And this is how reality replies

After the un-ethical, mannerless and worst in its kind guest welcoming behaviour by the Columbia University chairman of President Ahmadinejad, Mr. President blasted him in polite and mannered way, which was well enough sufficient for one of the most educated American in entire US. Followed to the comments by Mr. Lee Bollinger, Seven chancellors and presidents of Iranian universities and research centers, in a letter addressed to their counterpart in the US Colombia University, denounced the university chairman's insulting words against the Iranian nation and president and invited him to provide responses for 10 questions of the Iranian academicians and intellectuals.

The following is the full text of the letter.

Mr. Lee Bollinger
Columbia University President

We, the professors and heads of universities and research institutions in Tehran , hereby announce our displeasure and protest at your impolite remarks prior to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent speech at Columbia University.

We would like to inform you that President Ahmadinejad was elected directly by the Iranian people through an enthusiastic two-round poll in which almost all of the country's political parties and groups participated. To assess the quality and nature of these elections you may refer to US news reports on the poll dated June 2005.

Your insult, in a scholarly atmosphere, to the president of a country with a population of 72 million and a recorded history of 7,000 years of civilization and culture is deeply shameful.

Your comments, filled with hate and disgust, may well have been influenced by extreme pressure from the media, but it is regrettable that media policy-makers can determine the stance a university president adopts in his speech.

Your remarks about our country included unsubstantiated accusations that were the product of guesswork as well as media propaganda. Some of your claims result from misunderstandings that can be clarified through dialogue and further research.

During his speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad answered a number of your questions and those of students. We are prepared to answer any remaining questions in a scientific, open and direct debate.

You asked the president approximately ten questions. Allow us to ask you ten of our own questions in the hope that your response will help clear the atmosphere of misunderstanding and distrust between our two countries and reveal the truth.

1- Why did the US media put you under so much pressure to prevent Mr. Ahmadinejad from delivering his speech at Columbia University? And why have American TV networks been broadcasting hours of news reports insulting our president while refusing to allow him the opportunity to respond? Is this not against the principle of freedom of speech?

2- Why, in 1953, did the US administration overthrow the Iran's national government under Dr Mohammad Mosaddegh and go on to support the Shah's dictatorship?

3- Why did the US support the blood-thirsty dictator Saddam Hussein during the 1980-88 Iraqi-imposed war on Iran, considering his reckless use of chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers defending their land and even against his own people?

4- Why is the US putting pressure on the government elected by the majority of Palestinians in Gaza instead of officially recognizing it? And why does it oppose Iran 's proposal to resolve the 60-year-old Palestinian issue through a general referendum?

5- Why has the US military failed to find Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden even with all its advanced equipment? How do you justify the old friendship between the Bush and Bin Laden families and their cooperation on oil deals? How can you justify the Bush administration's efforts to disrupt investigations concerning the September 11 attacks?

6- Why does the US administration support the Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO) despite the fact that the group has officially and openly accepted the responsibility for numerous deadly bombings and massacres in Iran and Iraq? Why does the US refuse to allow Iran 's current government to act against the MKO's main base in Iraq?

7- Was the US invasion of Iraq based on international consensus and did international institutions support it? What was the real purpose behind the invasion which has claimed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives? Where are the weapons of mass destruction that the US claimed were being stockpiled in Iraq?

8- Why do America's closest allies in the Middle East come from extremely undemocratic governments with absolutist monarchical regimes?

9- Why did the US oppose the plan for a Middle East free of unconventional weapons in the recent session of the International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors despite the fact the move won the support of all members other than Israel?

10- Why is the US displeased with Iran's agreement with the IAEA and why does it openly oppose any progress in talks between Iran and the agency to resolve the nuclear issue under international law?

Finally, we would like to express our readiness to invite you and other scientific delegations to our country. A trip to Iran would allow you and your colleagues to speak directly with Iranians from all walks of life including intellectuals and university scholars. You could then assess the realities of Iranian society without media censorship before making judgments about the Iranian nation and government.

You can be assured that Iranians are very polite and hospitable toward their guests.

The President of I R Iran in Columbia University Part 1

Part 1 of 4


Part 2 of 4


Part 3 of 4


Part 4 of 4

Democracy and the people

Government of the people, by the people, for the people. This is the most common and famous definition of the democracy. Majority of the world's countries are following the pattern of democracy today of which the Topmost are the US, The Republic of India, and many others. And all these countries feel proud when called as a democratic.

But what exactly the democratic pattern of government is? Is it the same like that kings and rulers use to rule over there people, or is it totally in the hands of people, to decide what to implement in state means totally handled by its citizens or is it something else? Apparently democracy is in contrary to the kings rule on its citizen where king has all the rights to decide what is good and what is wrong for its people, and it is in a way similar to the public's rule, where general people will decide what to implement or what not to, general mass will decide what is best in their interest.

But when we look into the practical democracy, them picture is very different than what is supposed to be. In most of the democratic countries, pattern of government is based on voting of few popular politicians for the post of rulers, who will then rule over the whole country for the specific decided period. The overall central government will be of a party who is having maximum number of seats in the parliament or House of Commons.

Now after the election, the party who got majority will form the government. Now this majority will decide the future of the whole country for the next specified period, without any major threat from opposition parties as this party is in majority. So here in this case, general public is only in picture at the time of voting and nowhere after the election. So if now government wants to implement some rulings which is in benefit of ruling party but against the future of country, then no one can stop them because they have majority in the parliament.

This is the practical face of democracy. Let’s have a look at few examples. India, the world's largest democracy, its government has decided to sign the nuclear treaty with its key supporter in international platform, the US. It is clearly visible from all the angles that this treaty is not in favor of nation, and if signed, India will loose its basic right to do nuclear test, then also the so called government, which is the ruling party, has not bothered to sign the treaty because it’s in the party's benefit. General masses cried over this, taken out processions, opposition parties stand against the ruling party, but nothing happened. Ruling party is very strong on its position and doesn’t bother about other people like the ruler who rules over his kingdom. Is this the democracy? Where is the common person in this scene? How this government be termed as Government of the People? All these queries are an open query of democracy, which is not yet solved and that’s why imperialist countries are promoting it.

Let’s take another example from the United States itself. President George W. Bush was planning to send troops to Iraq. His government got rattled with huge number of protests, public debates and his relative public ratings falls considerably. But nothing happened to his position because democratic platform has given him permission for five years to whatever his ruling party wants to do. This is the real face of democracy.

As we have seen live examples of the future of democratic platform of ruling and it seems to be somewhat failure, we have to find the new system of ruling which will be compatible with every era. Democracy is using the common people’s right of voting for electing politicians who are not bothered about the citizen itself and ignored every voice and cry of these common people.

Now this is an open query to all the readers to find out what will be the suitable system for the political system of the world, either existing or new, but better than the current system, after all, world is working on the pattern on Research and Development, so we need to do some modifications on our current system so as to get perfect justice.

9/11 clues - Part 2 of 6

SEPTEMBER CLUES part6

9/11 Clues - Part 1 of 6

SEPTEMBER CLUES part1