Iranian lies -- but I repeat myself

Madman Mahmoud is at it again, and how does the Allah-Akbar Press report it?

"Iran leader softens his tone on Iraq"

Iran's hard-line president, who has berated the United States and refused to compromise on his nuclear program, is now softening his tone, saying Monday he wants dialogue rather than confrontation in Iraq. Tehran also denied it gave sophisticated weapons to militants to attack U.S. forces.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted that turmoil in Iraq is bad for his country and dialogue - not force - was the solution to the region's conflicts.

"We shy away from any kind of conflict, any kind of bloodshed," Ahmadinejad told ABC's "Good Morning America." "As we have said repeatedly, we think that the world problems can be solved through dialogue, through the use of logic and a sense of friendship. There is no need for the use of force."

Say this in your best Captain Kirk voice:

Riiight.



Ah yes, those Iranians are certainly staunch believers in solving problems through dialogue, logic and a sense of friendship. Sarcasm aside, Ahmadinejad is technically correct: Iranians don't see a need to use force, but it's their preference.

"I think this was childish of the U.S. government to do something like arresting defenseless people, not allowing them to talk to anyone," he said. And just what were those camel-fuckers doing to the Americans they seized in 1979?

Be wary of jihadists who want to discuss "peace": it's been their practice for centuries to use that as a distraction while they regroup and rearm.

Meanwhile, Agence France-Presse helps perpetuate Mahmoud's latest lie:



Yahoo News carried this picture with this caption: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad puts on an Arab outfit during a public meeting January 2007 in the southwestern city of Sousangerd. The European Union welcomed possible new talks to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions but pushed ahead with UN sanctions to punish Tehran for its refusal to stop enriching uranium.(AFP/File)

The other day, Ahmadinejad claimed that Iran and Iraq share a "brotherhood, common history, culture and beliefs" -- sure, about as much as France and Germany do. Iran is Persian while Iraq is Arab. Until about the middle of the second millenium AD, they were spending centuries conquering each other, making the 1980s war look like a mere skirmish. They don't even share a common language: Farsi is the language of the former, while Arabic is the language of the latter. "Common history" is no more than the Arabs once conquering what is now Iran, allowing the Persians to maintain their own culture (including language). Then again, the Mongols did the same after conquering present-day Iran, but who touts a "common history" between Mongols and Persians?