His stance on the Iranian related issues, his interviews with world class bloggers, essayists and informative people is unique among the people who claim to be journalists and knowledgeable.
That, I admire and appreciate.
The fact that he is trying to cover the real issues in the middle east and Islamic world is indeed great and very necessary in our path to safeguard the world for future generations.
but there is one thing I need to clarify here on my own weblog:
"Iammadinjihad" (Regime's) stupid and dangerous stance on Israel, Holocaust, nuclear programs, terrorism and regime's internal oppressive policies have drawn every concerned bloggers and journalist's attention towards Iran and its government these days.
But there is some thing I still can not understand and that is the terminology some bloggers, including Hugh Hewitt use to define the current situtation and among those terms, this "Mahmoud, son of Xerxes" is quite annoying and insulting to many Iranians, me included.
Unfortunately, Mr. Hewitt tends to use this term "Mahmoud, son of Xerxes" a lot in his blog and radio shows. That is absolutely unfair and wrong, to my opinion.
More info on Xerxes - Xerxes
his tendency to use this is annoying because he seems not to understand the true nature of the current Iranian government which is a non-Iranic, pro-Islamic/Arabic regime.
Trying to say that today Iran under the rule of Islamic cleric is posing a threat to the west the way the Persian empire did back in 400 B.C is dead WRONG.
Why?
Simply because the Iranian regime after the disasterous revolution of 1979 has been acting as if it is an occupational government and has been dicriminating against the Iranian people. I wonder if Mr. Hewitt has noticed this or not and I m pretty sure he has.
I have to emphasize that I agree with Mr. Hewitt's stance on the threat Iranian regime poses to our world but I do not agree with him trying to mix every thing up to further another MEDIA agenda and Hugh Hewitt is a Media man and not an exception.
Today's government of Iran is an Islamic regime which its constitution is also based on the rules and regulations taken from holy Quran and laws of Islam. This regime has NOTHING to do with a country known as Iran (Persia).
Trying to say "Mahmoud, son of Xerxes" is showing some sort of lack of historical knowledge with Mr. Hewitt.
Xerxes, son of Darius the Great and Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus the Great, was appointed King of Persia by his father, he was the Jewish people savior and a true Persian leader of the great Persian empire and this is Xerxes in Bible:
- In the biblical Book of Ezra, Xerxes is mentioned by the name of אחשורש Aashverosh (Ahasuerus in Greek). During his reign and that of his predecessor (Darius) and successor (Artaxerxes), many Samaritans petitioned the Persian king with accusations against the Jews.
Xerxes is also understood to be Ahasuerus the King in the biblical Book of Esther. In this book, Ahasuerus dismisses his Queen consort Vashti because she refused to obey his command of appearing as 'queen of his empire' at a feast he was having for his princes and then after sending forth a decree to gather the fair young virgins from througout his empire, chooses the Jewish Esther as his queen. The king's minister Haman an Agagite (a nation that was decreed by God to be destroyed), feeling insulted by Esther's cousin Mordecai because he would not bow down to Haman, convinces Ahasuerus to decree the destruction of all the Jews in the Persian Empire, but Mordecai and Esther manage to reverse their fate through their influence with the King.
Xerxes was the one who helped save the Jews, but Mahmoud "Iammadinjihad" is calling for the destruction of the Jewish state.
How can these two be related to each other, I do not know and I can't understand.
Any ways, I sent this following e-mail to Mr. Hewitt:
- "Mr. Hewitt
I am a strong Bush supporter, an Iranian blogger and a frequent listener of your show, moreover I have your link on my weblog.
But what is this Xerxes thing you put in your weblog? What purpose do you serve other than hurting the historical [national] sentiments of the Iranians listening to your shows and reading your weblog.
Why do you try to compare the current Un-Iranian regime with a national & historical figure of our proud history, Xerxes.
That is absolutely absurd and wrong. I dont think I will remain your listener or reader if this goes on, unfortunately.
Please be aware that using that term "xerxes" does have no relevancy to the threat Iranian regime poses to our world [today].
You may assume this to be a Roman/Greek thing which is encountered/threatened by the Persian empire [in the past as well] but you are wrong.
I wish Iran, today, was ruled by a Persian/Iranian government but this current government of Iran is totally non-Iranic, pro-Islamic, unpopular and does whatever they can to destroy Persia.
I hope you re-consider this choice of term[inology].
Regards
Winston"
4 comments:
Winston,
What Mr Hewitt should be comparing this situation to is the ultimatum that Mohammad the Arab Prophet gave to Persia - which was basically to surrender to Islam or face destruction. Famous scholars such as Amir Taheri have already made this analogy (check my entry on "grand declaration of war") and linked it to that 18 page letter that this terrorist sent President Bush.
Xerxes' name should not be associated in any way with that of Mahmood AhmadiNejad - an anti-Iranian arabo-muslim maniac!
It's a common mistake that people make. They don't understand who's taken over Iran.
well done
I was wondering what he was referring to. I, of all people, should have remembered. I love the Book of Esther. I do not know if he reads his e-mails personally. I have sent several, but then again it is as you say. Some people start to forget their purpose...sad.
Post a Comment