You Know You Need a New Travel Agent When He Says...

"Azerbaijan is for lovers."

Lurch of the Splatter Day Taints

Chant of the Mormon Zombies:

We want your brains...and your souls...but mostly your brains.

War of the Worlds, War of the Words

Recently, the president of Iran Mahmood Ahmadi-Nejad wrote a letter to George Bush, president of the United States, about the failure of the democratic state in the global arena. Covert operatives from the Hereafter were able to intercept President Bush's response to President Ahmadi-Nejad and make a copy before being tackled by apish Secret Service agents. Below is the copy of President Bush's response, word for word, and below that is the orginal letter received by President Bush from President Ahmadi-Nejad. Enjoy!




Aaqaa-ye Mahmood Ahmadi-Nejad,
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran

Thank you for your letter. I particularly liked the rosewater-scented envelope it came in, nice touch.

First and foremost, I must congratulate you on your impeccable English. I have it on good authority that you spent the entire month of shahrivar last year at English camp learning my mother tongue, and it has clearly paid off. khosh behaaletaan. Unfortunately, as president of a country that matters, I don’t have time to run off to summer camp and spend the days eating boxed mashed potatoes and lazily doing trust exercises with the other campers (but one can dream), so the fact that you took a few weeks to learn English is much appreciated. I have to admit, had you written the letter in your scribble script, I probably would have introduced it to the CIA intelligence reports I use to stoke my fireplace.

As of yet, I don’t have an Iranian stamp in my passport, though maybe someday soon I can come for a visit. If you don’t have a spare room at your house I wouldn’t find it an inconvenience to bunk with a cousin or a close family friend. And if you wouldn’t mind sparing one of your wives while I’m in town that would be right neighborly. Regrettably, JC won’t permit me have more than one ball-and-chain, which is both a blessing and a curse when you think about it. And by the by, in the United States we don’t have to write (PBUH) after Jesus Christ. I think they only do that in Great Britain and maybe Zambia. The British also spell “color” “colour” which is just a riot! And why do they call “cookies” “biscuits”? I’ve never been able to wrap my mind around that one.

Now that the niceties are out of the way let’s get down to brass tacks.


First Vice-Chancellor of the Iranian Electrical Corporation,

You openly admit that Saddam Hussein was a “murderous dictator.” Need I say more? You and the American liberals and the American media and the American electorate can go on and on and on and on about the US getting into the War on Terror (and on and on and on and on) for all the wrong reasons but the truth of the matter (and on and on and on and on) is Saddam had to go (and on and on and on until the cows come home). Like a bad tenant, he had to be evicted ipso facto! and without his damage deposit (you have no idea how inspiring Mr. Hooper from Three's Company can be). So maybe my cabinet “fabricated” a little of the evidence, but if not for fake evidence we wouldn’t be able to jail so many minorities, and who wants all those migrant loonies running around the placid streets of Middle-America, spewing that gobbeldy-goop they speak? Not me. Seriously, it’s not like the “cleansing rains” – which Dick and I call “Katrinas” by the way – were ever going to hit Baghdad and wipe out Saddam, so I made a Katrina out of military might thousands of life-size GI Joe action figures. Like it or not, the Katrina in Iraq happened. (Woosh! That’s the sound Dick and I make when we want to say “ethnic cleansing” but can’t because reporters are always lurking around. Try it with your tribesmen, I guarantee it’ll be a hit.)

You may think of what I just wrote as racist, but let me remind you that your country’s name – not mine – shares a root with the word “Aryan.” Think about it. My country was named after an Italian cartographer. God I love ravioli.

By the way, Laura is just crazy about that yogurt sauce your people put on kabobs. Do you happen to have a good recipe you can send me in our next correspondence? I don’t get to write letters as much as I’d like, which really is a crime because, as you can see, I have this really studdly stationary with Dalmatian puppies drawn around the perimeter of the page and a little black paw print where you sign your name. Woof woof! Ha ha! Did you think one of the cartoon Dalmatian puppies was actually barking at you? It wasn’t, that was just me writing Woof Woof. You gotta’ be on your toes when G-dub is in the house.


Mr. AhmaDinnerJacket,

One of largest faults I take with your letter is when you say that I must be “familiar with history.” This couldn’t be further from the truth; along with English, Natural Sciences, Economics, Government and Art, History was my worst subject. I did, however, excel at Lunch. I could eat tater tots like they were going out of style. In fact, I could eat them faster than anybody in the entire district. I took first at the regional meet, which was no small doing as I attended a AAA school. I would have gone pro but my when my wisdom teeth crowned it all went downhill. That’s my life story, what was your childhood like?

Back to my main point – I’m terrible at history, and in admitting this I have obviously defeated your letter and consequently emaciated your argument. At first your argument was a big burly Viking with a horned helmet and a shiny battleaxe, but now it’s a skinny little Ethiopian boy with flies on his head. That’s how emaciated it is. Zing! In case your not familiar with Zing! it’s a game Jeb and I made up as kids. When you make fun of somebody you yell Zing! and the first person to get ten Zing!s gets a ZabbaZing!, which means they get to concuss the loser. Jeb was much better at the game than I was.

Anyway, re “the whole History thing” the only thing I can remember happening prior to 1967 is that God made the earth in six days and planted artificial dinosaur bones underground to draw a clear division between the sinners (scientists and evolutionists) and the righteous (those who believe human life came about via elbow grease, God’s breath and mud.) The sinners believe “fossil evidence” suggests big lizards walked the earth, while the righteous know God was merely playing a little joke, or jokette if you will, with an abundance of calcium just taking up space in heaven.

Now let’s be clear about something. You say the United States is intent on impeding the scientific progress of all Middle Easter nations except Israel? Well, you’re absolutely right, but before you scream fatwah! or send Ali Baba to my house with a scimitar let me tell you why we’re trying to dampen your scientific spirit.

By not allowing you to advance your scientific R&D and acquire a modern society full of microwaves and air conditioners and computers (I know all of these “fantastical” words mean nothing to you but bare with me) America is protecting you, Mr. Iran-Away-From-Alexander-The-Great. Every decent, moral person, whether they be Christian or Jewish or, hell why not, Muslim, knows that science is the gateway to iniquity. Don’t believe me? The catholic church knew that science was evil centuries ago, hence all the burning people alive and whatnot. Science is the devil’s game. We’re just saving you from the sizzle.


Mr. Presi-Didn’t-Know-Science-Was-Luciferic,

Do you believe monkeys woke up one day and suddenly decided to turn into human beings? Do you believe the earth revolves around the sun? Do you believe that people actually landed on the moon? Of course not; these vagaries are the foolhardy notions of demented scientists and their maniacal schemes. America is halting your scientific progress because science equals sin. It’s as simple as pie (Notice I didn’t say as simple as Pi, because all that Pi nonsense is pretty darned confusing and, that’s right, sciencey.). If you want your country to be overrun by Satan’s robot army and centurions of pederasty-indulgent engineers, be my guest, chase after your scientific dreams. But heed my warnings: science will only lead you down a path of darkness. And on that path you won’t find a single flashlight or candle or glow stick. And no fireflies. Ok, sure, it’ll be dark for a while and daybreak will eventually come and you’ll be able to see the path clearly for a few hours, but when night falls the next day the path will be dark all over again. Say the word and America will back off, we’ll let you have your science, but know this: science will only turn your country into a nation inhabited by the condemned and the impure. Much like Greenland.

You ask me when science has been a crime? Well, maybe you’re familiar with the NASA documentary 2001: A Space Odyssey or Governor Schwarzenegger’s public service announcement the Terminator? If not allow me to sum things up. In both film, robots from the future kill innocent people to death. Now I don’t know how things are in Asia Minor, but in the major United States killing folks is a crime; it doesn’t matter if you’re a robot or a spooky futuristic spaceman or a regular retarded person – killing is illegal. And because killing people outright is illegal, especially once they’ve gained citizenship, I spend most of my day praying for more “Katrinas.”

Now let me ask you this, Monsignor Farsi: what is responsible for robots and futuristic spacemen and people with mental handicaps and speech impediments? Science. So put that in your hookah and smoke it.


Prince of Persia,

When you ask me questions about Latin America and Africa and ponder how the residents of these ancient jungle-kingdoms must live in fear, I feel compelled to remind you that Latin America is not actually a part of America, and while there exists a large population of African-Americans in the USA, the United States does not yet claim ownership of Africa. So maybe you should think twice before your next international diatribe. I suggest you write the leaders of these unstable societies accusatory epistles instead of expecting me to fix their problems (but write me back first, otherwise I’ll just wait by the mailbox all month). The United States is too busy refining our domestic policies and spying on innocent college kids to go around interfering in the political situation abroad. Latin Americans and Africans need to rely on themselves, just like American Americans have always done. We’ve pulled ourselves up by our Chinese-made bootstraps and saluted the French-engineered Statue of Liberty and have always said, “Goddamn, if our Greek-inspired democracy isn’t the most independently conceived and operated nation than a pox on us all!”

And don’t get me started on Israel. Both of our ancestors were Nazi sympathizers, so this really is a case of “the lesser or two evils.”

Penultimately, in reference to you referencing yours truly as “Your Excellency,” I must point out that I currently hold no title as King of America, though I do occasionally sacrifice a serf in my royal banquet hall and frequently demand of my minions hours of prayer for my eternal soul. That last comment was strictly off the record by the way, and in case “off the record” is a colloquialism that doesn’t translate into your squiggly language, it basically means that when Charleton Heston narrates this letter for the blind, the comment in question should not be committed to vinyl.

And finally, all of your quoting from holy books…boring! If I wanted a lecture I’d go to church or tell my father I used to smuggle drugs.


Oodles of toodles and khodaa haafez,







Dubya








P.S. Woof woof! Gotcha’, didn’t I? The exclamation point works every time.

The Inciting Document

Mr. George Bush,
President of the United States of America

For some time now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, especially in political forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.

Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the great Messenger of God, feel obliged to respect human rights, Present liberalism as a civilization model,

Announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and
WMDs,

Make “War on Terror” his slogan,

And finally,

Work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern, but at the same time,

Have countries attacked. The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and on the slight chance of the presence of a few criminals in a village, city, or convoy for example, the entire village, city or convoy set ablaze.

Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around one hundred thousand people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years. At what price? Hundreds of billions of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harms way, taken away from family and loved ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much psychological pressure that everyday some commit suicide and those returning home suffer depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of ailments; while some are killed and their bodies handed to their families.

On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples of the occupied and the occupying country.

Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to begin with.

Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal; nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it.
I point out that throughout the many years of the imposed war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West.


Mr. President,

You might know that I am a teacher. My students ask me how can these actions be reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness?

There are prisoners in Guantanamo Bay that have not been tried, have no legal representation, their families cannot see them and are obviously kept in a strange land outside their own country. There is no international monitoring of their conditions and fate. No one knows whether they are prisoners, POWs, accused or criminals.

European investigators have confirmed the existence of secret prisons in Europe too. I could not correlate the abduction of a person, and him or her being kept in secret prisons, with the provisions of any judicial system. For that matter, I fail to understand how such actions correspond to the values outlined in the beginning of this letter, i.e. the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH), human rights and liberal values.

Young people, university students, and ordinary people have many questions about the phenomenon of Israel. I am sure you are familiar with some of them.

Throughout history many countries have been occupied, but I think the establishment of a new country with a new people, is a new phenomenon that is exclusive to our times.

Students are saying that sixty years ago such a country did not exist. They show old documents and globes and say try as we have, we have not been able to find a country named Israel.

I tell them to study the history of WWI and II. One of my students told me that during WWII, which more than tens of millions of people perished in, news about the war, was quickly disseminated by the warring parties. Each touted their victories and the most recent battlefront defeat of the other party. After the war they claimed that six million Jews had been killed. Six million people that were surely related to at least two million families.

Again let us assume that these events are true. Does that logically translate into the establishment of the state of Israel in the Middle East or support for such a state? How can this phenomenon be rationalized or explained?


Mr. President,

I am sure you know how – and at what cost – Israel was established:

-Many thousands were killed in the process.

-Millions of indigenous people were made refugees.

-Hundreds of thousands of hectares of farmland, olive plantations, towns and villages were destroyed.

This tragedy is not exclusive to the time of establishment; unfortunately it has been ongoing for sixty years now.

A regime has been established which does not show mercy even to kids, destroys houses while the occupants are still in them, announces beforehand its list and plans to assassinate Palestinian figures, and keeps thousands of Palestinians in prison. Such a phenomenon is unique – or at the very least extremely rare – in recent memory.

Another big question asked by the people is “why is this regime being supported?”

Is support for this regime in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH) or Moses (PBUH) or liberal values?

Or are we to understand that allowing the original inhabitants of these lands – inside and outside Palestine -- whether they are Christian, Moslem or Jew, to determine their fate, runs contrary to principles of democracy, human rights and the teachings of prophets? If not, why is there so much opposition to a referendum?

The newly elected Palestinian administration recently took office. All independent observes have confirmed that this government represents the electorate. Unbelievingly, they have put the elected government under pressure and have advised it to recognize the Israeli regime, abandon the struggle and follow the programs of the previous government.

If the current Palestinian government had run on the above platform, would the Palestinian people have voted for it? Again, can such position taken in opposition to the Palestinian government be reconciled with the values outlined earlier? The people are also asking “why are all UNSC resolutions in condemnation of Israel vetoed?”


Mr. President,

As you are well aware, I live amongst the people and am in constant contact with them -- many people from around the Middle East manage to contact me as well. They do not have faith in these dubious policies either. There is evidence that the people of the region are becoming increasingly angry with such policies.

It is not my intention to pose too many questions, but I need to refer to other points as well.

Why is it that any technological and scientific achievement reached in the Middle East region is translated into and portrayed as a threat to the Zionist regime? Is not scientific R&D one of the basic rights of nations?

You are familiar with history. Aside from the Middle Ages, in what other point in history has scientific and technical progress been a crime? Can the possibility of scientific achievements being utilized for military purposes be reason enough to oppose science and technology altogether? If such a supposition is true, then all scientific disciplines, including physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc. must be opposed.

Lies were told in the Iraqi matter. What was the result? I have no doubt that telling lies is reprehensible in any culture, and you do not like to be lied to.


Mr. President,

Don’t Latin Americans have the right to ask why their elected governments are being opposed and coup leaders supported? Or, Why must they constantly be threatened and live in fear?

The people of Africa are hardworking, creative and talented. They can play an important and valuable role in providing for the needs of humanity and contribute to its material and spiritual progress. Poverty and hardship in large parts of Africa are preventing this from happening. Don’t they have the right to ask why their enormous wealth – including minerals – is being looted, despite the fact that they need it more than others?

Again, do such actions correspond to the teachings Of Christ and the tenets of human rights?

The brave and faithful people of Iran too have many questions and grievances, including: the coup d’etat of 1953 and the subsequent toppling of the legal government of the day, opposition to the Islamic revolution, transformation of an Embassy into a headquarters supporting the activities of those opposing the Islamic Republic (many thousands of pages of documents corroborate this claim), support for Saddam in the war waged against Iran, the shooting down of the Iranian passenger plane, freezing the assets of the Iranian nation, increasing threats, anger and displeasure vis-à-vis the scientific and nuclear progress of the Iranian nation (just when all Iranians are jubilant and celebrating their country’s progress), and many other grievances that I will not refer to in this letter.


Mr. President,

September Eleven was a horrendous incident. The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world. Our government immediately declared its disgust with the perpetrators and offered its condolences to the bereaved and expressed its sympathies.

All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property and good standing of their citizens. Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection and intelligence systems – and even hunts its opponents abroad. September eleven was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration?

Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren’t those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?

All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens. For some years now, the people of your country and neighbors of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind. After 9.11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people -- who had been immensely traumatized by the attacks -- some Western media only intensified the climate of fear and insecurity – some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear. Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damages incurred from fear and panic?

American citizens lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place. They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work and at home. Who would be happy with this situation? Why was the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity?

Some believe that the hype paved the way -- and was the justification --for an attack on Afghanistan. Again I need to refer to the role of media.

In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles. The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs. This was repeated incessantly -- for the public to finally believe -- and the ground set for an attack on Iraq.

Will the truth not be lost in a contrived and deceptive climate?

Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values?

Is the truth known to the Almighty lost as well?


Mr. President,

In countries around the world, citizens provide for the expenses of governments so that their governments in turn are able to serve them.

The question here is “what has the hundreds of billions of dollars, spent every year to pay for the Iraqi campaign, produced for the citizens?”

As Your Excellency is aware, in some states of your country, people are living in poverty. Many thousands are homeless and unemployment is a huge problem. Of course these problems exist – to a larger or lesser extent -- in other countries as well. With these conditions in mind, can the gargantuan expenses of the campaign – paid from the public treasury – be explained and be consistent with the aforementioned principles?

What has been said, are some of the grievances of the people around the world, in our region and in your country. But my main contention – which I am hoping you will agree to some of it – is:

Those in power have a specific time in office and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures.

The people will scrutinize our presidencies.

Did we mange to bring peace, security and prosperity for the people or insecurity and unemployment?

Did we intend to establish justice or just supported especial interest groups, and by forcing many people to live in poverty and hardship, made a few people rich and powerful -- thus trading the approval of the people and the Almighty with theirs’?

Did we defend the rights of the underprivileged or ignore them?

Did we defend the rights of all people around the world or imposed wars on them, interfered illegally in their affairs, established hellish prisons and incarcerated some of them?

Did we bring the world peace and security or raised the specter of intimidation and threats?

Did we tell the truth to our nation and others around the world or presented an inverted version of it?

Were we on the side of people or the occupiers and oppressors?

Did our administrations set out to promote rational behavior, logic, ethics, peace, fulfilling obligations, justice, service to the people, prosperity, progress and respect for human dignity or the force of guns,

Intimidation, insecurity, disregard for the people, delaying the progress and excellence of other nations, and trample on people’s rights?

And finally, they will judge us on whether we remained true to our oath of office – to serve the people, which is our main task, and the traditions of the prophets -- or not?


Mr. President,

How much longer can the world tolerate this situation?

Where will this trend lead the world to?

How long must the people of the world pay for the incorrect decisions of some rulers?

How much longer will the specter of insecurity – raised from the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction -- hunt the people of the world?

How much longer will the blood of the innocent men, women and children be spilled on the streets, and people’s houses destroyed over their heads?

Are you pleased with the current condition of the world?

Do you think present policies can continue?

If billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movement were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to the victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states, and extinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts, were would the world be today? Would not your government and people be justifiably proud?

Would not your administration’s political and economic standing have been stronger?

And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American government?

Mr. President, it is not my intention to distress anyone.

If Prophet Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael, Joseph, or Jesus Christ (PBUH) were with us today, how would they have judged such behavior?

Will we be given a role to play in the promised world, where justice will become universal and Jesus Christ (PBUH) will be present? Will they even accept us?

My basic question is this: Is there no better way to interact with the rest of the world? Today there are hundreds of millions of Christians, hundreds of millions of Moslems and millions of people who follow the teachings of Moses (PBUH). All divine religions share and respect one
word and that is “monotheism” or belief in a single God and no other in the world.

The Holy Koran stresses this common word and calls on all followers of divine religions and says: [3.64] Say: O followers of the Book! come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught with Him, and (that)
some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah; but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. (The Family of Imran)


Mr. President,

According to divine verses, we have all been called upon to worship one God and follow the teachings of divine Prophets.

“To worship a God which is above all powers in the world and can do all He pleases.” “the Lord which knows that which is hidden and visible, the past and the future, knows what goes on in the Hearts of His servants and records their deeds.”

“The Lord who is the possessor of the heavens and the earth and all universe is His court” “planning for the universe is done by His hands, and gives His servants the glad tidings of mercy and forgiveness of sins” “He is the companion of the oppressed and the enemy of oppressors” “He is the Compassionate, the Merciful” “He is the recourse of the faithful and guides them towards the light from darkness” “He is witness to the actions of His servants” “He calls on servants to be faithful and do good deeds, and asks them to stay on the path of righteousness and remain steadfast” “Calls on servants to heed His prophets and He is a witness to their deeds” “A bad ending belongs only to those who have chosen the life of this world and disobey Him and oppress His servants” and “A good end and eternal paradise belong to those servants who fear His majesty and do not follow their lascivious selves.”

We believe a return to the teachings of the divine prophets is the only road leading to salvation. I have been told that Your Excellency follows the teachings of Jesus (PBUH) and believes in the divine promise of the rule of the righteous on Earth.

We also believe that Jesus Christ (PBUH) was one of the great prophets of the Almighty. He has been repeatedly praised in the Koran. Jesus (PBUH) has been quoted in Koran as well: [19.36] And surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore serve Him; this is the right path. Marium
Service to and obedience of the Almighty is the credo of all divine messengers.

The God of all people in Europe, Asia, Africa, America, the Pacific and the rest of the world is one. He is the Almighty who wants to guide and give dignity to all His servants. He has given greatness to Humans.

We again read in the Holy Book: “The Almighty God sent His prophets with miracles and clear signs to guide the people and show them divine signs and purify them from sins and pollutions. And He sent the Book and the balance so that the people display justice and avoid the rebellious.”

All of the above verses can be seen, one way or the other, in the Good Book as well.

Divine prophets have promised:

The day will come when all humans will congregate before the court of the Almighty, so that their deeds are examined. The good will be directed towards Haven and evildoers will meet divine retribution. I trust both of us believe in such a day, but it will not be easy to calculate the actions of rulers, because we must be answerable to our nations and all others whose lives have been directly or indirectly affected by our actions.

All prophets, speak of peace and tranquility for man -- based on monotheism, justice and respect for human dignity.

Do you not think that if all of us come to believe in and abide by these principles, that is, monotheism, worship of God, justice, respect for the dignity of man, belief in the Last Day, we can overcome the present problems of the world -- that are the result of disobedience to the Almighty and the teachings of prophets – and improve our performance?

Do you not think that belief in these principles promotes and guarantees peace, friendship and justice?

Do you not think that the aforementioned written or unwritten principles are universally respected?

Will you not accept this invitation? That is, a genuine return to the teachings of prophets, to monotheism and justice, to preserve human dignity and obedience to the Almighty and His prophets?


Mr. President,

History tells us that repressive and cruel governments do not survive.

God has entrusted the fate of men to them. The Almighty has not left the universe and humanity to their own devices. Many things have happened contrary to the wishes and plans of governments. These tell us that there is a higher power at work and all events are determined by Him.

Can one deny the signs of change in the world today?

Is the situation of the world today comparable to that of ten years ago? Changes happen fast and come at a furious pace.

The people of the world are not happy with the status quo and pay little heed to the promises and comments made by a number of influential world leaders. Many people around the world feel insecure and oppose the spreading of insecurity and war and do not approve of and accept dubious policies.

The people are protesting the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots and the rich and poor countries.

The people are disgusted with increasing corruption.

The people of many countries are angry about the attacks on their cultural foundations and the disintegration of families. They are equally dismayed with the fading of care and compassion. The people of the world have no faith in international organizations, because their rights are not advocated by these organizations.

Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the Liberal democratic systems.

We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point -- that is the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: “Do you not want to join them?”


Mr. President,

Whether we like it or not, the world is gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justice and the will of God will prevail over all things.

Vasalam Ala Man Ataba’al hoda
Mahmood Ahmadi-Nejad
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran

Abstract of an Abstract Amore Hoosywhatsit

or
Cupid Never Took Algebra

What is love? Is it a smell? A feeling of comfort? The taste of really ripe cheese?

In Spanish, when you say “I love you” you say “Te quiero,” which literally means “I want you.” You could say “Te amo,” but this type of flowery language is generally considered tacky and reserved for sad sacks and saps and Oscar Wilde.

In Farsi “I love you” is “Dust-e daaram,” which means something like, “I have a friend.” [Dust = friend, daashtan goes to daaram = I have. The –e at the end of Dust is tricky, but for the sake of this essay we don’t need to go into particulars.) The word for you (to) is nowhere evoked in the Persian phrase for “I love you,” which I find strange. How can you express love without even mentioning the other person? I called my buddy Narcissus but he said he was too busy to answer my silly queries.

Mark Twain, though not generally recognized as a romantic or wimp or any of the other things we associate with love, is crucial in my scientific analysis (er, correction: my pseudo-mathematical, hackneyed study) of love, though something he said will assist me in my efforts. Twain wrote or hollered or something using either his stubby fingers or the resonant repository beneath his monstrous mustache, “There are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics.”

From this I conclude the following: numbers are as useful in quantifying love as dried turds. So Twain wasn’t talking about love, but indulge me, because if you look closely at this statement he wasn’t really talking about anything specific, he was generally generalizing about generalities.

So number are as usefull as dried turds. Well, I’m not a fan of turds nor the process of drying them, so let’s just leave the turds out of the study altogether, okay. (I know, big sigh from the copraphogics. I hope you all brush your teeth often.) So turds are our, unless of course you’ve eaten beets, which makes your turds red like your heart, then maybe your offal offering will be somewhat relevant to my study, though I’ll leave it to you to determine just how crimson crap will factor in. But for the time being forget the turds, as hard as it may be, forget them, okay? Onward and upward. And outward.

I’m going to type Twain’s epigram into my infallible Rectify-O-Chamber (just three easy payments of $79.95 to Swindle Corp. - worth every dime by the way), press compute, wait for the file to upload, wait for the Rectify-O-Chamber to wirelessly connect to the Center of Rectify-O-Cation located in Myanma, check my watch, wait for a response Center of Rectify-O-Cation, wait for the Rectify-O-Chamber to translate the supreme knowledge into intelligible words and phrases, have a cup of strong coffee, realize that all this time I forgot to actually hit “Send” on the Rectify-O-Chamber so I’ll have to repeat all the above steps except for the coffee drinking because I’m on a one cup a day kick. This time I hit send and in the intervening 15 seconds I scream, “Jeez! Damn computers are always slower than they will be in the future!” Then, once they’re printed, I read the results.

When typed in my Rectify-O-Meter, “There are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics” becomes “There are lies, the human memory, and then there are statistics. The Chinese particularly like red turds.” This is our starting point. (“You mean for starting the perfect Communist Turd Vilalge?” you ask. No, idiot. This is our starting point for a real, quantifiable, qualifiable, qualintifalible study of love. Love is realest of real realies. “Red turds are real,” says smarty-pants. True, red turds are real, but irrelevant. Let’s continue.)

Seeing as Twain and Myanmar contend that the human memory exists somewhere between lies and statistics, I think the mind is a favorable source from which to draw the data for our study. What? I didn’t mention my hypothesis? Oh, I’m sorry, I should have done that first, but I’m a little rusty on the scientific method (I haven’t actually used it since my 11th grade science fair project where I boiled gasoline and played with pure lead).

Hypothesis: Can you quantify love using common objects and experiences, yielding results that are either useless or useful or somewhere in between? I predict yes.

Red turds. Damn! Out of my head red turds! (If only I had a nickel for every time I said that…)

So how do we quantify love? Well, I’ve said “I love you” to many a women and a handful of lucky men to whom I was either related or were dressed up as a woman only to later reveal their giblets to me in uncomfortably close quarters. Friendly and familial “I love you”s aside - and times when I said “I love you” but was clearly lying to either get alcohol, sex, free pens, or a combination of all three - I have been provided in my life with four sterling examples of love or near love that we shall us. And given that all evidence will be provided by human memory, namely mine, let’s began when I’m ready. Go!

Example #1: I was in love with L.P. in high school. She wasn’t the most beautiful girl in the world, but then again neither was I. I was a manish boy. Gender confusion aside, I did fall in love with L.P. for various reasons: she wasn’t hard on the eyes, she wasn’t hard on the hands, and she wasn’t hard to tease. And she was smart. And volleyball players have tooshies like the moon cleaved in half.

I knew I was in love with L.P. and fully aware that she didn’t love me back, but I didn’t care because she didn’t take advantage of my infatuation with her. She was flirty but friendly and always let me know that the intimate moments we shared were not going to last, but were purely for fun in the hear and now. She was realistic, which made loving her less painful. And did I mention the hienie shaped like a cleaved moon?

But enough exegesis. Science ahoy!

One night L.P. called me late. My parents were asleep and I was giddy with delight to be receiving a phone call so late. L.P. asked me if she could borrow a baseball bat, for what I don’t remember. I agreed, but told her that she would have to come pick it up. A few minutes later L.P. drove to my house and, after sneaking outside, I handed her the baseball bat. As a reward for the bat, or because it was dark and basking in the gauzy moonlight made me look dreamy, L.P. and I kissed for the first time over the perimeter wall that surrounded my parents’ house. It wasn’t the first time I’d kissed a girl, but it was the first time I kissed a girl I loved.

This case of love includes two elements: 1) a wooden baseball bat that had been with my family for years, and 2) deception. I was a good kid, and I considered sneaking out at night, even to lend a friend a baseball bat and get a little action, a naughty thing. If my parents had caught me they probably would have just thought I was smoking a cigarette. But I didn’t like deceiving my parents and sneaking out felt like I was lying to them in their sleep. Had they later asked me where the baseball bat had gone to, I would have casually lied and said, “ I don’t know.”

So you see, in this situation: 1.0 baseball bat + 1.5 acts of deception (1 for sneaking out and 0.5 for the future prospect of lying.) = Love.

When I put this equation in the Rectify-O-Chamber it prints out a picture of Paul Newman straddling a camel with Paul Simon’s head and wearing Paul Westerburg’s pants. Mr. Newman is wearing a sundress and “whipping” the camel with a large peacock feather. The expression on Mr. Simon’s face seems to be saying, “I think orthodontia would have been far more rewarding.” But that’s science for you; it doesn’t make sense to anyone except for the person, or machine, performing the study. On to the next case!

Example #2: N.A. and I hadn’t been dating very long, but our relationship was already different from my relationship with L.P.: A) Instead of sneaking out at night like I did with L.P. I simply stayed out all night with N.A. and never called my parents to let them know I wouldn’t be coming home. B) N.A. bought me a loaf of bread once when my friends and I were really high, which we devoured gleefully. C) N.A. and I drove up to the Los Alamos gorge and simply stared into the nothingness below, knowing that should either of us really want to we could dispose of the person with a simple shoulder nudge, sending the other to certain death over the ledge.

But the saddest part of A) defying my parents’ rules, B) senselessly stuffing Wonderbread in my gullet, and C) risking developing cancer by going to a township with more radiation than Chernobyl is that N.A. and I were never in love. We were nearing love, but I could tell our relationship was to be short-lived because of her stunted emotional development, so I held myself back for fear of being hurt, which I later was. Had I let myself go, I would have been hurt even more.

As a teen, I performed A, B, and C knowing that they were acts of love for a love that didn’t ever, nor would ever, exist. So you see, the equation of: [1 staying out all night divided by negligible importance of broken curfew - prospect of making out] + [1 loaf of bread x drug euphoria] + 50% chance of radiation poisoning did not = love. Sad but true. The figures don’t lie.

Maybe A+B+C does not = love because the real equation was divided by the fear mentioned above [see: fear of getting hurt]. In this case, fear is represented by 0, because fear is a void of faith, and anything divided by 0 is not love. [A+B+C]/0=error.

When the equation (A+B+C)/0 was typed into the Rectify-O-Chamber I received a slight static shock. Then the chamber made what sounded like the mating call of a wild turkey. Then it seemed to mutter, “Sissy,” under its breath.

Example #3: In college, B.S., who admittedly had been drinking heavily and didn’t weight more than 100 pounds, called me and asked me to come over to her dorm room and partake in some forbidden beer (my campus was a dry campus, ironic because it was also in the desert). I agreed, adding that I would be over momentarily. Before hanging up, the B.S., said, “I love you.” Not knowing if B.S. was mistaken in saying this – perhaps she momentarily thought she was talking to her mother…I’ve been known to have that effect on women – or meant the “I love you” in a platonic way, I felt it uncouth to say nothing. So I said, “I love you,” as well. Later that night I ended up kissing B.S.’s roommate C.Lifeguard. Her surname wasn’t really Lifeguard, I never knew it, but for the sake of the study Lifeguard is as good a name as any.

The situation with B.S is a classic case of Love Confusion. I believe Freud would have called this a “Me slip.” Modern street vernacular has labeled this a “my bad.” In any case, 5 or 6 beers + the amplitude of fuzzy telephone reception + unexpected emotive confession + awkward silence + an arguably over-active sense of decorum imbued by mother does not = love. Even though all the symptoms are there - words, alcohol, fuzzy things - love was absent. B.S. didn’t love me and I didn’t love her. In fact, quite the opposite; in the above case, all emotional feelings were displaced onto B.S.’s very bosomy roommate C.Lifeguard. (I felt like the captain of the SS Bosom.)

When I enter the above scenario into the Rectify-O-Chamber it prints out a man wearing an “I’m With Stupid” T-shirt, though the arrow on his shirt is pointing not to anyone standing next to him but rather to the man’s crotch.

Example #4: This example is the most painful, because it is the freshest. D.M. and I started dating in Baltimore, went to Costa Rica, fell in love, and eventually moved to Nashville in together. But through a series of unsightly pratfalls we began fighting a lot (she wanted to be a lawyer so I guess in some way fighting was “homework”). D.M. began upsetting me and I began upsetting her. She abandoned me without a car or telephone shortly after we moved to Nashville and then lied to her mother about why I “wasn’t able to make it” to the weekend the three of us had planned. As a result, I said some nasty things about her. As a result of the nasty things I said, D.M. started, behind my back, talking to an ex-boyfriend she voluntarily promised she would never again contact. But the icing on the cake was that when the ex “mysteriously” got our new address, he started sending gifts (one box of Mrs. Field’s Cookies and a backpack). Sure the gifts seemed innocuous enough, but I didn’t like that D.M., the woman I loved and who said she loved me, could so aloofly (and selfishly) accept gifts from her ex and not see that the situation was problematic.

D.M. refused to send the gifts back so I refused to be her boyfriend, and ended it on the spot.

The math on this one is tricky.

2 plane tickets to Costa Rica + me quitting my job and moving across the country to be with D.M. + good sex + my parents’ obvious favor for her – her mother’s dislike for me = Love. Yes, even though her mother never liked me, we were still in love. And how.

To top it all off:

Love > fighting + weekend abandonment + nasty words + fighting + less sex + fighting + lying to her mother who already didn’t like me.

Yes, our love was still greater than all of that. It was. Which is why I find it even more baffling that

Love < 1 box of cookies + 1 back pack.

Our love was not stronger than a nylon sling bag and the chewy, chewy goodness of Mrs. Fields. Mrs. Fields, your cookies vanquished me!

When I typed the above mathematical tomfooleries into the Rectify-O-Chamber it simply shut down and could not be resuscitated, even with offers of higher dosages of electricity and a date with my iBook G4.

Conclusion: Love is the Chaos Theory of math. Mark Twain shouldn’t be allowed to co-author studies of love with tired writers. And beets make pooing even more fun that God intended.

(image from: http://www.babygorilla.com/warehouse/art/oldportfolio/cupid/cupid.html)