Iranian Leader's Christmas Message Prompts Outcry

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran, delivered Channel 4's alternative Christmas address yesterday, sending a message of "happiness, prosperity, peace and brotherhood for humanity" which immediately ignited a furious row.

The speech by Mr Ahmadinejad, whose nuclear ambitions and views on Israel and homosexuality have strained relations between Iran and the West, was moderate, with none of the harsh rhetoric for which he has gained notoriety. God, he said, had created "every human being with the ability to reach the heights of perfection". He also urged Muslims and Christians to work together towards a world of "love, brotherhood and justice".

Perhaps mindful of its controversial choice of speaker, Channel 4 did not broadcast the message at 3pm to coincide with the Queen's speech on BBC and ITV, as it has done every year since 1993. Instead, the programme was screened at 7.15pm. However, that did not prevent a backlash which started even before the broadcast. The human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell had urged Channel 4 to "pull the plug on this criminal despot, who ranks with Robert Mugabe, Omar al-Bashir of Sudan and the Burmese military junta as one of the world's most bloody tyrants".

Speaking in Farsi with English subtitles, Mr Ahmadinejad sent his congratulations to "the followers of Abrahamic faiths, especially the followers of Jesus Christ, and the people of Britain". He said the world's ills had come about through nations failing to follow the teachings of the Prophets, including Jesus. He also made a thinly-veiled attack on the US, claiming Christ would have been against "bullying, ill-tempered and expansionist powers" and would have opposed "warmongers, occupiers, terrorists and bullies the world over".

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office rebuked Channel 4 for giving a platform to the President, who has called the Holocaust "a myth", saying it would cause international offence. A spokeswoman said: "President Ahmadinejad has during his time in office made a series of appalling anti-Semitic statements. The British media are rightly free to make their own editorial choices, but this invitation will cause offence and bemusement not just at home but amongst friendly countries abroad."

Israel called the message a "sick and twisted irony". Ron Prosor, the Israeli ambassador to Britain, said: "In Iran, converts to Christianity face the death penalty."

Read more from the Independent.

Comments

[Riani]

Ha , but here is the twist - he is allowed to speak freely, yet, he does not allow his opponents in Iran to speak freely. Those who oppose him have either left Iran, are spending some R and R time in Iranian prisons, or live in fear and silence. Yet he gets to speak freely on a popular broadcaster in a country that he has on numerous occasions insulted and villified! And don't bundle him in with Muslims in general, please, I live in the Middle East and I assure you, he is not exactly winning popularity contests here.

[BayAreaResident]

You have to understand the possible reasons of Iranian paranoid behavior, they have a technically illegal war (now we all know it) waged right to it's western national border, millions displaced, tens of thousands killed, while all along they are blatantly threatened to be the next ones... If you suggest Iran is a big security concern for us, imagine what that translates into on their side. Iran is unquestionably less democratic than the West, but if we do compare it to some of it's regional neighbors (many of which we actively support(ed) ) we see that Iran actually looks like a relatively modern and competitive state. So the whole premise that Ahmadinejad is the worst of all simply put does not really hold water. I can image there is a lot of political prisoners in Iran and their conditions must really be appalling, but we on the other hand systematically imprison and torture foreigners without absolutely no due process granted, abusing them indefinitely for years with no habeas corpus, just because we neither have the courage to define them as the prisoners of war and thus recognize their inalienable rights under the Geneva convention, nor do we have guts to admit that they are simply our new political prisoners and thus come into term with what we actually are perpetrating on them. So given what's going on, i simply don't find the necessary moral high grounds to be able to push the hard line on the president of Iran.

[beherenow54]

I don't think lack of courage has anything to do with our systematically imprisoning foreigners (and Americans) and abusing them, I think it is lack of respect for national and international law, the constitution, along with a current lack of a moral compass. Bush just decided to trash the Geneva convention, the constitution, and do anything he could to increase his governmental power.

[Kache]

Cheers, BayAreaResident!

Stand Bush and Ahmadinejad next to each other in front of the mirror and they'd get confused as to which was who.

[BayAreaResident]

there were a few typos, my apologies!

[soupson52]

"and don't bundle him with Muslims in general, please."
Thank you, Riani. I live in Southern California and my Palestinian neighbors say the same thing about the Hamas, whom they find more responsible for the Palestinian difficulties than Israel. I am not sure I agree with them. There's enough blame to go around, but then there are the real folks trying to live their lives with love and respect for their neighbors.

[benchy]

Channel 4 has always had an alternative speech to the Queen's on Christmas day. I love Britain and loved living in London. The media can present someone else's point of view without people calling for a boycott. I don't like this guy one bit, so I decided not to listen to him, I turned it off. I listened to the Queen's speech this year and nearly put me to sleep, maybe too many mince pies and booze but it is great to have a free press. It is hard to see only one side of the horrors of the middle east. Today we hear at least 35 people have been killed in Gaza by Israeli raids. Not the kind of action that will bring peace in the region. So the vicious circle keeps on spinning and people are worried about this guy appearing on British TV?

[derekc06]

update... 200+ people have died

[Faraja]

Quote - "He also made a thinly-veiled attack on the US, claiming Christ would have been against "bullying, ill-tempered and expansionist powers" and would have opposed "warmongers, occupiers, terrorists and bullies the world over".

Good point.

[derekc06]

good points from a man like that don't have much weight in my mind...

[eden4barack08]

So bad relationships are doomed? No chance for betterment? Just nuk'em? Is that it?

[Faraja]

Who would you rather have as President?

1. George W. Bush
2. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

No. 2 will be my final answer. Ahmadinejad has a point here. USA needs to change its Foreign Policy. I hope President-Elect Obama will try to do something but I don’t think he will do anything. He is surrounded by the same old players.

[Right-turn]

The Brits are farther down the road to destruction than the U.S
All of our nations liberties are at stake if we let Islam take a foothold here.
Religion and Goverment are one in the same to them.
God help the women of the west if they get their way.

[SadButWiser]

Really? And who is occupying Iraq?

[HyperInfluential]

I think the more serious threat facing women's rights right now is our home-grown fascists, the fanatical evangelical Christian movement that nearly took the Vice Presidency this year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Wave_of_the_Holy_Spirit

The Third Wave is exactly like the Islamic fundamentalists in that they want to destroy the Constitution of the United States and replace it with their particular holy book.

Just like the Islamic fundamentalists, the Third Wave is actively and openly seeking to take over this country and transform it into a religious theocracy. And they already LIVE HERE and have the right to BEAR ARMS! So to me, they are much, much scarier.

[Kache]

I hope you are hyper influential because you are hyper correct!!!!

Actually the Third Wave is more frightening. They believe they are getting current support and guidance from God (doors opening), whereas the Islamic fundamentalists have to consult old dead books hoping to find references to words like gnome, genetics, photovoltaics, etc.

[eden4barack08]

So the chickens are coming home to roost? Centuries of colonialism and imperialism perhaps?

[msblkwidow]

Oops! Sounding a little like that awful, terrible, misspoken, racist, crazy, Reverand Jeremiah Wright. Or, was it Malcolm X?
What centuries of colonialism? What do you mean, Imperialism? Who colonialized and imperialized. What are you talking about??? Chicken...what chickens...coming where...to do what to roost! Oh you've got to explain. Some people don't understand what you mean...chickens coming home to roost.

[voltage356]

It's interesting that people of color are always given this title for what The human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell said for Channel 4 to "pull the plug on this criminal despot, who ranks with most bloody tyrants".

[kingbtd]

I am a half Jew and I agree with you. I find irony in Israel's critique of:
'calling the message a "sick and twisted irony". Ron Prosor, the Israeli ambassador to Britain, said: "In Iran, converts to Christianity face the death penalty.'
Especially when Palestinians who refuse to accept Israel as a State are also considered 'terrorists' - everyone forgets that Israel was artificially created after WWII and with the 'State' of Israel committing horrendous acts of terrorism in the region for almost thirty years. My Jewish family always seem to also leave out the fact that almost 25,000 Jews currently reside in Iran... Everyone wants to ignore Iran's actual claims of just wanting to become energy independent... which, when one understands the economic realities of today's world, is the most probable reason for Iran developing nuclear energy.

[guajiro]

well said.

[Huffyfan]

brilliant . well said thank you .

[liberalnfree]

Palestinians who refuse to recognize Israel as a state are not considered terrrorists-- only those among them who engage in terrorism are terrorists.
Iran has 25,000 Jews? This represents less than .04 percent of its population of 70 million. How noble of them to allow them to live! Israel has 1 million Muslims within the 1967 borders, about 17 percent of its population of 6 million. So by this mathematically meaningless standard Israel is 425 times as tolerant as Iran.
Actually, sounds about right.

[Infostream]

Bravo.

[soupson52]

Ahhh...a voice of sanity. Thanks.

[AliMB]

i dont get this statement... is your argument that race plays a role in who gets designated a "criminal despot"? in other words, no white/european person ever gets called a criminal despot? please explain...

[ZenJu]

What lovely disguises for anti-Semitism we find here in some of these comments! Israel is a thriving democracy with Muslim Arab and gay citizens who live in security and freedom, where women can wear whatever they wish and hold high office; Iran is a semi-feudal theocracy which has, for nearly 30 years, vilified the United States as "Satan," sent thousands of Iranian kids to run across minefields carrying plastic "keys to Paradise" and Qur'ans, openly denies the historical veracity of the Holocaust, and openly calls for Israel's demise. IF you claim to be "liberal," I find your choices...fascinating.

And I wonder if THIS gets posted.

[kingbtd]

Did you forget that it was the British that asked the USA in 1953 to thwart Iran's democracy with the intent of keeping Iran from holding a 50% stake in their own oil profits... I don't understand your comments about 'Anti-Semitism'. Are the Democracy and freedom you speak of the ones which pay out the highest dividends to America and Britain? I'm originally from Chicago - you know the place where they have to open up special high schools for gays... I should know a lot considering that my father was a closeted homosexual happily chained in the religious sentiments of 'American Freedom'. As far as the Holocaust goes, I'd recommend you read one of Professor Finkelstein's books on the subject - The Holocaust Industry would be a good start (but then again his parents were really at Auschwitz so I'd imagine in a typical American distortion of reality-criticism his views don't count)

[TheBaffler]

Ah, another "anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism" zealot.

[Hedonist]

You declare, my friend, that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist.' And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

[TheBlackCat]

So pretty much anyone who questions anything Israel does is anti Semetic?

You must be one of those neocons who say that anyone who questions any American policy is an America hating commie?

[msblkwidow]

I agree. There is toooo much Middle-Eastern history to be learned to make quick assessments of what is happening in Middle-Eastern countries today. What did the Bibical character Abraham have to do with the little understood history of Jews and Arabs? Can someone answer this question for me?

Jews and Arabs have had many many years of anger and deaths in their past. But, do we know their story? I mean REALLY know their story? I have learned bits and pieces-certainly not enough to judge the Israli people or the Palestians. I do know that death and destruction should NOT be an option. But, how do intelligent thinking people get two rival cultures to listen to what WE think is common sense - communication?

We can't seem to get American racist White people to accept the notion that being African American is okay, . Yet, we try to analyze what is happening in other countries. Why do we jump all over people who we assume are "anti-semetic" and don't call out white racists here in America? They are all over the place. Try starting in Louisiana.
I don't get it. Hate, towards anyone, has no place in our world.

[rwt1138]

A thriving democracy??? Israel??? Really??? Maybe you can explain that to the Arab Israeli citizens who have fewer rights than their Jewish fellow citizens. Or even fewer rights than American citizens who are Jewish.

Iran has never called for Israel's demise; what Ahmadinejad did say was that if Israel continued it's current policies, it would relegate itself to the dustbin of history. He's right; I call Israel the "George Costanza of foreign policy". That is, I can pretty much determine if a foreign policy decision is ill advised or self-defeating, if it comes out of Israel. The only good forreign policy move they've made recently is negotiating peace with Syria, but don't worry: the day before the treaty is to be signed they'll probably carpet bomb a border checkpoint or something. There's no way they'll get one right.

Holding elections does not make a country a democracy; they held elections in Iraq under Saddam, too.

[Alvarask]

The semites are the Palestinians. Js are members of a religion, not of a race, and they are predominantly Russian, German and Eastern European.

[NoDubya]

I say let the guy talk. I could care less what he says about Israel. He hasn't made threatning comments towards the US. Why do people treat Israel like the 51st state? That just alientates 1.5 billion muslims.

[newworldman777]

"Why do people treat Israel like the 51st state?"

Because with 80% of the population of America being Judeo-Christian, we are little more than a Christian theocracy. Our evangelical-minded citizenry literally believe the Bible's assertion that "God promised the land of Israel to the Jews."

This is a perfect example of our mixing politics with religion -- completely opposite of what our founding fathers had intended.

[rwt1138]

51st state? Hardly; more like overlord to our vassal state. Israel has the final say in this country. Note that Israeli politicians don't have to repeatedly and passionately declare their fealty and loyalty to America to get elected, the way American politicians have to pledge fealty and loyalty to Israel.

[Christian]

"the world's ills had come about through nations failing to follow the teachings of the Prophets, including Jesus. He also made a thinly-veiled attack on the US, claiming Christ would have been against "bullying, ill-tempered and expansionist powers" and would have opposed "warmongers, occupiers, terrorists and bullies the world over"

Hate to say it but he is exactly right in this statement. Would Jesus pick up a gun and shoot someone? If people get over their nationalism, they might see he is right on this point.

[like a ginsu]

Right as he may be, the President of Iran really has no room to criticize anyone in this manner.

[isthatso]

Why not?

[BayAreaResident]

When truth is inconvenient it is usually dismissed as a lie, it is a common practice in the western politics and around the world. But i think what really outraging the "West" about the Arabs/Muslims is that they rarely hide their true intention and act openly and graphically in pursuit of their ideological goals without much of an apology. Where as on the other hand "We" always talk about the democracy and freedom and other good intentions only to proceed with no less criminal destruction purely out of our own material self interest. I'm not sure if that is what qualifies to be called "the clash of civilizations", but it comes pretty darn close to it.

[Topo]

Is there anything wrong about what Ahmadinejad said.
Isn't it true that the west occupy Iraq and Afghanistan on false premises deliberately?
Isn't it true that Bush knew that there were no WMD in Iraq but pretended that he was cheated by CIA and invaded Iraq and killed hundreds thousands Iraqi and about 400 thousand US Troops?
Isn't it true that America fully support Israel's indiscriminate attack against innocent civilians in Gaza and West Bank.?
Isn't it true that the so called "international community" are no more than an alliance of west countries dictated by America?
Come on America, wake up, open up and free your mind. Don't let yourself be fooled by Fox News and Israel lobbies that works against our national interest.

[Mykel]

Either freedom of speech is a fundamental belief of Western Civilization, or it's not.

Let the Muslims speak!

[mtflyer]

Great idea. To Hell with them all. I am an American and this country, not any others, is my prime concern. Too bad we don't seem to have anyone in Washington that has felt this way. For too long we have been the last thing on their collective minds. We can only hope that after 20 January the focus will change.

[HyperInfluential]

Exactly! That's why the Iraq War is extra DOUBLE wrong now that the Iraqis have their own government, which asked us to leave long ago. We keep negotiating to stay, because we say we're so worried about the two factions of Iraq tearing the country apart. So what if they do? We once tore our country apart, and it was a cathartic thing that needed to happen so we could decide once and for all, are we going to try to live up to the promise of universal liberty, or what.

Maybe the Iraqis need to have their civil war to sort things out for themselves. Maybe they would all calm down if we left them alone. Who knows. The point is, it's none of our concern now that their democratic leaders have asked us to go, and there are a LOT more important things for us to deal with here at home, like the land Americans are standing on and the air they're breathing, and the water they drink, and the food and medicine nobody can afford to buy, and what a stain that is on our national honor.

[DoctorWhoDat]

Big Deal, America has Fox News. Put up with that Brits.

[BayAreaResident]

It's funny, i made exact same argument above (which is still passing moderation) and then saw yours. Your point closes the propaganda argument right up especially when we are talking in an absolute terms. It's almost scary how selective some people are in their righteous criticism!

[Jack 0017]

This site is so full of hatred it's scary. The Jew / American hating here is the equal of the far rights hostility towards muslims.

In the words of human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, this guy " ranks with Robert Mugabe, Omar al-Bashir of Sudan and the Burmese military junta as one of the world's most bloody tyrants."

Don't let those character issues cloud your judgement. He's a muslim, an enemy of Israel and the West and the far right don't like him so lets champion him as a misunderstood hero.

It's frightening that then far right have such big influence in the US through the evangelical vote. Thanks goodness the far left have no influence. Obama certainly isn't listening.

[AliMB]

Iran is a repressive theocratic state... bush, cheney, us foreign policy, et al. doesn’t change that fact. And I agree... President Obama will definitely not be listening to the Ahamdinejad sympathizers, and certainly not some strange faux-peace Christmas message.

[mtflyer]

And if the lunatic fringe right got their way, this country would also be a repressive theocracy. When you read or listen to some of their spokespersons, especially those posing as clergymen, there is no doubt about it..........

[katinpuyallup]

I can't claim to know what was behind Ahc's Christmas message. Maybe he is actually reaching out to build a more friendly relationship. PE Obama has publicly stated that with proper preperation he would begin talks with him. Maybe this is Ahc's way of trying to prepare.
I find Ach's comments and the reaction to them amusing. I think he makes outragous over-the-top comments just to stir things up and watch the reaction.

[newworldman777]

Ahmadinejad is not an enemy of the West. He is against many of the flawed foreign policies that America has implemented and currently supports. I, as an American, am also against many of our foreign policies. Am I "an enemy of the West," because I dare to disagree with American foreign policy?

[AliMB]

ahmadienjad is a hardline/conservative president of the islamic republic of iran, a committed enemy of the united states of america since its inception in 1979... a regime born on the phrase "death to america" can only be classified as a hostile state. i don't think any mainstream politician, including PE Obama, would dispute that conclusion. furthermore, under his tutelage iran has adopted many anti-liberal, anti-western policies; both at home and abroad, and the iranian government has sponsored many anti-western militant organizations like hezbollah and the al-sadr militia (who btw, have also killed american servicemen with iranian training/weapons). if israel were to be considered a western state (controversial, i know), that would only make Ahamdienjad's anti-west credentials that more profound. Disagreeing with american policies is one thing; actively seeking to harm or defeat american interests is another.

[HyperInfluential]

Your statement is logically inconsistent. You say that the people on this site hate both Jews and Americans, and then your evidence for that is that posters have, in your view, attempted to portray Ahmadinejad as a "misunderstood hero." The evidence does not support the conclusion, it's a logical fallacy of misdirection, like saying your argument is wrong because you are wearing a hideous tie.

Liberal people's opinions about Ahmadinejad are completely separate from their opinions about Judaism, the Jewish people, the nation of Israel, or the nation of the United States of America. We liberals think about each of these things separately and independently, and just because Ahmadinejad hates America, while we love America with all our hearts, we do not feel a need to hate him, only to try to understand him so we can fix him, so he too will love America with all his heart, as it is worthy of that love and he must be under some misunderstanding if he does not love it as we do.

[rodjones101]

Why cant we give the man a chance...sure hes made some controversial remarks regarding Israel but to me actions speak louder than words and Iran has not taken any aggressive measure toward Israel or any of its neighbors in the recent past. I guess we should just take the word of our government just as we did with Saddam and not do our own research and make our own minds up in regards to Mr. Ahmadinejad. If nothing else the last eight years have shown us that we cannot trust our government to make intelligent informed decisions for the masses only a select few.

[AliMB]

By all means, listen to what Mr. Ahamdienjad has to say… it is good to listen, but it is also important to think analytically and objectively... consider the message, the messenger, and the objective of the message. If some of the comments on this thread are any indicator, his christmas address has been effective propaganda, and progpanda with a purpose: to weaken western domestic support for any hardline policy towards iran in the year ahead.

[HyperInfluential]

I don't think Ahmadinejad has any charisma at all. I think the posts you see that might be interpreted as support for him are actually support for the Obama plan of SPEAKING to him, as opposed to the Bush plan of completely ignoring him.

Many of us have felt for 8 years now that Bush's plan was incredibly shortsighted and stupid. We know from experience that ignoring bullies does not make them go away. You have to confront them, and be assertive, with your friends to back you up, and get people the bullies respect to help you persuade them that they have to stop bullying and act right.

We realize Ahmadinejad is a terrible bully, and we don't think he's a hero. We're not fighting for HIM, we're fighting for Obama's good plan of TALKING to him, so we can nip the trouble in the bud, before it gets any bigger.

[AliMB]

I find it strange how many commentators are impressed by Ahamdinejad's media outreach, even if its been the de rigueur Iranian strategy for sometime now: portray Ahamdinejad as a misunderstood humanist to weaken western domestic opposition and convince certain political constituencies e.g. western anti-war movements to criticize American policies towards Iran, all while concurrently implementing a hostile policy (aiding Iraqi Shiite extremists to kill American servicemen, continuing a nuclear weapons program, etc).This was a similar strategy Yasser Arafat employed during his later years as leader of the PLO; he talked like a man of peace to a western audience (which was more effective in English), but then advocated continued violent resistance to a Palestinian audience. In Ahamdinejad’s case, he preaches justice for Palestinians in the West, but to an Iranian revolutionary/hard-line audience he calls for the destruction of Israel. Ahmadinejad’s message is also rather fallacious with the attempted politicization of Christ e.g. "opposing warmongers", fighting "against tyrannical policies". Jesus never condemned any nation i.e. Rome for its policies e.g. slavery, political oppression, and imperialist wars. Jesus teachings were primarily concerned with individual sin. From an objective perspective, Ahamdinejad’s message is not very substantive or original; it's the same garden variety language he uses at any international forum. If his goal is to start a groundswell of positive opinion vis-à-vis Iran’s desire to be a sincere broker, I doubt this message will convince anyone save the edges of the Western leftwing.

[northstar11]

he is still allowed to speak freely. as are you .
limbuagh mouths off continually. the american people listened and rejected his blatherings.

what is it about the israeli spokespeole who want to pre-empt the speech or shut it down?or deny him his right to speak. or engage in demonization before the speach is even aired.?

excuse me but i think we can see through him and the censors
i think we know propaganda when we hear it .no matter the source -

[AliMB]

no one argues Ahmadinejad's right to speak... he is the chief executive of a major state. neither is anyone trying to shut down his speech... whether it is a smart policy for UK Channel 4 to air this as an "alternative" christmas message is another issue... i for one don't mind. but then again, i also enjoy hearing Mr. Chavez's weekly addresses for the comedy of it all.

[iblisexpat]

Ali,

You are long on anti-iran and Ahmadi propaganda short on logic. The most subjective statements on the thread have come from you. In the long run, your argument loses.Cool off.

[AliMB]

well, you are entitled to your opinion... whether my arguments lose is anothe question. surely, they lose on this forum... but i think my views are more in tune with current western policies towards iran. again, that maybe good or bad, depending on your viewpoint.

[AliMB]

and what have i said that is either "anti-iran" (a currious statement) or "propaganda" i.e. not factual? i'm willing to stand corrected, so if please share if i have stated something that is not accurate...