Just Another Monday

"Last Judgment Triptych" by Hans Memling 1467-71, Muzeum Narodowe, Gdansk

 

Whilst our kids look forward to a new iPod or mobile phone at this time of the year, schoolchildren and their parents in Iran received less joyful news on Saturday:

Tehran, Iran, Sep. 17 – A new security organ has been set up to aid police inside schools in Tehran beginning from the start of the new academic year, the chief of police in the Iranian capital announced. Brigadier General Morteza Tala’i announced the formation of a new “Youth Police” which will be present in schools across the Iranian capital.

The announcement appeared in the Saturday edition of the semi-official daily Kayhan. The new security organ will include youths of various ages. “This initiative was taken to help prevent any possible crimes [inside schools]” Tala’i said.

The State Security Forces (SSF) commander in Tehran said that the organ would operate both inside and in the vicinity of the schools. The SSF are already assisted by the Bassij force, affiliated to the Revolutionary Guards, in cracking down on social dissent.

To all who think the West, America and the current Administration in particular, are to blame for the actions of the Islamofascists, I say, poppycock! If anything, American ideals of freedom is what they are attacking in classrooms and in the schoolyard.

Once you understand that, it is clear for instance why Charles Johnson @ LGF doesn't believe the Islamist thugs will accept the Pope's expression of deep sorrow over "the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address at the University of Regensburg, which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims".

The Vatican (this is no longer just the Pope talking) is trying to get away with a non-apology apology, to appease the Islamic world’s violent temper tantrums. [...]

This is exactly the wrong way to go, for one simple reason. It won’t work. Islamists can tell the difference between diplomatic words and true surrender, and they want the Pope to utterly abase himself.

It would be far better to stand up, and speak truth about the Muslim world’s insane reaction to his speech. The Pope actually has a golden opportunity right now to bring these issues to the forefront of the public dialog, but it looks like he’s not going to use it.

Personally, I love the Pope's nuance in his reference to the 'reaction' not the content. Translated, it means, 'look in the mirror, you fools. You've just confirmed the accuracy of the quote, which is the reason why you need help.' According to the UK Telegraph, the Holy Father most of all voiced his deep sorrow in the way his lecture  "has been exacerbated by the deliberate manipulation of his words by Islamic firebrands and their slick media operation".

The combination of grievance-nurturing multiculturalism and instant headlines is having a disastrous effect on the worldwide Muslim community. There seems to be no limit to its spokesmen's willingness to voice outrage; and their messages are then picked up by fanatics who mount appalling attacks on Christians in Muslim countries. When was the last time a Muslim leader apologised for such atrocities?

The truth is that barbaric attacks happen weekly. No wonder that Benedict favours an urgent dialogue with Muslims on the subject of religious violence, rather than the usual touchy-feely exchange of compliments.

Well, he has started a dialogue now, albeit not quite in the way that he intended. And it is essential that it continue. A self-abasing apology from the Pope would have postponed that discussion yet again.

We suspect that Western public opinion is not displeased that Benedict has said the unsayable. Now it is time for other churchmen to tell their Muslim counterparts that, in addition to dishing out criticism, they must learn how to take it.

Meanwhile, welcome fodder for the rabid Liberals, who are desperately hoping to extend their 'Bush lied People died' smear campaign from Iraq to Iran, comes from International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), run by El Baradei, its General Director:

"This is like prewar Iraq all over again", said David Albright, a former nuclear inspector who is president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington. "You have an Iranian nuclear threat that is spun up, using bad information that's cherry-picked and a report that trashes the inspectors."

Well, according to an Iranian analyst, this 'bad information' came from the IAEA inspectors in the first place, citing El Baradei's ambition for Kofi Annan's job as one of the reason for releasing "ambivalent, contradictory reports".

"This ambivalence, contradictory reports by IAEA inspectors are at the core of the difficulties between Iran and the opposite side, Europe and American", one Iranian analyst following the issue told Iran Press Service, adding Mr. Elbarad'i (IAEA General Director) wants to replace Kofi Annan as Secretary General of the United Nations and for that he needs to please the Americans while at the same time, as an Egyptian, as a Muslim and as an Arab, his heart is in Tehran.

El Baradei as the next UN Secretary General -- sounds like a perfect fit; more incompetence and mediocrity at the helm of the UN...

But the real jewel today is Daniel Johnson's essay 'Understanding Benedict'. Read every word and savor it - the following only to wet your appetite:

The contribution of Hellenic thought to this gradual enlightenment is, for Benedict, essential. He laments the "dehellenization" of Christianity since the Reformation. Its effect, he thinks, has been to "relegate religion to the realm of subcultures" and to treat scientific rationality as if it had nothing whatever to do with faith. "The West has long been endangered by this aversion to the questions which underlie its rationality," he warns. If the West ignores this theological perspective, it "can only suffer great harm."

But the Pope was saying that there is an alternative to the Jewish or Christian God: the God of medieval Islam. Allah is "absolutely transcendent," above even rationality. Benedict cites a Muslim authority to the effect that "God is not bound even by his own word."

It is in this context that the pope invokes the Emperor Manuel II Paleologus, who recorded his dialogue with a learned Persian Muslim about the year 1400. Byzantium would finally succumb to Turkish conquest only half a century later, and Manuel wants to know how the doctrine of jihad can be justified, given that it is incompatible with God as Logos. For this Hellenic Christian, Muhammad's command to spread Islam by the sword must indeed be "evil and inhuman."

Yesterday, the pope insisted that he did not agree with Manuel. But it is clear that he sympathized with this monarch of a doomed Christian civilization enough to use him as a mouthpiece through which he could pose his own implicit questions to Islam. Does the Muslim understanding of Allah allow rational debate about the morality of violence, given that the doctrine of jihad is a central pillar of Islam? If Allah is above reason, might violent jihad, including terrorism, be not merely justifiable but obligatory, as many Muslim scholars argue?

By now, the answer to these questions is clear: churches firebombed in the West Bank and Gaza, a nun murdered in Somalia. Such persecution is, alas, routine in many Muslim lands, and Catholics are not the only victims. But it is clear that Muslim leaders — even those of "pro-Western" countries such as Turkey or Pakistan — are not yet ready for the "frank" dialogue proposed by the pope. By pointing out that violence is a part of medieval Islam, not a "distortion," as Western liberals like to think, Benedict has touched a raw nerve.

No, this pope is not naïve. It is our liberal, theologically illiterate politicians who are naïve. We are already at war — a holy war, which we may lose.

When 'Truth' is expressed in such calm and eloquent phrases, it emanates warmth for the heart and soul. Well done, indeed!

Comments

[nofate]

here and here is more about Sister Leonella. Certainly a better person than I could ever hope to be.
Darrell: not looking. Been with the same one for 25 years now and although I've used that adage quite a few times, it just keeps getting better. I am truly blessed. And a good dog for those days when she makes me wonder what happened to the "blessed" part ;-).

[rich]

Lord Carey of Clifton, retired Archbishop of Canterbury, gave a speech at Newbold College, 9/18/2006, supporting Benedict while maintaining a conciliatory attitude towards Islam.

The speech is available at Lord Careys website:

http://glcarey.co.uk/

The link for the speech is:

http://glcarey.co.uk/Speeches/2006/Cross%20and%20Crescent.html?.html

The part of the speech dealing with Benedict is about three quarters of the way through a twelve page speech.

Lord Careys point is that there must be a dialog between the faiths.

[Raimondo]

Tomorrow on Thursday the 21st of September Mass will be held for the funeral of Suor Leonella of the order of Le Suore Missionarie della Consolata based out of Nepi Italy near Viterbo. Service will be held in their chapel.

Suor Leonella's last words were "perdono,perdono", "I forgive, I forgive"... she was referring to the Somali gunman who killed her in the name of Islam. Suor Leonella worked at the SOS center in the district of Karaane on the outskirts of Mogadiscio, she was part of a tiny contingient of four nuns who had decided to stay in Somalia in spite of their order asking them to return. She had been kidnapped in the past and local people risked their lives to save her. The local Imam's wives and children had also been treated by her and her sisters on numerous occasions.

I learned how to read and write at the Consolata Mission school in Mogadiscio and so had my mother. These people are nothing but good...

Once again my basic question: Where is the "moderate" Islamic outrage at acts like these perpetuated by members of their own faith?

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Now, now, people, who will chase manbearpig, if not Al Gore?

Al is the only one up on the problem, we are still chasing the Islamic Fascists, when all along the real threat to Nash'nal S'curity is......manbearpig!

[Darrell]

Nofate,

Looking for a date, are we? Have I GOT a girl for you! You'll get to use your adage quite often, I'm sure!

[nofate]

Michael: you're welcome.
Gang: i can't help it. Another adage comes to mind: Sufferin' Succotash!

[Rorschach]

Pope's response, summarized: "I'm sorry that what I said provoked such a disproportionate reaction."

Note the difference between that and "I'm sorry I said it."

[Michael van der Galien]

NoFate: Thanks!

[Gang of One]

Weekendeman and Nofate [as well as all others reading here],
Inre: GD's propensity for long-winded, paid-by-the-word musings I have always found no small amount of wisdom in this adage:
The argumentative defense of any proposition is inversely proportional to the truth contained.

[nofate]

I found it, here.

The late Muslim scholar Ali Dashti (d. 1984) wrote a biography of Muhammad entitled Twenty-three Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad. Dashti chronicles Muhammad’s “changed course” at Medina, where the Muslim prophet begins to “issue orders for war” in multiple and repeated Koranic revelations (sura [chapter] 9 being composed almost entirely of such war proclamations, for example). Prior to enumerating the multiple assassinations Muhammad ordered, Ali Dashti observes:

Thus Islam was gradually transformed from a purely spiritual mission into a militant and punitive organization whose progress depended on booty from raids and [tax] revenue….The Prophet’s steps in the decade after the hejra [emigration from Mecca to Medina] were directed to the end of establishing and consolidating a religion-based state. Some of the deeds done on his command [were] killings of prisoners and political assassinations…

Muhammad’s failures or incomplete successes were consistently recompensed by murderous attacks on the Jews. Thus Muhammad developed a penchant for assassinating individual Jews, and destroying Jewish communities—by expropriation and expulsion (Banu Quaynuqa and Nadir), or massacring their men, and enslaving their women and children (Banu Qurayza). Subsequently, in the case of the Khaybar Jews, Muhammad had the male leadership killed, and plundered their riches. The terrorized Khaybar survivors—industrious Jewish farmers—became prototype subjugated dhimmis whose productivity was extracted by the Muslims as a form of permanent booty. And according to the Muslim sources, even this tenuous vassalage was arbitrarily terminated within a decade of Muhammad’s death when Caliph Umar expelled the Jews of Khaybar (after whom the Khaybar-1 rockets were of course named).

[Alexandra]

Nofate, you didn't miss anything...

[nofate]

LOL!
BTW, I was under the impression GD is a woman. You guys keep calling her a man. What did I miss? Maybe my (mistaken?) impression is a flyover country thing?

[Crusader.NoRegrets.]

Thousands of Christians will now die terrible deaths, unless the Pope can somehow backtrack and convince this screaming, slobbering mass of illiterate, paedophile barbarians and demon-worshippers, that THE POPE DOES NOT APOLOGISE for stating historical facts.

And no one apologises for stating the obvious. To state that Islam has now become a vile, fascist ideology is simply minimally observant, not insulting.

But apologising to these maggots will send the message that the Christians in the grasp of these devils and demons are now ripe for slaughter. This Pope has about two days to get this right.

Oh, and guys, just ignore GD. He is actually Al Gore, pretending to be some kind of status North American Indian intellectual. He briefly smartened up, but now he's back to just running around chasing manbearpig.

[nofate]

Michael: There was not much, as far as I know, when I am wrong, please correct me, 'enlightenment' in Mohammed. Mohammed called for Jihad. Not for peaceful spreading Islam by the power of the Word

I remember reading somewhere, I don't have my references available here, that Mohammed did have a "revelation" or "enlightenment", but that after a time, he succumbed to jealousy and greed, and thus began his journey of conquering neighboring Jewish and Christian neighbors for their booty, i.e. money, property, and women. The real story is more like reading about a pirate king than a leader of a religious movement. Contrast with Jesus spending 40(?) days in the wildernes resisting the temptations of Satan to make him an earthly king. It seems Mohammed took the deal and thus gained the treasure of this earth, but lost the keys to the kingdom.
Crusader: per your venting comment in a previous posting: crude but oh so true! Here is an article in The American Thinker that I think you would appreciate. For instance: The Muslim texts that mandate killing or subjugating the infidel are well-known to anyone who hasn’t spent the last five years with eyes screwed shut and fingers in ears chanting “nyah, nyah, nyah, I can’t hear you.” ...Militant expansionism is not a peripheral aspect of the Muslim faith...Al Qaeda and all the other terrorist groups don’t exist in opposition to mainstream Muslim society. They are the mainstream...Get a terrorist group to front for you and avoid leaving proof beyond reasonable doubt of your involvement. If America responds at all it will flail away at the puppet while the puppeteer laughs...We have to convince it that Islam can only survive in the modern world by adapting to the reality that the infidel calls the shots...We have to understand that millions of Muslims who are not active terrorists are nonetheless our enemies.

[Darrell]

Ghost, quoting Scripture just like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did in that letter to Bush. I have the same reaction to both.

Whenever the study of the Scriptures is entered upon without a prayerful, humble, teachable spirit, the plainest and simplest as well as the most difficult passages will be wrested from their true meaning. With the cunning of the serpent, they entrench themselves behind disconnected utterances construed to suit their carnal desires. Thus do many willfully pervert the word of God. Others, who have an active imagination, seize upon the figures and symbols of Holy Writ, interpret to suit their fancy, with little regard to the testimony of Scripture as its own interpreter, and then they present their vagaries as the teachings of God's word. It is Satan's plan to bring into the church insincere, unregenerate elements that will encourage doubt and unbelief, and hinder all who desire to see the work of God advance and to advance with it. Many who have no real Faith in God or in His Word, assent to some principles of truth, and pass as Christians; and thus they are enabled to introduce their errors as scriptural doctrines.

The violence "in response" to the Pope's words is being orchestrated by the same forces we fight. It's a tactic to scare the faint of heart to belive that it is a war we can not win. Just like the Left did with its "Better Red Than Dead" campaign of the 60's. Funny thing that. The Islamofascists take a page out of the Left's playbook. Somebody should look into that...No matter. We will do what is necessary. In Iran, and wherever a threat arises.

[weekenderman]

Good job at saying absolutely nothing, Ghost. A typical response from you, from what I've learned this past year . . .

[Ghost Dansing]

The Pontif did a good job on many levels... very nuanced... very subtle... and the only thing trully regrettable was, indeed, the vitriolic reaction that sprang from shallow understanding... of just about everything.

Could it be that the commonality between the Abrahamic religions can actually be cultivated on the basis of their sharing of Greek influence?

"Islamic philosophy is intimately connected with Greek philosophy, although this is a relationship which can be exaggerated. Theoretical questions were raised right from the beginning of Islam, questions which could to a certain extent be answered by reference to Islamic texts such as the Qur’an, the practices of the community and the traditional sayings of the Prophet and his Companions.

On this initial basis a whole range of what came to be known as the Islamic sciences came to be produced, and these consisted largely of religious law, the Arabic language and forms of theology which represented differing understandings of Islam.

The early conquests of the Muslims brought them into close contact with centres of civilization heavily influenced by Christianity and Judaism, and also by Greek culture. Many rulers wished to understand and use the Greek forms of knowledge, some practical and some theoretical, and a large translation project started which saw official support for the assimilation of Greek culture (see Greek philosophy: impact on Islamic philosophy).

This had a powerful impact upon all areas of Islamic philosophy. Neoplatonism definitely became the prevalent school of thought (see Neoplatonism in Islamic philosophy), following closely the curriculum of Greek (Peripatetic) philosophy which was initially transmitted to the Islamic world. This stressed agreement between Plato and Aristotle on a range of issues, and incorporated the work of some Neoplatonic authors. A leading group of Neoplatonic thinkers were the Ikhwan al-Safa’ (Brethren of Purity), who presented an eclectic philosophy designed to facilitate spiritual liberation through philosophical perfection (see Ikhwan al-Safa’).

However, there was also a development of Aristotelianism in Islamic philosophy, especially by those thinkers who were impressed by the logical and metaphysical thought of Aristotle, and Platonism was inspired by the personality of Socrates and the apparently more spiritual nature of Plato as compared with Aristotle (see Aristotelianism in Islamic philosophy; Platonism in Islamic philosophy). There were even thinkers who seem to have been influenced by Greek scepticism, which they turned largely against religion, and Ibn ar-Rawandi and Muhammad ibn Zakariyya’ al-Razi presented a thoroughgoing critique of many of the leading supernatural ideas of Islam...

After the death of Ibn Rushd, Islamic philosophy in the Peripatetic style went out of fashion in the Arab world, although the transmission of Islamic philosophy into Western Europe started at this time and had an important influence upon the direction which medieval and Renaissance Europe was to take (see Averroism; Averroism, Jewish; Translators; Islamic philosophy: transmission into Western Europe).

In the Persian-speaking world, Islamic philosophy has continued to follow a largely Illuminationist curriculum right up to today; but in the Arab world it fell into something of a decline, at least in its Peripatetic form, until the nineteenth century.

Mystical philosophy, by contrast, continued to flourish, although no thinkers matched the creativity of Ibn al-‘Arabi or Ibn Sab‘in. Al-Afghani and Muhammad ‘Abduh sought to find rational principles which would establish a form of thought which is both distinctively Islamic and also appropriate for life in modern scientific societies, a debate which is continuing within Islamic philosophy today (see Islamic philosophy, modern).

Iqbal provided a rather eclectic mixture of Islamic and European philosophy,

***and some thinkers reacted to the phenomenon of modernity by developing Islamic fundamentalism (see Islamic fundamentalism). This resuscitated the earlier antagonism to philosophy by arguing for a return to the original principles of Islam and rejected modernity as a Western imperialist instrusion.**

The impact of Western scholarship on Islamic philosophy has not always been helpful, and Orientalism has sometimes led to an overemphasis of the dependence of Islamic philosophy on Greek thought, and to a refusal to regard Islamic philosophy as real philosophy (see Orientalism and Islamic philosophy).

That is, in much of the exegetical literature there has been too much concern dealing with the historical conditions under which the philosophy was produced as compared with the status of the ideas themselves. While there are still many disputes concerning the ways in which Islamic philosophy should be pursued, as is the case with all kinds of philosophy, there can be little doubt about its major achievements and continuing significance."

How to cite this article:
LEAMAN, OLIVER (1998). Islamic philosophy. In E. Craig (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London: Routledge. Retrieved September 18, 2006, from http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/H057

per·i·pa·tet·ic (pr-p-ttk)
adj.
Walking about or from place to place; traveling on foot.
Peripatetic Of or relating to the philosophy or teaching methods of Aristotle, who conducted discussions while walking about in the Lyceum of ancient Athens.

Illuminationist Philosophy

Illuminationist philosophy started in twelfth-century Persia, and has been an important force in Islamic, especially Persian, philosophy right up to the present day. It presents a critique of some of the leading ideas of Aristotelianism, as represented by the philosophy of Ibn Sina (Avicenna), and argues that many of the distinctions which are crucial to the character of that form of philosophy are misguided. Illuminationists develop a view of reality in accordance with which essence is more important than existence, and intuitive knowledge is more significant than scientific knowledge.

The real originator of illuminationist philosophy is al-Suhrawardi, a Persian philosopher of the twelfth century ad, who composed over fifty works but who is chiefly remembered for his brief Hikmat al-ishraq (The Philosophy of Illumination). In this book, al-Suhrawardi (in Persian, Sohravardi) adopts some of the main principles of Peripateticism (al-falsafa al-mashsha'iyya), but also sets out to challenge others. He criticizes Peripatetic approaches to a wide variety of topics, in particular quantification, the confusion between 'term' and 'utterance', the notion of amphiboly, petitio principii and many other issues (see Aristotelianism in Islamic philosophy). There is a marked similarity between his critique and that of William of Ockham, who also identifies in his Summa logicae what he regards as ten fallacies in Aristotelian logic. Both al-Suhrawardi and Ockham rearrange the parts of the Organon and omit from their discussions some of the books.

Ibid.

5:43 You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thy enemy.

5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you:

5:45 That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust.

5:46 For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have? do not even the publicans this?

5:47 And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more? do not also the heathens this?

5:48 Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect."

The Words of Jesus in
THE HOLY GOSPEL OF
ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW

[rich]

Remember B-16's statement to some Muslim communities at Cologne on August 20, 2005.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/august/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050820_meeting-muslims_en.html

The speech concluded with these words:

Christians and Muslims, we must face together the many challenges of our time. There is no room for apathy and disengagement, and even less for partiality and sectarianism. We must not yield to fear or pessimism. Rather, we must cultivate optimism and hope.

Interreligious and intercultural dialogue between Christians and Muslims cannot be reduced to an optional extra. It is in fact a vital necessity, on which in large measure our future depends.

The young people from many parts of the world are here in Cologne as living witnesses of solidarity, brotherhood and love.

I pray with all my heart, dear and esteemed Muslim friends, that the merciful and compassionate God may protect you, bless you and enlighten you always.

May the God of peace lift up our hearts, nourish our hope and guide our steps on the paths of the world.

Thank you!

[Ricardo Rodriguez]

Why are the muslims lashing out now? Because, now, they can. Unlike 70 years ago; for example, when they didn't have the means, they now have PETRODOLLARS. Unlike 40 years ago, when Israel struck back forcefully, now the enemy responds to Islamic blows by whimpering "IT'S OUR FAULT!!!"
Fom the time of Mohammed to now, Islam has never missed an opportunity to expand forcfully when able to. What other religion's icon is a SWORD?

[Stefan]

Richard John Neuhaus makes some nice contributions to this debate on First Things' "Blog"...worth a look

http://www.firstthings.com

[Michael van der Galien]

Steve, great comment, I agree completely, yet you said it much more eloguently than I ever could.

The problem is that this culture of 'non-reason', is ingrained in the 'Muslim world' for centuries and centuries. Now, as we all know, enlightenment took a while here in the West as well. The difference, however, might very well be that Christianity was, in fact, in accordance with reason (same for Judaism). Although it had been used (or abused) differently for a lot of centuries, the Christian Faith was 'deep' for centuries and centuries, until the dark ages actually.
But.. with Islam it is a different story. There was not much, as far as I know, when I am wrong, please correct me, 'enlightenment' in Mohammed. Mohammed called for Jihad. Not for peaceful spreading Islam by the power of the Word (since that would not be suffice I like to argue).
In other words: the very root, the beginning of Christianity was enlightened, was based on / in accordance with 'reason'. The beginning of Islam not.

That is the real major problem. As I see it, only one thing can solve it and that is that Muslims have to invent a new kind of religion. One in which they will keep that 'what is reasonable and peaceful' and will get rid of all the negative things.

[Steve]

Just another Monday...or is it the first Monday after the speech that ushered in a new cultural crusade of sorts? Far from being naive, with his beautifully nuanced speech, Pope Benedict has aptly demonstrated just how uneducated and dim the world has become. I'd wager that few in the Muslim world understood it, or were capabale of doing so. Not many ordinary Americans or Europeans will understand it either. People seldom speak on this level anymore. Sadly, the results have been predictable, as the masses nearly always attack what they cannot understand. It illustrates his point about reason and religion beautifully, making the speech almost self-fulfilling.

Broken down into the common tongue, he's saying that the practitioners of Islam are an angry mob, devoid of reason, never questioning. I think he wonders, like Emperor Manuel II Paleologus, if this unreasoned baptism by violence is inherent in Islam or whether reason could come to Islam as well. I think he knows the answer, but is willing to hope for a better one.

[Michael van der Galien]

Your trackbacks are not working.

[Red]

This is disgusting but not surprising!
Not missing a beat, the American Leftist group, Council on Foreign Relations, plans on meeting with Iranian President Ahmadinejad when he is in New York this week!
One Jerusalem has this:

One Jerusalem has confirmed that the President of the Council on Foreign Relations, a Left-leaning establishment organization in New York, is inviting major civic, business, and political leaders to meet Iran's tyrannical President Ahmadinejad this week, when he is in New York.

Ahmadinejad will be coming to New York from Cuba where he continued his denunciation of the United States.
One Jerusalem offers some this advice:

So what can you do?

1) Let the Council know that you protest their actions. Email them now, fax their main office: +1-202-986.2984, or phone them: Tel. +1-202-518.3400.

2) Send around this post to family and friends. Don't be caught sitting on the sidelines. Stand up for the United States, Israel, and the oppressed people of Iran today.

3) Attend Wednesday's rally. See info here. (Listen to our interview with organizer Malcolm Hoenlein.)

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/09/american-leftists-plan-to-meet-with.html#comments