nothing to do with Allah. Comparing them with Allah is like telling Hitler did kill on the name of Jesus.

Yes I am worried that the West as well as the Israelis who accuse everyone in the world as terrorists do provide support to a bunch of terrorist thugs like the MEK. It tells me about the hypocrisy of their supporters like you.

"Iran's animosities to the 'great Satan" - the US and its allies exist because it is not Islamic. The US did court favour with the Shah in the 1960's - purely and simply because of the Cold War and Iran's proximity to Russia. Once the Shah was deposed by the deranged Ayatollah and his co- cultists - talk of the US government meddling with Iranian government decisions is pure fantasy.
Iran's meddling in the affairs of other countries is well known - eg. Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan."

My Answer >>>>> How naive of you that you did not talk about US overthrowal of Mohammad Mossadeq , the most progressive,nationalist and secular leader of Iran in last 100 years and replacing him with the tyrannical Shah regime. Now I call that "act of malevolent interference" in other people's matters.This is similar to what would happen if the Iranians tried to determine the government in the US or Israel.Kindly try to answer that one.

As per as Western support of Saddam is concerned kindly do remember that Saddam was met by US luminaris such as Mr.Donal Rumsfeld and Jessy Helms. One of the US officials made the following comment about Saddam that "We know Saddam is a son of bitch but he is our son of bitch". Don Rumsfeld even met Saddam in person and provided him with Satelite details of Iranian as well as Kurdish positions. Now it is evident that Saddam was working for the US and not for Allah. Saying that Saddam was working for Allah is equivalent to saying that Hitler was working for Jesus.

"And by the way there are plenty of unconfirmed reports that groups linked to the al-Qaeda network have tried to obtain the ingredients to make mustard gas in Afghan labs."

My Answer >>>>> Mustard Gas from Afghan Labs ???? I think you will also agree with me that Afghanistan is a pretty much underdeveloped country. How can you have laboratories there producing a sophisticated chemical such as Mastard gas ? By the way there are plenty of confirmed reports that Israel used toxic agents on innocent Gaza civilians during "Operation Cast Lead".

"Yes - Saint Mandela WAS called a terrorist at that time - he was brought before a court of law and he himself admitted to terrorist charges."

My Answer >>>> By your above logic then former Israeli leaders such as Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin should also be called terrorists since they were convicted by British courts at the time of being involved in terrorist activities at the time. By the way I believe plenty of US founding fathers were also called terrorists by the british at the time.

My defintion of terrorism is any act by which innocent blood is shed for pollitical reasons is worthy of called terrorism. Do you agree with it ?

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to My answers to the Grand Infidel by Debanjan Banerjee

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2021 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)