Smartest Man in the Room
Ahmadinejad's visit to Columbia University has been getting an incredible amount of attention in the media, political and activist circles around the country. As someone who was born in Iran and lived in Tehran for 17 years, I want to give you my assessment of how I believe Ahmadinejad's visit will be viewed elsewhere in the world with the main conclusion that as he said his goodbyes to the audience in the university's hostile environment, one thing became clear: regardless of what you may think of his values (or lack thereof), he proved to be the savviest person in the room.
Let's begin with the massive protests. It was no surprise that there were thousands of people in the streets of New York protesting unconditional freedom of speech and his right to speak his mind. He knew that the city was home to over two million Jews, and that he would face massive protests. But that is precisely the martyr-like image that he was intending to create. Standing on that stage after a hostile introduction by the Columbia University president and in the face of thousands of protesters may have made him look lonely and illegitimate in the West. But to the eyes of many around the world, he looked like a hero and someone who was speaking what they are likely to consider "the truth" in the face of a bully. On August 31, this blogger wrote that one of the main reasons why the United States has not effectively addressed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and vetoed 47 UN Security Council Resolutions against Israel (14 under Bush II, 7 under Clinton, 7 under Bush I, and 19 under Reagan) is the strength of Jewish lobby in America and "the willingness of millions of Jews in America, including many liberal ones who normally support sensible foreign policies, to roll over, make an exception, keep silent and even vocally cheerlead America's support for the Israeli occupation." Massive protests in New York very much reinforced that assertion as almost all of the signs related to Iran's nuclear program and none relating to its actual human rights violations. I would have had a lot more admiration for the protesters if they focused more on Iran's primary crimes on women, youth, homosexuals, Baha'is and political dissenters instead of a predicted imaginary military attack against Israel that has not happened. Iranians will watch the protests and see that the main concern of the American people is not the oppression of Iranians, but Ahmadinejad's anti-Israel rhetoric.
The president of Columbia's criticisms of Ahmadinejad's crimes before his speech was very constructive. But Bollinger did the cause of free speech and America's image in the Middle East a great deal of disservice when he went on for almost 19 minutes name-calling Ahmadinejad before allowing him to speak and not really thanking him for accepting Columbia's invitation to speak. Ahmadinejad scored a second point when he criticized the Columbia president for giving the audience what he called a "vaccination" before Ahmadinejad had a chance to speak. He said that in Iran, they allow students and professors to freely exchange ideas without instructing them how they should feel about things. That, of course, cannot have been farther from the truth. Nonetheless, many in the room related to his argument, promoting the students to applaud, hence ridiculing those who introduced him. It is understandable why Columbia would be inclined to give such an introduction to defuse some of the pressure that was asserted on the university due to massive criticisms of the institution for allowing Ahmadinejad to speak. But he went too far, which gave Ahmadinejad the opportunity to successfully attack back and score some sympathy.
But the most tragic part of the event was the Q and A segment. The Iranian regime is as vulnerable with regards to its domestic policies as America is with regards to its foreign policy and war in Iraq. It is true that Iran has occasionally funded various groups that have been hostile to U.S. interests. But the United States has done the very same thing to Iran and much more. An example which Ahmadinejad pointed out to was Reagan's sales of weapons to Saddam, which he used against in Iran for eight years. I can still vividly remember the sound of sirens, duct taped living room windows and American-funded air strikes.
And yet, most of Bollinger's questions focused on Iran's foreign policies. By keeping the focus on international issues, Columbia gave him an easy way to turn the conversation around time and again and criticize American policy. One question was why Iran was enriching uranium, which Bollinger naively ended with "would you stop?" And why should they stop? There is no evidence that they are building a bomb, they are a member of the NPT, which gives them the right to enrich uranium, and their two main open enemies -- Israel and America -- both possess nuclear weapons, with the former not being a member of NPT and the latter breaking its rules by not moving toward the treaty's ultimate goal: elimination of all nuclear weapons.
Many Iranians hoped that Columbia would take this opportunity to keep the focus of questions on Iran's brutal domestic policies. And yet, of the five or six questions that were asked, astonishingly, only one related to human rights, with women and homosexuals put together in one question as if they didn't deserve their own individual questions. But for the most part, the questions that were asked of him were significantly superficial. This is not because questions with regards to anti-Israel and anti-American rhetoric aren't important. But rather, they are nothing new! Iran has been issuing such empty rhetoric since the Islamic revolution in 1979. Yet that's what they have been: empty rhetoric for domestic consumption, not an official policy declaration. But human rights crimes, stoning of women for infidelity, arresting unmarried people for dating or holding hands in public and killing homosexuals for being have been going on for almost three decades. As someone who was arrested in Tehran at age 16 for the crime of being on a date, I can attest to that fact. Here are some questions Bollinger should have asked: Will you allow women to have the right to initiate divorce from their husbands or obtain a passport without the consent of their husbands? Will you allow boys and girls to date or go to school together? Do you promise that the people in Iran can be safe in publicly criticizing you or the Supreme Leader Khomeini? Will you guarantee people's rights to wear whatsoever clothing they choose in public? Will you allow people to convert away from Islam to other religions? Would you support a free UN-administered referendum for your people to vote on whether they want an Islamic republic or a secular democratic republic? If yes, will you respect its outcome?
Without asking these significant questions or any meaningful understanding of more than 2,500 years of Iranian history, Columbia provided an environment for Ahmadinejad to criticize American policy, divert every viewer's attention from the country's brutalities and oppression and play to the audience's idealist beliefs that scored him more applauses than any meaningful challenge to his stance and record on issues that mattered the most.
Follow Sam Sedaei on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SamSedaei
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The whole nation has been played like a carom by worse than him. Somehow, a thug hiding in a cave has managed to put together a global movement of idealist intellectuals and become an Islamic Robin, Earl of Locksley, al-Zawahiri his Little John and Friar Tuck rolled up in one, and Amadinejad got the President of no less a university than Columbia to instruct content that its already quite capable young critical thinkers could have easily arrived at without the pedantry instead of really using the time to pose the Iranian president some puzzlers worthy of the institution before which he was to speak. Shameful bunch of rubes we Americans have become--university presidents on down.
You are aware that al-Zawarhiri is a Sunni and would hardly be in cohoots with Amadinejad?
Georgie, are you playing with the grown-ups' computer, again?
What a breath of fresh air. I appreciate your perspective.
Agreed. You might also look at Cenk Uygur's post
http://www
Thanks, I did.
I agree. In both the Columbia forum and in the 60 Minutes interview he came across as measured and cool in the face of ranting incoherent criticism.
Since we would never get honest answers to questions, why are we wasting our time? He didn't answer the questions he WAS asked.
On one hand he speaks of the importance of science, at the same time he denies that millions of people died horribly at the hands of Hitler. This event has more documentation than needed, to prove that it happened.
It's acceptable to view incidents from his point of view as compared to the United States point of view, but it's not acceptable to ignore, or deny facts.
In the face of the awful things that are happening in his country, if his "Gottcha" point against America is that we are rude, or "not hearing" his complaints, he only proves the negative things the world has been saying about him.
There are legitimate complaints to be said about Americas behavior in the world, but while we are trying to calm Iraq - he is escalating the violence in Iraq. Americans aren't going to listen to a guy who is killing our soldiers, nor should we.
If the world wants to listen to and believe this guy, then we should buck up for a heavy duty war, because I will fight and die before I end up living under his rule.
but while we are trying to calm Iraq - he is escalating the violence in Iraq.
trying to calm Iraq? Doing a great job of that! If all hell was breaking loose in Canada wouldn't we try to do something about it?
You mean like take over Canada, because they were ripe for the taking? He's hoping Iraq becomes so weak, he can just walk in.
The author calls him the smartest man in the room - He doesn't even know fact from fiction.
If the science he talks about tells him there are no homosexuals in Iran, he's the dumbest person in the room.
You'd have to ask a honest question to get an honest answer.
Here's a transcript, read it make up your own mind.
http://www
you can also hear it: http://www
I think Ahmadinejad nailed it.
He hit a homerun on the "We execute homosexuals" question too. Glad you are impressed.
He didn't deny the holocaust.
Americas occupation isn't "calm"ing Iraq.
Please present the evidence that Iran is killing our soldiers.
Aren't you slightly concerned that this "fact" is based on assertions made by those who lied us into war in Iraq? No proof has been presented AT ALL.
"Living under his rule"? ... geesh.
Iran has no ability to attack America.
Raising the possibility is extreme exaggeration.
Your comment makes the case argued in this post... focus on the real issues not the invented ones skewed by propaganda you repeat as fact.
I watched him on C-Span and was impressed. He spoke of science as illumination, and if defined as such, why isn't spirituality considered a science? A good question. He demonstrated scholarship, intelligence, and restraint when asked inflamatory questions.
1) Why do we not respect is a country with a 4,000 year old history? Why must the older cultures of other peoples be destroyed by the Super Power?
2) Iran has suffered from terroism when chemicals of WMD's sold by the US to Saddam were used against Iranians. Iranians suffered 70,000 dead and 600,000 maimed from the chemical weapons. Why are we trying to silence him?
3) Why should the Palestinians pay for the Holocaust?
4) He wants the destruction of the Zionist state, not a destruction of the Jewish people, or even the removal of the Jewish people from the lands of Palestine, but a return of the borders of the nation of Palestine when both Palestinians and Jews lived there as one nation. If one one nation who would have the majority population? Why not restore the nation of Palestine inhabited by both Jews and Palestineans and ruled by both as democratic equals. This doesn't seem like a looney idea to me, but a peaceful solution.
5) More research on the Holocaust - why? What difference did the Middle East Oil play in the European War? Jews were gassed in Germany, European nations and the US sold chemicals used by Saddam to gas the Iranians? Any connection? The Palestinians are housed in concenstration camps similiar to how the Jews were housed in ghettos in Warsaw. Now you have the Super power's army camped out in all the nations surrounding Iran = Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq. If you were an Iranian, you wouldn't be asking questions?
7) "There are no homosexuals in Iran". This statement is true if one doesn't regard homosexual behavior as an identity, but as a behavior. He didn't say there was no same-sex behavior, only no same-sex identity.
9) Treatment of women - it's hard to be converted on this issue with sweet talk,...
you are totally nuts to equate the Iraq fiasco of death and destruction as "trying to calm".
Ameerica is the the one escalating violence.
America CHOOSE to invade a country for no reason and is ultimately responsible for the death and injuries that have and are happening.
Saudia arabia is supplying MOST of the arms flowing inot Iraq (next to us and blackwater!) lets go after saudia arabia. but since bush loves the saudi royal family they are getting away with murder and sept. 11
Good post, many points to consider.
I agree that the domestic policies of Iran generally repress freedom and should be condemned.
But the national dialog in America has nothing to do with truth or justice. The dialog has everything to do with the march to war which will follow this beating of the drums.
Bush has the mass media firmly under his control and everyone has their part to play. Promote the war.
To promote the war it has been decided that foreign policy, specifically threats to us and Israel, should be the main selling feature for the war.....fe
The absolute lack of honesty and context by our media and Democrats (are they still for peace?) in discussing the run up to the Iraq debacle is shameful.
Such a mess with so many dead in Iraq and no voices to be heard telling us not to repeat our mistakes in Iran.
So off we go one more time with "precision bombs" that will certainly kill small children and mothers, dead US soldiers, entire cities and neighborhoods destroyed and the possibility of using nukes. Unbelievable.
America has become a nation of fat greedy ignorant war mongers oblivious to the pain we are causing in this world.
From where I sit, Bush and Cheney should have been impeached by now and the Iraq war should be in a winding down faze.
Instead we have our Democratic presidential hopefuls joining in on the rush to war (once again) and so scared and stupid that they vote to condemn MoveOn for an anti-war ad.
And Nancy Pelosi on Wolf Blitzer today looked like an idiot as she defended Democratic funding for Iraq, parroted DLC talking points over "who owns the war" while firmly rejecting impeachment once again.
Excellent point - none of this discussion of Ahmadinejad and Iran's largely imaginary role in the Iraq occupation maks any sense outside the context of the war fever that grips US officialdom and its mouthpiece media.
However crazy (or not) Ahmadinejad, however symbolic his presidency, it is the internal dynamic of the US rush to a wider mideast war that is the driving force here, and as with Iraq there is nothing the Iranians can do or not do that will change the outcome.
A most excellent and concise reply!
Thanks.
Excellent reply to the article. I agree with you. Thank you.
great post
freespeach:America has become a nation of fat greedy ignorant war mongers oblivious to the pain we are causing in this world.
Yes. Great comment. And this pain and suffering and death is going to show up on our shores again as it did on Sept 11, 2001 and we'll have no one to blame but ourselves and Israel.
It is obviously easy to be provactive and seem to be savvy when you never really answer a question. Pres. Ahmadinejad simply replied with another question; the Socratic, negative method of hypotheses elimination that he is attempting to use failed miserably. He should have brushed up on this technique before his presetation.
As a politician, he is right up there with our president.
Right up there with your president? Are you kidding? Do you seriously think Bush could stand in front of a hostile crowd of university students anywhere and answer questions he didn't have a script for? I'd love to see that!
There have been a few cases where citizens did get to question him and they got either lies, obfuscation, or stupid remarks. In all cases the press jumped on the questioner!
WorriedNeighbour, are you a demented Rick Mercer clone?
How would you feel if someone on an open forum bad-mouthed Canada and your Prime Minister?
Never Mind! You would cheer that, too! After all Harper is NOT a left-wing looney (no pun intended).
And just so that you know, President G. W. Bush could stand in the front of any crowd and be far more eloquent and comprehensible than your former Prime Minister, the who could speak neither official languages of Canada.
Electing a dud like that (even once) speaks volumes of the mental prowess of Canadians.
Our President can't handle a group of fourth graders. "Childrens do learn"
Thanks for an article from a different point of view than we usually get in this country. Hope the post lets you review the John Mearshimer and Steven Walt book, looking forward to it.
To RHR, since Ahmadinejad came to speak to the UN he had little choice but to go to New York, where the UN is located.
Thank you. This is the first intelligent piece I have read about Ahmadienhad's visit.
This is not a stupid man. Let's not pick up right wing talking points that claim he is a hothead, a third grader and so on. Uh uh.
He didn't appear as crazy as reported either.
He actually believes that the 12th Imam (sometimes called the Hidden Imam) has been kept alive by Allah in a hidden cave somewhere for centuries and will return shortly (if certain pre-apocalyptic conditions and prophecies are fulfilled) to sweep the world into an age of Islamic glory and governance.
How is that not crazy?
Many of the questions you wished had been asked of Ahmadinejad could be asked of the leaders of the Evangelical-right in the USA. As for smarts, Ahmadinejad and bush spin in the same orbit and that's the problem. Peace
Great post.
Imhotep: How can you compare the policies and enforcement in Iran to the Evangelicals here in the States? The two aren't even in the same ballpark with each other.
Iran: State enforcement of Islamic law regarding homosexuality, women's rights, oppression of minorities, totalitarian practice of squashing free speech, personal choice and so on with the accompanying punishments ranging from public humiliation, political re-education, hanging and stoning etc.
The US: Large group of Evangelical Christians that try through protest and legislation to get their sense of morality imposed on the general public. Yes, they may have backwards views, but here they are just another lobby group. In my state, they keep trying to get legislation passed, but always end up failing.
I'm no fan of the Evangelicals or any other religious group for that matter, but equating their movement with the totalitarian regime in Iran is ridiculous.
Let's try the marriage is only a man and a woman. The evangelical right managed to get that passed in many states, even here in California. Iran does not have a Church/State wall. If the right were ever able to get a Supreme Court to rule the Separation Clause out, and the present court is one that could do it, you better believe we would become a religious state as extremely controlled as Iran.
Visit Theocracy Watch if you think our Christian fundamenta
And if the Christin mullahs took over, we'd have exactly what they have in Teheran.
'totalitarian regime'; we have a 'decider' who feels his judgement surpasses all other branches of government. Don't you fear we are heading down a slippery slope?
Beaux510:Large group of Evangelical Christians that try through protest and legislation to get their sense of morality imposed on the general public.
We are a nation that is run by lobbys and legislation, legislation is the law of the land. Im not sure if you're intentionally glossing over the damage these Christian Fundementalists have done to our cuntry and the middle east or if you are sincerely ignorant of the facts. War, religious fundamentalism, assault on reason, attacking science and evolution, erroding invidual freedoms and freedom of relgion by attacking, demonzing and excluding other religions, terrorizing politicians, cherry picking the presidential candidate that will support their Apocoloyptic wars in the middle east and electing the one who will support Israel the most and follow that THEY call Gods Foreign Policy.
They are terrorists.
I just wish someone would have asked, "why don't you admit that you were one of the ringleaders of the Tehran embassy hostage crisis?"
Everyone knows it was him, why doesn't he admit it?
It would have been a good opportunity to point out the "regime change" that the US sponsored in 1953 against the democratically elected government in Iran to install a brutal dictator. Where do you think the current regime learned their brutality from?
Because everyone who READS knows that this myuth was completely FALSE and DEBUNKED!!!
The hostage taker does not look like him to me. The guy in the photo is taller.
Sorry, but your perception is also limited.
Not every American Jew is interested in putting aside foreign policy issues over human rights, but in visiting the nation's home to the largest population of Jews, our Iranian "friend" was setting himself for protests.
Yep, he wanted them because he knows that finally he has media outlets like Al-Jazeera that often follow in the well-trodden footsteps of Fox News.
Ahmadinejad could have stood on the podium holding a kitten and a lollipop and received the same response. He was only savvy to show up. The remainder of his comments (as in his 60 Minutes interview) were forwarded ironically and meant to aggravate the crowd.
Finally, the proper word is "regard" not "regards" as you write (below).
"Irregardless" of your essay, you can't expect a bunch of (mostly) college kids to encompass the same level of knowledge that you have, based on your origin.
++++++++++
The Iranian regime is as vulnerable with regards to its domestic policies as America is with regards to its foreign policy and war in Iraq.
First, to compare Al-Jazeera to Fox News shows that you must not have ever watched the former and way too much of the latter. Second, as for the author's perception being limited, it isn't anywhere as limited as yours. And given your previous statements and their lack of any real substance, who are you to be correcting other peoples language useage?
Al-Jazeera is clearly NOT news.They think Muslims are like real people or something.
Al Jazeera is more like the BBC than Fox Noise.
I think your perception is limited. Have you actually ever watched Al-Jazeera? I would argue that they are easily more informative, unbiased, and fair than any US based media outlet, including this one. His comments were not very enlightening to me, because I already know about the hypocrisy of the claims the US makes against Iran, but they should have been to you and millions of others like you who simply follow like sheep the government provided line and frame.
Agreed absolutely. It is singled out for hatred because it presents the Arab point of view fairly.
I watch Al Jazeera every night (thanks to DishNetwork's package), and I find their news more informative than all the bullshit we get fed here in the States.
How about "regarding" its domestic policies etc. I think few of us minded that mistake. She wrote a clear and cogent blog. And I think she was not commenting in the domestic policies if Iran. I think the blog was about how the Moslem world would view his speech at Columbia. And I think she was right. Berating a guest is an acceptable thing with Moslems. Ahmadinejab must have loved all the demonstrators and the lecture on what a bad guy he is. It showed up the Americans. If he had been welcomed politely and questioned politely he would have lost a lot but Americans took the bait. He reeled in a big one with no effort.
RHR: You're comparing Al-Jazeera to Fox?
Well. That is a new tactic in discrediting Arab voices via Arab media.
There is no comparison what so ever and you know it but, making the laughable comparison only serves to highlight your Zionist agenda.
The point, however, is that Iran's domestic policies are IRAN'S domestic policies. Iran's domestic policies, even wrong as most are, are not responsible for the destruction of a sovereign nation, the murder of a million or so of its inhabitants, the dislodging of 2 million+ more, sectarian violence, and the increase of terrorism.
Domestic policies of any nation become a real problem ONLY when genocide and mass murder occurs under the auspices of those policies.
this is the most intelligent post I have read. You make very good points and you make them very well.
What if everything he says is TRUE?? What if every charge against him is exageration (sp)or lies. How would we ever know, with the current tendency to avoid the truth.
Most of the attention in mainstream media went to the gay issue. I don't care if they allow gay's or not. If the homosexuals in Iran care, they will change it, or hide their illegal activities. In Iran it is illegal to be homosexual. America accepts homosexuality and are willing to discuss the issue. We use it as a wedge issue to try and win elections.
Gays are should not be the most important topic for the world.
Bravo... I believe we missed a key opportunity to ask him the questions that really matter. It is terribly sad that many who post on here feel that this man is some wise and great leader. They should carefully examine your post and look into the reality that exists in Iran.
You're probably right, Sam, Ahmadinejad's visit is going to score big points for him back in the Arab world. It's a shame that people here didn't realize the theatrical nature of his visit and move to project a rational, reasoned, accepting, democratic, free response. The Columbia president is a tool, at least the students were able to react against his authoritarianism.
Ahmadinejad pwnd us, yet again.
Could it be that Bollinjerk made an even bigger Bush sycophant of himself than Petraeus!
I think so!
This seems to be the new liberal modus operandi.
Invite someone to speak. Then spend weeks and weeks undermining the speaker before they are allowed to do so.
They did it with Petraeus, now they did it again with this guy.
This one ended just as many conservatives predicted. It was a dog and pony show. Hitler Jr got up and gave his empty rhetoric, then refused to answer the questions that were meant to serve to balance the appearance.
If not for the statement on gays not existing in Iran, he would have enthralled millions of libs all across the country.
"Science it good. I love science. America is evil because it hordes science. blah, blahblah, blah blah..."
What a waste of time.
The left is certainly enraged that their plan to use Ahmadinejad as a weapon against Bush (in exchange for allowing Ahmadinejad to be legitimized on the Columbia stage) was destroyed by Bollinger.
Ahmadinejad is a leader of a terrorist state. He promotes terrorism and funds it around the globe. He's a butcher that spreads intolerant racism and hate. He's responsible for the deaths of many innocent people around the world, even today no doubt. He wants you to be ruled by radical Islam. Are you really worried we might have "offended him or are you angry that the left wings cynical use of Ahmadinejad was destroyed by Mr Bollinger?
Terrorist leaders of foreign nations have no "FREE SPEECH RIGHTS" in America. Ahmadinejad does not have the rights of an American citizen. He should no more be on that platform than say, someone espousing the killing of blacks.
Ahmadinejad never should have been offered the prestigious platform of a prominent American university from which he could elevate his status as global terror leader. If someone must speak in the "distinguished speakers" series lets not let them represent hate, intolerance, and violence. Bring in speakers that represent the victims.
Do you believe in "speaking truth to power"? That useless left wing attack phrase to sanctify any outrageous comment? Well Bollinger clearly spoke truth to a massive and evil power. Bollinger confronted Ahmadinejad with his crimes against humanity and Ahmadinejad's promotion of intolerance, racism, and hate.
Mr Bollinger is an amazing speaker. I'd like to believe Mr. Bollinger did so because he felt that someone should stand up to this tyrant and confront him debate with the violence and hate Ahmadinejad promotes. And to make it clear that Ahmadinejad was not brought in to be used as a cynical, anti Bush political tool.
I'm afraid however that it may have been the financial, political, and JOB pressure being placed on Mr. Bollinger that caused him to abandon the left wings cynical agenda and support human rights instead.
Yes. AJ is truly evil. Imagine, him reading e mails, listening to telephone conversations, lying to get into a war for oil, creating millions of refugees, spending money on weaponry and war instead of its own people or social programs, rendition, torture, abu gharib, corporate coroption, katrina, global warming, and promoting religeous views into their own political policies. What a silly little terrorist. Has Iran ever used a nuclear weapon or sold and then supported the use of chemical weapons ? How many wars has Iran got going on right now? Is Iran occupying any countries? Spend more time on Osama, in case you've forgotten, and just perhaps you might actually find him. These diversions are getting tired.
Did you even read the post?
The Left isn't looking for a weapon against Bush in Ahmadinejad. They are looking for dialog that will prevent another disastrous war with Iran. It really is THAT simple. I was really disappointed in Bollingers rant. I'm not saying he had to be nice, but he could have been less inciting. It really is amazing how tunnel visioned we have become on this issue. I'm not in the usual loop of MSM. But when I check in once and awhile, I'm still appalled, yet not surprised by how far off message they still are. And another beef I have with your post is free speech. If you truly advocate for free speech, then that means EVERYONE! American citizen or not. If you start to pick and choose who gets to speak, then you are encroaching on censorship. When we shut down criticism from outside this country, we loose the ability to be the great nation we are.
I don't understand why he was invited if the president of the Univ was going to totally downgrade the man before he spoke. I don't understand why the man wanted to go there and speak. This countries people unfortunately isn't too bright when they so unwittingly gave him the power to do what he accomplished. I'm not an expert on his actual human rights abuses so I can't attest to that. I don't believe ANYTHING our govt. will try to sell to us anymore. There is always a reason to it and I just don't trust their reasoning. So, how much does someone know what is true and what is not?
Doesn't the US know any better than act like that to a visiting head of state? Whether he is what they say he is or not they played right into his hands. Hello people!!!
Bush needs phonetic notes, Ahmadinejad doesn't.
Regardless of reality in Iran, and regardless of accusations of "dictator" (he was elected) or leader of a terrorist state (it's only terrorism if THEY do the same things We do to THEM... Or the irony of the NRA 2nd amendment wingnuts wanting to arm everyone --except people they don't like....
Independent of holocaust denial ... the man is smart, and the NeoCon outrage over the fact he was even here -- was enough to make Americans act like completely rude, utter fools..... he comes across as more intelligent, reasoned and open to dialog than any NeoCon ever imagined..
No wonder they don't want us to hear what he has to say
I'm not advocating for him.... I'm just saying --in terms of brains, charisma, and willingness to engage in dialog with people he knows don't like him --he has everything Dubby lacks.... put him on a stage with Bush, and George will look like he's totally third rate loser as a world leader
I'm confident the WORLD saw what happened at Columbia and the UN far differently than FOX news reported it.
. . .and our inability to see the world as others do, is but one aspect of why our nation will regrettably decline. For some, there is a sorta of comfort zone in the belief of how we process information is the one and only true method for doing so. However, it is steeped in cultural arrogance, the same arrogance along with greed that now has us bogged down in a costly war.
And sadly, America's prestige, power and wealth made her 1%ers less tolerant of others to such a degree that those who actually run this nation are basically unable to listen to the ideas of others on a level playing field. They are eventually going to move this nation in the direction of war, because deep inside the sinues of their souls they are unable to trust anyone who is not a white, male Christian.
The die cast by Bush is to persuade with force and it will sadly be repeated over the next decades as we continue our destructive ways?
Sam Sedaei....
A great post!
The President of Columbia by berating the President of Iran before he even started his speech, told the entire world that in this Country we harbor hate against Iran and that civility is a lost art in America. He managed in a very short few mintutes to bring himself down to the Iranian President's level.
We have a choice to like or dislike any Country and It's leader. Should we condem a Country on the words of warmongers who lied to us about Iraq and it's wmd's. I have seen no evidence that Iran is trying to build an atomic bomb. I feel as this writer does we should explore the civil rights of the Iranian people. We did not, the Columbia President was too engrossed in throwing cheap slurs at the man before he could even defend himself.
Iran voted this man into office. We may believe he is a dictator and he may be but it is the people of Iran's choice if they want this man as their leader, It is about time this country stops playing police cheif of the world. We do not have the money nor the man power to police the world and bring them around to our way of thinking. We have to talk to people who some see as our enemy as well as our friends. We must solve our problems diplomatically, else we will destroy our Country and our World, because noone wins in nuclear war.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
