How big is your carbon footprint?

Blocking Cold Cash William Jefferson — The guy that hid a br in his freezeribe

Professor at Kent State University running Jihad web site

Professor at Kent State University running Jihad web site

“Are You Prepared for Jihad?” IN THE NAME OF OBL. 2007: THE YEAR OF ISLAMIC VICTORY!” “OBL” — you know who that is. Talk of “Crusaders” and praise for suicide bombers. Run by a Kent State prof.

“Me and Julio Down by the Schoolyard,” by Mike S. Adams (thanks to all who sent this in):

Yesterday afternoon, I logged on to the “Global War” blog ( of Associate Professor Julio Pino – a Muslim convert who teaches at Kent State University. The heading for the site used to read “The Worldwide Web of Jihad: Daily News from the Most Dangerous Muslim in America.” Now it reads “Are You Prepared for Jihad?” IN THE NAME OF OBL. 2007: THE YEAR OF ISLAMIC VICTORY!”Hardly able to believe what I was reading, I called Pino at his office in Ohio around 4 p.m. According to his secretary, he had not been at work that day (he only has office hours two days of the week). He was drawing a paycheck from the people of the State of Ohio while trying to launch a Jihad against people like me. In fact, just five minutes before I called he posted an entry under the title “Crusaders Can’t Take Anymore in Afghanistan!”

Pino began his morning of not going into his office at Kent State by penning a post under the title “Frightened British Crusaders Rush More Troops to Occupied Afghanistan.” Using terms like “occupation” and “Crusaders” it isn’t really necessary to read these posts in order to ascertain who this employee of the State of Ohio is rooting for in the War on Terror.

But, just in case you were curious about the purpose of this site, it is provided in the upper right corner: “We are a jihadist news service, and provide battle dispatches, training manuals, and jihad videos to our brothers worldwide. All we want is to get Allah’s pleasure. We will write ‘Jihad’ across our foreheads, and the stars. The angels will carry our message throughout the world.”

There is also an “Oath of Freedom” in the upper right corner: “We were born free. We will live freely and when death comes to us, we will die freely. Jihad is changing all that can be changed; freeing ourselves through our own efforts; and the conviction that truth will prevail, inshallah.”

Under the entry “Sister Detonates Herself to Eliminate Shia Traitors” there is a description of a female suicide bomber who recently killed 41 people. Just in case you wondered how the host of the site feels about the suicide bomber, the next line tells you: “Now she lies on the Golden Couch of Paradise.”

UPDATE: More on Pino here.

Cover-Up Alleged After Botched Cross-Border Operation


No matter what your political views, you have to get a laugh out of this one. If you don’t you may need to talk to someone about getting a sense of humor!


Bill, Hillary & Al in Heaven


And so it starts……………


Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and Al Gore were in a plane crash. They’re up in Heaven, and God’s sitting on the great white throne.


God addresses Al first. “Al, what do you believe in?”


Al replies, “Well, I believe I won that election, but that it was your will that I did not serve. And I’ve come to understand that now.”


God thinks for a second and says, “Okay, very good. Come and sit at my left.”


God then addresses Bill. “Bill, what do you believe in?”


Bill replies, “I believe in forgiveness. I’ve sinned, but I’ve never held a grudge against my fellow man, and I hope no grudges are held against me.”


God thinks for a second and says, “You are forgiven, my son. Come and sit at my right.”


God then addresses Hillary. “Hillary, what do you believe in?”


Hillary replies, “I believe you’re in my chair.”



The Rape of Europe

The Rape of Europe
By Paul  Belien

The German author Henryk M. Broder recently told the Dutch  newspaper “De Volkskrant” (12 October) that young Europeans who love freedom,  better emigrate.
Europe as we know it will no longer exist 20 years from now.  Whilst sitting on a terrace in
Berlin , Broder pointed to the other customers  and the passers-by and said melancholically: “We are watching the world of  yesterday.”
Europe is turning Muslim. As Broder is sixty years  old he is not going to emigrate himself. “I am too old,” he said. However, he  urged young people to get out and “move to Australia or
New Zealand . That is  the only option they have if they want to avoid the plagues that will turn the  old continent uninhabitable.”
Many Germans and Dutch, apparently,  did not wait for Broder’s advice. The number of emigrants leaving the Netherlands and
Germany has already surpassed the  number of immigrants moving in. One does not have to be prophetic to predict, like Henryk  Broder, that
Europe is becoming Islamic. Just consider the  demographics.

The number of Muslims in contemporary
Europe is  estimated to be 50 million. It is expected to double in twenty years . By  2025, one third of all European children will be born to Muslim families.  Today Mohammed is already the most popular name for new-born boys in Brussels  , Amsterdam ,
Rotterdam , and other major European cities.
Broder  is convinced that the Europeans are not willing to oppose  islamization.  “The dominant ethos ,” he told De Volkskrant, “is perfectly voiced by the  stupid blonde woman author with whom I recently debated. She said that it is  sometimes better to let yourself be raped than to risk serious injuries while  resisting . She said it is sometimes better to avoid fighting than run the  risk of death.”

In a recent op-ed piece in the
Brussels newspaper  De Standaard (23 October) the Dutch (gay and self-declared “humanist”) author  Oscar Van den Boogaard refers to Broder’s interview. Van den Boogaard says  that to him  coping with the islamization of
Europe is like “a process of mourning.” He is overwhelmed by a  “feeling of sadness.” “I am not a warrior,” he says, “but who is? I have never  learned to fight for my freedom. I was only good at enjoying  it.”

As Tom Bethell wrote in this month’s American  Spectator: “Just at the most basic level of demography the secular-humanist  option is not working.” But there is more to it than the fact that non-religious people  tend not to have as many children as religious people, because many of them  prefer to “enjoy” freedom rather than renounce it for the sake of  children.  Secularists,  it seems to me, are also less keen on fighting. Since they do not believe in an  afterlife, this life is the only thing they have to lose. Hence they will  rather accept submission than fight. Like the German feminist Broder referred to, they  prefer to be raped than to resist.
“If faith collapses, civilization goes  with it,” says  Bethell. That is the real cause of the closing of civilization in
Europe .  Islamization is simply the consequence. The very word Islam means “submission”  and the secularists have submitted already. Many Europeans have already become  Muslims, though they do not realize it or do not want to admit  it.

Some of the people I meet in the U.S. are particularly worried about  the rise of anti-Semitism in
Europe . They are correct when they fear that  anti-Semitism is also on the rise among non-immigrant Europeans. The latter hate people  with a fighting spirit. Contemporary anti-Semitism in
Europe (at least when  coming from native Europeans) is related to anti-Americanism. People who are  not prepared to resist and are eager to submit, hate others who do not want to  submit and are prepared to fight. They hate them because they are afraid that  the latter will endanger their lives as well. In their view everyone must  submit.

This is why they have come to hate Israel and  America so much, and the small band of European “islamophobes” who dare to  talk about what they see happening around them. West Europeans have to choose  between submission ( Islam) or death. I fear, like Broder, that they have  chosen submission – just like in former days when they preferred to be red  rather than  dead.
Europeans  apparently never read John Stuart Mill:
War is an ugly thing, but  not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and  patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse . A man who has  nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety is a  miserable creature who has no chance at being free, unless made and kept so by  the exertions of better men than himself.

The Inconvenient Truth about Muslim Extremists

The Inconvenient Truth about Muslim Extremists
Jason Rantz
Author: Jason Rantz
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: February 7, 2007

While a documentary based on questionable science is honored at the Academy Awards and shown throughout college campuses, another one based on the cold stark facts of our real world is not.  FSM Contributing Editor Jason Rantz explains how such a travesty could happen.

The Inconvenient Truth about Muslim Extremists

By Jason Rantz

Former Vice President and apocalyptic visionary Al Gore is one happy man today. Fresh off a win for Best Documentary Film by the Academy Awards Sunday night, Gore – and his “crisis climate” friends – are seeing copies of the documentary get screened all across the country on college campuses.

Since An Inconvenient Truth was released in theaters last year, college administrators, professors and hippie, self-aware students have flocked together to discuss how on earth they can save… the earth. Pushing the facts about global warming aside, they have created a false sense of urgency and are propagandizing their classmates to fix the “crisis” by showing the documentary.

Indeed, a screening of An Inconvenient Truth kicked off “Green Week” at George Washington University. Free screenings have aired at Penn State, Holy Cross, Macalester College, University of Rochester, and other colleges, big and small. All this, despite the questionable science behind the film.

Even though Gore seems to think the debate on global warming is over, actual scientists and other experts tend to disagree. National Review Online author and senior fellow in environmental studies at the CATO Institute Patrick Michaels strongly questions the fuzzy science behind Gore’s documentary and declares “When it comes to global warming, apparently the truth is inconvenient.” Oregon State’s climatologist George Taylor “has said human activity isn’t the chief cause of global climate change.” And two terrific books, that should be mandatory reading on many college campuses, lay out the inconsistencies of the climate crisis studies: Marlo Lewis, Jr. of the Competitive Enterprise Institute penned the A Skeptic’s Guide to An Inconvenient Truth and Chris Horner, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, recently published the Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming (and Environmentalism).

Yet despite the lively debate over global warming, campuses seem to move ahead to fix a problem that is not really considered an immediate threat. They seem utterly convinced that global warming can take this planet at any time.

Ironically, there is an immediate threat that faces not just the United States, but civilized countries across the globe, which isn’t tackled with the sense of urgency that it demands – Jihadism.

Whereas An Inconvenient Truth is welcomed with open arms, Obsession is not. Obsession is a frightening documentary on the extreme Muslims who wish to destroy Western civilization and everything it stands for.  Rather than get support from American campuses, administrators and students are doing whatever they can to get the documentary screenings shut down.

Indeed, at the University of California at Los Angeles, dozens of protestors showed up to a screening of Obsession. The screening’s intent was to denounce “militant Islamic radicalism,” but the PC-left didn’t think it was appropriate.  According to the Daily Bruin, “Representatives from the Muslim Student Association and Students for Justice were gathered outside the event because they said it portrayed Islam in a negative light in that it highlighted the radical sects of the religion.”  (An aside: I wonder if these students protested outside theaters that showed the Academy Award nominated Jesus Camp, which highlighted the radical sects of Christianity; one wonders if they protested during seminars that portrays big business and capitalism as a leading contributor to the “climate crisis”).

As I reported several weeks ago, Pace University pressured the campus Jewish group to cancel its screening of Obsession. (After conservative bloggers and publications reported this, Pace quickly backed away and tried to spin their actions). Similarly, at State University of New York at Stony Brook, the campus Jewish group was pressured into canceling their Obsession screening.

Unlike An Inconvenient Truth, there is not much serious debate over the dangers of the extremists portrayed in Obsession.  Indeed, the student protestors and critics of the film are mad that the film accurately portrays the extremists in the religion and not the normal practitioners of Islam. The only people who seem to think we’re not at war with terrorists are the New York Times and CBS.

Why are leftist campuses so eager to accept An Inconvenient Truth, but so hesitant to accept the inconvenient truth about militant Islam? It’s pretty simple, really: anti-American sentiment.

You see, those behind the “climate crisis” lunacy are the same people who hate our capitalistic ways. They want big business to suffer; every time they see a Starbucks or WalMart, they scream in anger. They see capitalism as exploiting the poor and weak, all while polluting Mother Earth. And they just hate it!

On the other hand, they secretly agree with some anti-American Islamo-fascists who want to put an end to our Western ways.  Much like our Islamic enemies, they see a problem with Western culture: our excess, our waste, our “arrogant” attitudes.  No, the environmentalist hippies don’t want us to suffer car bombs or planes-as-missiles – but they do want to put a dent in the ways of big business.  And an easy way to get us to stop driving SUVs or drinking coffee from Starbucks or buying cheaper good from WalMart is to tell us – subtly and sometimes not-so-subtly – that every time we partake in big business, we are helping to destroy the planet.  And no one wants to be told their actions will lead to our extinction. Contributing Editor Jason Rantz is a producer and talk radio show host based in Southern California whose program has been called “irreverent and skillfully witt.y. His program frequently broadcasts on Free FM in San Diego, California. Check your local listings or listen to his show online at his website

© 2003-2007 All Rights Reserved

If you are a reporter or producer who is interested in receiving more information about this writer or this article, please email your request to

Note — The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of The Family Security Foundation, Inc.

Carbon credits: indulgence or commutation fee?

Carbon credits: indulgence or commutation fee?

Thomas Lifson
The ability of wealthy individuals like Al Gore to purchase what amounts to rights to pollute by buying carbon credits is a repulsive moral dodge, demanding us to consider useful analogies. One comparison that has occurred to many is the sale of Papal Indulgences that so infuriated Martin Luther. Taxprof picked up on this analgy in commenting on the “get out of jail free” card for pollution guilt that was part of the gift bag given to all Academy Awards presenters.

This year’s Oscar goodie bag contained gift certificates representing 100,000 pounds of greenhouse gas reductions from TerraPass, which describes itself as a “carbon offset retailer.” The 100,000 pounds “are enough to balance out an average year in the life of an Academy Award presenter,” a press release from TerraPass asserts. “For example, 100,000 pounds is the total amount of carbon dioxide created by 20,000 miles of driving, 40,000 miles on commercial airlines, 20 hours in a private jet and a large house in Los Angeles. The greenhouse gas reductions will be accomplished through TerraPass’ [program] of verified wind energy, cow power [collecting methane from manure] and efficiency projects.” Voila, guilt-free consumption! It reminds us of the era when rich Catholics paid the church for “dispensations” that would shorten their terms in Purgatory.” [hat tips: Instapundit, Clarice Feldman]

But I think there is another good analogy, much closer to hand, both geographically and temporally.
During the Civil War, it was possible for well-to-do men who were drafted to pay a $300 “commutation fee” and escape the draft. The move sparked much public outrage, creating the impression that the war was a “rich man’s war” and probably contributing to the disgraceful draft riots in New York City, which led to the lynching of African Americans.
It seems to me that the purchase of carbon credits is a direct imitation of commutation fee. I don’t expect to see SUV-deprived soccer moms lunching the wealthy outside of fixed base operator terminals at haunts of private jet-setters like Teterboro and Santa Monica Airports,  but I do expect public revulsion to rise and rise, as sacrifices demanded of ordinary people are evaded by the wealthy. The war on global warming seems very much a “rich man’s war.”
Everyone who preens about personal enlightenment by virtue of a “position” on global warming should sign a green pledge to reduce actual personal carbon emissions, not just pay a commutation fee in the form of carbon credits.  Anyone who emits more CO2 than the average citizen does should be subject to relentless ridicule. They can no more claim virtue than could Civil War-era draft evaders who paid their $300 bucks claim moral parity with wounded veterans.

Why Confront Islamism?

Why Confront Islamism?

By Amil Imani

Why confront Islamism? Because if we don’t it will continue to get more extreme. This is not Islamophobia, as many Muslims and their apologists protest.  A phobia is a baseless irrational fear. Detestation of Islamism, the violent form of Islam, is based on irrefutable facts and it is not only rational, it is ethically imperative.

It is a virtue to take action to oppose the hateful, a vice to ignore it. It is a virtue to hate tyranny, misogyny, discriminations of all sorts, oppression, and all manners of violations of the legitimate rights of individual and peoples. Islamism is a mutation of Islam into a terrible menace. It is religious fascism, a destroyer of liberty and much of what free people cherish. Therefore, it must be confronted.
Islamism, Islamofascism, radical Islam and political Islam, are different terms for essentially the same thing: a virulent, hateful, and violent system of beliefs and practices. Yet, one and all are progeny of Islam itself.
It is a systemic problem of Islam that inevitably gives rise to Islamism. The three scriptures of Islam, the Quran, Islam’s holy book; the Hadith, sayings of Muhammad as recorded by his contemporaries; and the Suna, the life examples of Muhammad himself, together form the body of Islamic beliefs. They provide an array of frequently confusing, multiple-meaning and even outright contradictory dogma that enable anyone to pick and choose certain teachings of Islam and justify anything they do on the basis of the scripture.
The Quran enjoys a sanctified standing, since Muslims believe it is written by Allah himself. Allah handed down the Quran to Archangel Gabriel, chapter by chapter, to deliver to Muhammad over the course of some 22 years. Muhammad could neither read nor write. So Gabriel had to whisper the chapters to him and Muhammad in turn would reveal them to a literate person who happened to be around to write them down on anything he could find. To Muslims, every word of the Quran is a literal perfect immutable eternal word of Allah himself. Therefore, no man or divine is ever to revise, much less dispute, the Quran.
The hodgepodge of Islamic scripture is the medium for generating all kinds of mutations, some of which such as Islamism are extremely dangerous. A segment of any society, at any time, is staffed by people who feel disaffected, alienated, and disenfranchised. It is from the ranks of this population that Islamists heavily recruit.
Islamism’s rallying cry is also of particular attraction to the young since it is rabidly anti-establishment. The young lack a major stake in society but brim with action-inclined vitality. They are among the most willing recruits to anti-establishment causes. Older leaders frequently take advantage of the young’s proclivity to act and enlist them as foot-soldiers in their cause. The Hitler’s youth, the Soviet Union’s young Communists, and the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Basij (young Islamic storm troopers) are some examples of the young’s enlistment by tyrannical systems.
Furthermore, there is excitement in action, any action. The greater the risk, the greater is the excitement. This feature is highly attractive to a significant segment of the population. That’s why it is said that war is exciting, while peace is boring. The validation of this dictum is seen daily, for instance, in numberless arenas where battles rage between combatants, be they cocks, dogs, or human. Throngs of spectators pay by time and money to participate vicariously in the socially-approved brutalities.
In any physical contest, the more violent side usually prevails. The Islamists use ruthless force to eliminate the opposition or to intimidate them to join its ranks.
Islamism is rapidly advancing on two fronts. In every Islamic country, it is cowing the non-radicals while recruiting more and more radicals into its own ranks. In non-Muslim lands, Islamism,flush with Petrodollars, is establishing itself as a formidable force by enlisting the disaffected and attracting the delusional liberals with its promises. For the faithful, there is the added incentive of Allah’s heaven and its irresistible attractions.
There are those who claim that the majority of Muslims in the world are moderate and non-violent. It may be so. Yet, the silence of this majority is deafening, although, they do speak up from time-to-time by, for instance, claiming that the 9/11 slaughter was the work of the Jews, even when Osama himself proudly admits the dastardly act.
This very same Muslim majority pours into the streets of the West on a moment’s notice to protest against the slightest perceived affront to its sanctities, but they almost never march to condemn the violent acts of the Islamists or speak up against them. This sort of behavior by the majority makes it complicit with the Islamists.
In spite of all this, Islam’s apologists and lobbyists want us to accept the notion that the present Islamic radicalism is an aberration that, given time, will dissipate as have all radical movements of the past. These folk fail to tell us about the radical movements that inflicted horrors on humanity before they expired. Here are a few instances of the bloody acts of radicalism from Wikipedia:

  • Japan 1910-45. Imperial Japanese killed 25,000,000 Chinese and enslaved millions of Koreans.
  • Soviet Union 1918-89. Communists killed 20,000,000 of their own citizens.
  • Germany 1940-45. Nazis killed 11,000,000 Jews, Romas, homosexuals, Slavs, the mentally ill and Communists.
  • China 1950-80. Communists killed 65,000,000 fellow Chinese.
  • Bangladesh 1971. Muslims killed 1,500,000 Hindus.
  • Cambodia 1975-79. Communist Cambodians killed 1,700,000 Cambodians.
  • Afghanistan 1979-89. Soviet Communists killed unspecified number of Afghans.
  • Sudan 1983-2007. Arab/Muslims killed over 2,000,000 Africans.

Iraq’s socio-fascist Baathist government slaughtered several hundred thousand Kurds and Shiites during Saddam Hussein’s reign of terror. And let us not forget the genocidal mullahs presently ruling Iran. These Islamofascists executed, without the least due process, tens of thousands of the opposition in order to consolidate their Islamist tyranny. The mullahs’ present project is the subjugation of the region and, down the road, the world itself.
Islamism threatens to set a new record for brutality, contrary to the contention that there is no reason to worry about it. Jihadist Wahabism’s tentacles are reaching out from its cradle in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf Arab Emirates. The Petrodollar flush Sunni zealots are liberally financing mosques, madresehs (Islamic indoctrination schools), Islamic centers at universities, front organizations and lobbyists to promote the Wahabi virulent Islamism in every part of the world.
Murderous Shiism, led by Iran’s racing to arm itself with the ultimate weapon, is busily doing whatever it can to ensnare the world into Islam’s nation, the Ummeh. The purported peaceful Muslim majorities are nowhere to be seen. They are either complicit with the Islamists or on the retreat from Southeast Asia to the Americas, from Australia, to Europe.
Islamism is a pincers, with the world in its jaws between the end-of-the-world Shiism and the jihadist Sunnis. The two jaws aim to crush the life of all non-believers. It is imperative that people who value liberty rise up and act to defeat Islamism. Here are some specific suggestions:

  • Any mosque, Islamic center or front organization that condones or promotes hate or violence must be shut down.
  • Islamic studies centers at universities must be scrutinized to guard against mercenary academes who deceptively preach the gospel of Islamism.
  • Lobbyists and front organizations serving Islamism must be investigated as to their sources of funds.
  • Laws should be enacted to protect all media and individuals against lawsuits, so that they can report the truth without risking ruinous litigations.
  • Imams, mullahs and others who promote Islamic hate doctrine should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
  • Local Muslims should review Islamic literature, including the Quran, and should mark them with an asterisk, disavowing teachings of hate and violence or purge them entirely.

It is urgent that we confront Islamism. All free people, Muslim or not, must demand that their governments, at all levels, abandon the practice of political correctness and act to safeguard liberty against the truly deadly assault of Islamism on the rest of the World.
Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America, who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website at

Don’t Worry! The Religious Left Is Making “Peace” with Iran

Don’t Worry! The Religious Left Is Making “Peace” with Iran
By Mark D. Tooley | February 28, 2007

On Friday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vowed that Iran will not backtrack on its nuclear program. And on Thursday, the International Atomic Energy Agency announced that Iran had ignored a United Nations Security Council ultimatum about potential nukes.

But do not fear! An ecumenical delegation from the U.S. is currently in Iran, meeting with the Iranian president and various ayatollahs.  Peace is at hand. 

“The headlines in U.S. newspapers talk about missed deadlines and stalemates,” recounted Quaker official Joe Volk in his report.  “But sitting here in Iran, we see a different picture.”  He promised that “the Iranians are willing to begin negotiations to return their nuclear program to full international safeguards.”  After all, the Iranian deputy foreign minister has assured Volk’s delegation that this is so. 

The U.S. religious representatives, representing United Methodists, Episcopalians, Quakers, Mennonites, “Sojourners,” Pax Christi, and the National Council of Churches, have found an “openness to negotiations here in Iran,” according to Volk.  But, “sadly, the United States has not demonstrated a similar openness.  The U.S. government has refused for many years to enter into any type of negotiations with Iran, focusing instead on a program of sanctions, isolation, and threats of regime change.”

Worried about Iran’s safety in the face of U.S. belligerance, the ecumenical delegation is meeting with whomever the Iranian theocratic police state will allow it to in Teheran, in pursuit of peace.  The churchmen are in Iran at the special invitation of the Iranian dictator, anti-Semite and apocalyptic preacher, Ahmadinejad, who met with a much larger group of U.S. clerics when he was in New York last September.

Dave Robinson of the left-wing Catholic group Pax Christi explained in his dispatch from Teheran that the delegation therapeutically “plans to highlight and draw attention to the source of each nation’s pain and mistrust and to understand what divides us historically.”  Robinson, of course, was pleased when assured by Ayatollah Mohammad Emami Kashani that Iran’s nuclear program is not a weapons program and that in fact, nuclear weapons are incompatible with Islamic law.

“Our delegation has come to Tehran in a humble posture of listening and learning as well as to raise difficult questions,” Robinson explained.  But the delegation seems to be eager to accept dubious answers to its supposedly difficult questions.  When the ayatollah was asked about Iran’s “harsh” rhetoric about the U.S., the cleric responded, “What you mention is not against the American people. Our objection is to statements of the American government.”  Undoubtedly, the ecumenical delegation liked that answer.  The imam even assured his visitors, “Please consider Iran as your second home for Americans.”  Such hospitality.  The imam might be disappointed that this batch of American churchmen is likely to take his offer seriously. 

Of course, sojourning in Teheran is not quite like jetting to the Virgin Islands.  Jeff Carr of the evangelical left group Sojourners noted that as the delegation’s plane descended, the pilot warned:  “By order of the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, all women need to cover their heads for their own protection.” Welcome to the Shiite paradise!  

Before taking off for the vacation land of imams, Mennonite official Daryl Byler dashed off an urgent letter to President Bush about Iran.  “I wish you were the one meeting with President Ahmadinejad.” Byler wrote.  “Not because I fear meeting Iran’s president. To the contrary, when I met him last fall in New York I found him to be bright and engaging.  Like you, Ahmadinejad is a religious man. I believe you would enjoy one another’s company. Your conversation could signal a positive change in a relationship severed more than 25 years ago.”

Bush and Adhmadinejad, as religious men, would have much in common to discuss. The American president could discuss his Methodist church and his daily prayer devotionals.  And the Iranian could talk about his dreams of destroying Israel in a final holocaust that would apocalyptically usher in the the Reign of the Mahdi in a sea of blood.

Byler fretted to Bush that the U.S. has captured several Iranian diplomats inside Iraq and dispatched a second U.S. naval carrier group to the Persian Gulf.  “Many see these events as provocative,” he worries.  “Of course, Iranian rhetoric and actions have added to the volatile mix.” he reclutantly added.
Will you be a “repairer of the breach” as the biblical prophets urged of leaders long ago (Isaiah 58:12)?” Byler asked of Bush.  Byler and the rest of the delegation will meet with Ahmadinejad before leaving for home to begin their “education” of the American public about the reality in Iran. 

Undoubtedly, the church delegation will be as charmed as they were last September.  The Iranian president likely will courteously omit any of his rhetoric about killing infidels as he serves the American Christians hot tea and Iranian pastries.

For the latest updates about the delegation’s final adventures in Iran, check out: