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

[CheshireCat2]

Alex02139 See Profile I'm a Fan of Alex02139 I'm a fan of this user permalink

Warren has stated that women exist to serve men, that Je-ws cannot ever go to heaven, that hom0sexuality is a perversion of choice. The evangelicals are the American Taleban, and thanks to Obama the so-called progressives have been suckered.
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:45 PM on 12/26/2008
----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­----

Jesus was a Joo, dunderhead.
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:52 PM on 12/26/2008
- + New CheshireCat2 See Profile I'm a Fan of CheshireCat2 I'm a fan of this user permalink

You have any idea how many of the early converts were Joos, including the disciples and the Apostle Paul

Your biblical history is terrible.

Have more to say than will fit in a comment? Sign up for HuffPost's OffTheBus project, and join thousands of other HuffPost readers in publishing your original reporting and op-eds on the presidential election.

[CheshireCat2]

Alex02139 See Profile I'm a Fan of Alex02139 I'm a fan of this user permalink

Warren has stated that women exist to serve men, that Jews cannot ever go to heaven, that homosexuality is a perversion of choice. The evangelicals are the American Taleban, and thanks to Obama the so-called progressives have been suckered.
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:45 PM on 12/26/2008
- + New CheshireCat2 See Profile I'm a Fan of CheshireCat2 I'm a fan of this user permalink

Jesus was a Joo, dunderhead.
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:52 PM on 12/26/2008
- + New CheshireCat2 See Profile I'm a Fan of CheshireCat2 I'm a fan of this user permalink

You have any idea how many of the early converts were Joos, including the disciples and the Apostle Paul

Your biblical history is terrible.

[CheshireCat2]

The Iranian Revolution and the Iran-Iraq War

Much like most Iranian baby-boomers, the career of Ahmadenijad both as a politician and as a social activist was most influenced by the Iranian Islamic revolution of 1979. Ahmadinejad’s personal involvement in the American hostage crisis in the aftermath of the 1979 Islamic Revolution remains unclear. Several of the 52 Americans who were held hostage in the United States embassy say they are certain Ahmadinejad was among those who captured them. However, he has always denied this claim and he continues to insist that he was absent at this event. However, regardless of the uncertainty regarding Ahmadinejad’s direct involvement in the hostage crisis, the aftermath of the 1970 revolution represents a major event in the development of his political career.

[LesserOf2Evils]

I count 38 comments from you on this 400 comment thread.
Hurry up pal, you're falling behind the required 10% quota. Not going to get paid at that rate. Unless the comments of wyd? and Ld are also yours, in which case you are one busy little Arab hating beaver.

[papapj]

Busted!

[gwhizz]

Add the comments posted under his other ID, whosyorwhatsit, and he makes his quota easily.

[Schvenzlerman]

The office of President in Iran has no power. Ahmadinejad is just Iran's public face.

[CheshireCat2]

Looking for an audience with a soft shoulder and an open mouth. He found both amongst the gullible.

[whosyourdaddy]

LOL!

[Alex02139]

Untrue. Iranians elected this guy by overwhelming margin. Ahmendinijad is the perfect representative of Iranian values.

[booboo111]

They elected him because only the extremists voted. The "liberals" who put Khatami in last time, didn't bother to vote, because they saw that the mullahs over-ruled almost every democratic move he made. The previous commentor is correct. The office of president has no real power.

[lizziekw]

Oh. He's slick like Pastor Rick.

[CheshireCat2]

Only a Lib would compare a minister in this country with a rogue leader who has been a part of murd-ering and t0rturing millions.

Nice stretch! Good job!

[Coinyer101]

ahmad is considered to be devoutly religious also. any arguments?

[Coinyer101]

mur dering and tor turing millions? you have no proof of that.

[lizziekw]

Of course I'm liberal and proud of it.

Pastor Rick went to a thrift shop so that he could use a gay man as a prop. He's removed anti-gay policy statements from his official website. He will say and not say whatever will serve his ambitions. It doesn't change who and what he is. By his own reckoning the only difference between Pastor Rick and James Dobson is tone, in all else they are in agreement.

Ahmadinejad's message reminds me a lot of Rick's bait and switch PR tactics.

They are professional hucksters and hypocrites, the pair of them. They pretend to promote messages of peace and love while they persecute and hate.

[Alex02139]

Only a conservative would even try to justify bigotry posing as religion. Rick Warren is noting more than an America-style Ayatollah

[Coinyer101]

many similarities.

[CheshireCat2]

Name them?

[max]

show it here, i want to see it....land of the free

[brooklyncitizen]

Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

[Zeebob]

Its true though, would any true god want his creatures to kill one another because they have different beliefs. Aren't people suppposed to love thy neighbor instead of kill them because they have a different set of ideals. Homosexuality isn't exatly accepted in this part of the world either, is it? This is just one religion trying to crush the other, nothing holy about that.

[Raco]

1. No
2. Yes
3. No
4. Agree

[MagisterLudi]

1. AhMadinJihand is NOT a leader of Iran. He's Supre-e Leader Ayo-tllah's court jester.
Nothing more. Let him talk. Do a SNL special on him.That would be more effective than protesting his luna-tic verbosity. Even better ignore him altogether.

[CheshireCat2]

The SNL special would be good. The puppet from Iran, is only out currying favor amongst the public and in most cases here at HP, he was successful.

[whosyourdaddy]

It's strange how often one reads the freedom of speech argument here and the "no one really has to listen" rationale.
However, I have noticed that in left leaning universities, bastions of free speech and the free exchange of ideas, it has become commonplace to invite a conservative guest speaker, then assault them.
Yet, in these same bastions of intellectual freedom... dictators, despots and anyone saying something vile about one's own country are hailed as bringers of light and ought to at least have their moment at the podium.
Strange hypocritical and juvenile logic. Truth is, most of you are on Christmas Break. Sorry, forgot, you guys are rebels, Winter Break.

[Maezeppa]

I can't say I disagree with the content of the speech.

[CheshireCat2]

Exactly, that was the point of it, to draw people like you in and draw in public support.

You bought it and so did many others here.

[papapj]

Ok so what is so objectionable about THE SPEECH?

Why is it you seem to think grown adults aren't smart enough to discern danger when they see it?

What is so smart about you that you see what the rest of us don't?

What are you so afraid of?

..Seems to be that you've bought into the fear and loathing meme, and will react accordingl­y...

[MagisterLudi]

It is not the message, it is the v-ile nature of the messenger.

[poiuytrewq08642]

One can provoke debate without giving platform to a would-be genocidal maniac. Why not the (comparative) moderate former Iranian President, whose name temporarily escapes me?

Free speech is good. State-sponsored broadcasters putting on a speech by a man who denies Hitler's crimes even as he seeks to emulate them is not.

Indeed, there are troubling parallels. The BBC was the sole broadcaster on both radio and TV in the thirties. It broadcast George VI's Christmas speech. Had Channel 4 been around then, would it have picked a similar hate-filled, hostile, genocidal demagogue for an 'alternative message'?

[Alvarask]

Can you please cite the evidence that makes MA a genocidal maniac in your mind?

And I would like to see your evidence for MA denying Hitler's crimes as well. I've never heard that particular accusation against him before.

Was this speech hate filled? Did Channel 4 air a hate filled speech?

[JooJooMan]

Let' s admit it: FREE Speech has it's limitations.

I, a regular citizen, can go on TV and say that I love all homosexuals but
I, a regular citizen, can't go on TV and say that I hate all homosexuals. Why?

I will be banned by the Network; I will not go to jailed but I will be censured.

Therefore free speech only means that the government can't do anything about most of what you say but the public acting through private businesses can make your life a living hell.

Is speech really free or is it just not a criminal act as far the gov is concerned?

[whoajack]

I am sorry for perhaps being ignorant, but can someone, anyone, please tell me when it was that MA committed acts of genocide, or has acted as a bloody tyrant? Robert Mugabe? Really? He is akin to Robert Mugabe? When did he kill people? I don't mean supplying arms, the US supplies arms to many of our "enemies" and always has, hell, we gave them to Osama and Saddam.

I am not being sarcastic, I really have NEVER heard of one incident that he has instigated or been involved in that meet those criteria. Please no talking points from the right wing, left wing, Israeli lobby, etc, I really want to know what he did, besides say some of the same things I read on blogs here in the US all of the time? He sounds like a bunch of people I read posts from in Georgia if you ask me.

[IranQuest]

Quote: "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"."
Author Ian Johnston must have felt rather fortunate when he came across this quote by Mr. Tatchell. It's got exactly the attention getting noise to make people read his article. It's bad enough that Mr. Tatchell said it, but it is irresponsible that Mr. Johnston chose to repeat it. Spread hate much? Spread fear?
As Westerners we cannot understand Ahmadinejad’s (often mistranslated) comments about Jews, homosexuals, and more. He is not a popular president and elections are next June so let’s hope for better next time. In the meantime, we must stop expecting Iran to be eager to adopt our version of democracy and we must allow Iran to evolve without outside interference. We must make an attempt to understand their very different culture just as we would hope they would make an attempt to understand ours.
I would urge Mr. Tatchell and maybe the author too, to travel to Iran and ask the very first Iranian they meet if they would compare Ahmadinejad to Mugabe. When the Iranian is done laughing she may straighten her scarf, give you a steely stare and tell you to back off and give Iran some breathing room. No war in Iran.

[Alvarask]

Thanks for your post! Personally I believe Ahmadinejad to be an incredibly progressive guy for a middle eastern nation to have as leadership figurehead. All the people attacking Ahmadinejad do so either out of ignorance or from completely and willfully misunderstanding everything he says.

[whosyourdaddy]

Gosh, you mean like virtually all world leaders and human rights organizations? Damn them!

[gwhizz]

Oh please. Did someone tie people down and make them watch this? Personally, I don't see much of a difference between this guy's most incoherent ranting and those of our own current administration.

[enry straker]

I bet most people didn't even watch it. I guess people wanted to vent of some hate since everybody else seems to be doing it and its the in thing.

BUT there is a difference between Ahmedinajad and Bush/Blair et al. The former has never started a war against any of its neighbors. Bush/Blair ( and in general the US and Britain ) have started multiple wars, caused untold misery, death and destruction and successfully manipulated the media through clever propaganda.

I just don't see anyone protesting giving these jokers a platform. These are people who have actually killed thousands of their own countrymen/women and countless iraqis and afghanis.

What a world we live in...

[any67ways]

excellent response - people are told by the media to fear Ahmadinejad so they do - Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Kissinger were all for Iran having nuclear power in the 70's when Iran was run by our ruthless despot, the Shah. Only Kissinger would admit the obvious that his support was contigent on our guy being in power.
I don't think Iran would be so hasty with their nuclear program if Iraq hadn't been invaded. The US never would have invaded Iraq if they had nuclear weapons. With Bush's preventive war doctrine, real nukes were the only deterrent.
Iran hasn't attacked anyone for centuries as far as I know. Iran was attacked in 1980 by Iraq with US made weapons and US support. We can go back even further to 1953 and talk about how the Shah was returned to power by a CIA backed coup overthrowing their parliamentary democracy (yes the USA subverting another democracy) because Iran was trying to nationalize their oil (they were getting fleeced by the British). But this is all stuff you rarely see in our media here in N America. Sure Ahmadinejad is a bad guy and his poorly translated rhetoric may seem far worse than leaders in the West, but if you judge people by their actions rather than their rhetoric it is clear that the recent regime in Washington is far worse than any regime in Iran.

[One more Thing]

Thank you for speaking out!

[gwhizz]

...The former has never started a war against any of its neighbors. Bush/Blair ( and in general the US and Britain ) have started multiple wars...

All too true indeed.

[CheshireCat2]

chirps See Profile I'm a Fan of chirps I'm a fan of this user permalink

What about OUR pr0paganda stunts? WMD's and yellow cake uranium, anyone?
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 02:33 PM on 12/26/2008
- + New CheshireCat2 See Profile I'm a Fan of CheshireCat2 I'm a fan of this user permalink

You mean like this "pr0paganda?'
updated 3:57 p.m. MT, Sat., July. 5, 2008

The last major remnant of Sad-dam Hus-sein's nuclear program " a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium " reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans.

The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" " the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment " was a significant step toward closing the books on Sa-ddam's nuclear legacy.

[CheshireCat2]

I guess "chirp" was all I got.

Jimeny Crickets!

[chirps]

So why wasn't Bush and his handlers crowing about this? That's very odd. It would have lent significant credence to their WMD excuse for war. Something doesn’t add up.

[Coinyer101]

those stocks were already reported by saddam to the un monitors. they were not hidden, and saddam never attempted to unseal that storage area. nice try, though.

[lizziekw]

True. Maybe Cheshirecat's been at the Caterpillar's hookah.

[whosyourdaddy]

Yet, your ilk claims he had nothing. Odd too that his own generals radio transmissios recorded during the final stages of the war show them pleading with Sadam to allow them to start using his WMDs. It's pretty pathetic that you have so little regard for your own country that you insist Bush ought to have known something even saddam's own generals were unaware of.

[blimie]

Something that promotes political discussion is not bad. People used to talk politics all the time. The Bush years kind of intimidated peolpe from expressing their political opinions by using language like anti American, supporting evil does, not supporting the troops. I think it was a bold move to air his speech. Hopefully this is a new era that allows discussion of differing pollitical viewpoints.

[whosyourdaddy]

Really? You feel intimidated right now?

[LesserOf2Evils]

I sure wouldn't attempt to determine if blimie "feels" intimidated right now in terms of feeling free to talk openly about PEACE with Iran, about olive branches and diplomacy.
But I can guarantee you there are at least two people on this thread who wish he was.

That is his point. It hopefully is the beginning of an era that allows discussion of differing political viewpoints. But there are those who always try to intimidate, shout down and spew hate. Take the 2:47PM and 2:50PM stuff here as a perfect case in point. They would LOVE for blimie to feel intimidated, and anyone else who wants to make peace with Iran too.

[One more Thing]

Exactly. The Bush years are filled with labels ... no discussion ... labels say it all.