Playing dumb?

Iran's president is either terribly uninformed or...


Share/Save/Bookmark

Playing dumb?
by Ben Madadi
29-Sep-2008
 

Mr Ahmadinejad had an interview with CNN's Larry King recently, and of course, as usual with such people who have no positive plans or serious and constructive policies toward anything, the interview was nothing new. The same old rants complaining about this and that and bragging about this and that! I watched the interview and I'm sure many people did. The guy, Ahmadinejad, must not be taken that seriously, but he's the president of a relatively large country anyway. So, we have no way out but to take an irrelevant and unrepresentative, and obsessed (about his image mostly), person somewhat seriously, especially that the country (our country) he represents sits on one of the largest oil, and natural gas, reserves in the world.

Let's look at what he told Larry King and see where are all the lies and misleading answers and of course irrational and irrelevant speeches he gave! From the way he was talking you could say that he himself wasn't comfortable with his answers, and his gestures and movements, facially and physically, gave him away terribly! He was lying and he was misleading, and he knew it and his body couldn't hide his feelings. Just look at the videos and you will notice that time to time his uplifting on the chair, and of course his facial expressions, are clear signs of his discomfort about the things he was saying. And Larry King, as usual, as an experienced interviewer, was too kind and did not want to get too deep into controversial issues to prove the president wrong!

Anyway, I would like to bring up many of the things, lies and misleading issues, that Mr Ahmadinejad said, so that readers can make up their mind about this undemocratic leader of an unfortunate country, a rich and beautiful country that is being abused by an unrepresentative and undemocratic, yet expansionist and dangerous, regime! Here are some of the things he said, and some of my rebuttals follow after each presidential rant!

1) Mr Ahmadinejad says that the hostilities have been one-sided, and that it is the US who has been hostile toward Iran.

He forgot to mention the US embassy takeover and hostage taking after the revolution in which he has allegedly been a party!

2) "Keshvare Iran 7000 sal sabegheye tarikhi dare. Hich vaght mellate Iran aleyhe hich mellati harekati ro anjam nanade."

I don't know why he felt the need to fantasise something like this! We are living in year 2008 and he is talking about things he probably has no idea about! First of all where did he get the 7000-year figure? That the country Iran has a history of 7000 years. I thought a country called Iran was established almost 2500 years ago for the first time by the Achaemenid. Did anybody live in Iran's current territories before that? Well, people lived in America (Africa, Europe etc) too some 7000 years ago, but there was no country called America, as there was no country (politically united entity) called Iran, even 3000 years ago. He is also saying that the Iranian PEOPLE (mellat) has NEVER acted against any other people.

Again, why did he need to say something so irrelevant?! Has any other PEOPLE in this world ever acted against other peoples, ever? If so, who? If we are talking about political entities, it is a different matter then! The political entity called Germany acted against its neighbouring political entities during the two world wars. The political entity Iran has repeatedly acted against its neighbouring lands, taking them over and robbing them time and time again. This applies for the Iran before Islam (invasions of Greece, Babylon, Egypt etc), and for Iran after Islam (for instance, the siege of northern India and the total plunder of the area by Nader Shah Afshar says anything?).

3) Mr Ahmadinejad says that Iran did nothing but defend itself against Saddam who was incited and aided by the Western powers.

Of course, the inciting is not accurate, but the aiding is documented. What Mr Ahmadinejad omitted is that Saddam shortly after the war wanted to end the war (he realised he could not win), and it was the Iranians (the Iranian leadership) who did not agree, and thought they were going to conquer Najaf and Karbala.

4) About the nuclear issue the president has some good points, by mentioning the fact that other countries are developing much more sophisticated nuclear technology, and even weapons, and they are not feared, and so carefully and diligently inspected. He says "don't you think the Zionist regime needs inspections?"

What the president doesn't understand is that the West (those who are indeed ruling this world, and definitely the democratic world) are fearful of his regime, the fundamentalist Islamic regime of Iran. The fear is genuine and it is based on precedence. The Iranian regime has not stopped interfering in other countries' affairs to create instability, whether it is in Israel, Palestine, and Lebanon, or more recently in Iraq. The Iranian regime is one of the world's relatively powerful countries openly challenging the democratic world, and desiring to obtain bomb-making nuclear technology. The West is fearful and it is legitimately so. While the same West is not fearful of a nuclear Israel. This is a fact that Iran must understand. Yes, as Mr Ahmadinejad said, it is political rather than legal (Israel has not signed the NPT, so it is not breaking that treaty anyway).

5) The president, when asked about Israel, and its supposed prospect of annihilation, complains about the dire humanitarian state in which the Palestinians are living under the "Zionist" regime. Then when asked about the possible solution, Mr Ahmadinejad says that he wants a free referendum in which Israelis and Palestinians would participate in order to choose their system of statehood and leadership.

Mr Ahmadinejad is the man of an unrepresentative ruling clique who have taken 70 million people hostage for about 30 years and they are concerned about 3-4 million non-Iranians? No, they are not. So, listening to what they say is a waste of time. Why not let YOUR OWN people participate in a referendum, a free referendum, and choose their own form of government? I know they got screwed 30 years ago and voted the Islamic constitution, but maybe, just maybe, they are a bit more experienced now! It is also true that most of the same Islamic constitution has not been respected.

6) When asked about the Holocaust, Mr Ahmadinjead says that it is not even allowed to question, and to research, the possibilities, and whether it did take place the way it has been portrayed by the West.

Again Mr Ahmadinjead is either terribly uninformed or simply playing dumb. The Holocaust has been researched and studied extensively and what the official Western history is saying is pretty much the result of the studies that have taken place after the event. However the president is RIGHT in saying that further research and study must be done. And the European laws that forbid questioning the Holocaust are not doing anything good either for the victims or for the future generations, by giving room and possible credibility for people like Ahmadinejad.

7) Mr Ahmadinejad, again, says that he thinks that IF the Holocaust took place in Europe and because of the crimes of the European regimes, then why didn't they set up Israel in Europe?

He is quite right in his simply putting the words in a short and rational response. But then again, if he is the 'representative' of justice and speaks for human rights, then why not apply it first in his own court? Well, he is NOT speaking for anybody's good. He is just wasting our time to try to fool a few, and he has quite a success among many Muslims (actually Sunni Muslims) in countries, mostly other than Iran.

8) Mr Ahmadinejad seems to ignore the threat of an Israeli attack altogether by saying that Israel is weak and irrelevant compared to Iran.

I wouldn't be so sure he is NOT genuinely worried about an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear sites. Israel has not only a very powerful army that can match the Iranian army by ease (even putting the atomic bomb aside), but it also enjoys the support of the world's most powerful country, America.

9) When Asked about homosexuals Mr Amadinejad did not stay that polite and ambiguous any more and stated a clear response regarding the homosexuals, that homosexuality is disliked by the vast majority of Iranians, and that there are laws which punish homosexuality.

Mr Ahmadinejad is right to say that "kasi tazahorati nakarde" (no one has demonstrated) in his attempt to minimise the plight of homosexuals in Iran. Well, I guess they would either be hanged, or somehow disappear altogether if they dared protesting in the streets asking for their rights inside Iran. And he is also right that the vast majority of Iranians are against homosexuality and dislike it. This was true even in the US a few decades ago. Even Iranian Bahais, to this date, are disliked by the vast majority of Iranians, who are Shia Muslims. Even Sunni Muslims are not much loved I must say. So, Mr Ahmadinejad is rights about some of the odious realities of the mostly backward Iranian society he continuously brags about. In Mr Ahmadinejad's 'logic' if the vast majority of Iranians dislike something then the regime is obliged to hang, or oppress, or mistreat, those who LIKE that something? Why not start at the top and do something about the regime itself? Why not ask the Iranian people whether they like the ruling regime or not?

I really don't see much of a reason to sit and talk with people like this, whose legitimacy are seriously questionable. The actions of the Iranian regime are out there for all to see, and their apparent soft talking when they come to the West are nothing but attempts to buy more time for whatever they may be up to, against their own people and against the interests of the democratic world.


Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by Ben MadadiCommentsDate
Moving forward
33
Nov 06, 2008
Testing democracy
15
Nov 02, 2008
Smart choice
22
Sep 15, 2008
more from Ben Madadi
 
default

Here is my 2 cents regarding the points:

by Shamse Vazir (not verified) on

1) Obviously "marg bar Amrica" and hostages did not help the situation. No it was not one sided.

2) Iran does have a 7000 + year history. But none of it matters to Islamists since they only consider post Islamic history as important. Why else do they show so much disregard for pre-Islamic Persian history?

3) It is true that Iran was defending itself against Iraq. But Iraq would have never been in a position to attack Iran had it not been for the revolution. By purging the military and alienating the west IRI put Iran in a weakened position and made it vulnerable to attack.

4) Whether we like it or not the west is still strong and does not trust the IRI. Given IRI's record starting with broken promises by Khomeini (free water and electricity; democracy ..); the hostage fiasco and so on who can blame them? IRI leadership has lied so many times that no one trusts them. This is not to say that west does not ' lie but it does explain why so many ordinary people in the world mistrust the IRI.

5 - 8) Israel is an scapegoat for IRI. They just keep using it to cover their own failures. Again I am not defending Israel but just pointing out that this obsession wit it is a distraction. Why is the Holocaust an Iranian issue anyway? It was not Iran that perpetrated it so why should Iran be so involved in researching it. Israel was not made on Persian territory and is not our problem. Iran should fix its own problems.

9) Gays are and have been a part of human race since the beginning. IRI is fooling itself if it thinks they would just go away. Why not accept them as regular people?


Mehdi

Little anecdote for Ben

by Mehdi on

Some time ago I was in Long beach, a very nice area in California, right on the Pacific Ocean. I was walking by a house and a tiny sign posted on the wall outside caught my attention. It said on it:

"If you are lucky to live by the beach, you are lucky enough."

I immediately felt a laughter coming. I actually had a realization. I realized that there are people in this world who are born into the lap of luxury - relatively speaking. They look at their own conditions and the conditions of others in the world and see that they have been "blessed" by many luxuries. They have peace, security, money, car, house, boat. They have family, relatives, uncles and aunts that are themselves well off which adds to their sense of security. But they don't understand why they are so "blessed." They don't see anything within them that makes them so special. It is rather mystifying. And it bothers them. So some of these people eventually decide that it must be "luck." Of course "luck" is that mythical entity that could be replaced, in all literature, with the phrase "unknown cause." No such thing as "luck" has ever been discovered. On matters when we don't understand the cause we use this word to fill the gap that otherwise bothers us. It makes us feel better to pretend that we "know" the cause than to admit we don't.

Probably one of the reasons we come up with "luck" as explanation is because in fact we are trying to deflect responsibility. We don't want to see that we have a responsibility to others who are not so "fortunate" so we claim "there is a difference" between us and them - we have luck and they don't. There! Problem solved.

Such people look at others who not as "fortunate" and say, "Huh, backwards! Barbarians! Savages! Low-life's! Terrorists!, Bums! Lazy people! etc." It is a really great way of saying I have no responsibility. I am above it all and they are just sub-human. The reason I am doing well is because I am the "Superior Race" or the "Chosen People" and they are not - is it that hard to understand?!

But my personal viewpoint is that evolution is a little bit like a family where the newer generation might look back at the older ones and blame them for all his troubles. The fact is that such a newer generation is ignorant of the fact that the older generations did not have all the current resources available to them. You can imagine a teenager who angrily shouts at her parents and wondering why they didn't Google "good parenting" and read some of the articles!

In the same way, the "more advanced" societies, owe their success to some degree to the ones that haven't quite made it yet. If I have a bachelor's degree in something, it is because many many farmers and villagers worked very hard in their difficult environments to make it possible for me to have that education. It isn't all because I was so smart! Sure, maybe I also did my part, but my being smart or hard working is only part of it - not all. In a way, we can say that all those farmers and villagers gave me part of their lives, in the hopes that I would find better life and better way of living and maybe even bring some back to them- or at least help build a better world for their future generations.

So we see here our Ben born and raised in the lap of luxury, completely ignorant of the life that a Palestinian kid goes through, or some Iranians Basiji goes through, assigns all the difference to the "democratic" "nature" of his beloved country, Israel! Can't be more ignorant than that, my friend. Wake up and smell the coffee! You are not so "chosen." And you have a responsibility. Get out of your warm home and give a hand to those who helped put you there. Stop being so ignorant. Ask yourself this question, if you had opened your eyes from day one to the terrifying noise of F-16I's circling around your village and you knew no other world than what your parents told you about the "occupiers" on the other side of "the wall" would you be so smart to figure it all out now? And please spare me the justification that "it's their own fault." A new born such as that does not have the luxury of seeing what you can see. And he never gets that chance as he grows up. So I guess the solution again is, you are lucky and he is not!


Ben Madadi

Dear commentators...

by Ben Madadi on

There are people who genuinely disagree with me and thanks to the Internet and to the freedom of speech (both gifts we enjoy in the West, but not openly and freely in Iran) these folks can say what they want, and that is great. This website has people from all corners of thought, politics, and geography, so it is normal ro have disapproving comments, no matte what one writes. And thanks for the friendly comments too :)


default

It is tragic that most of

by p,,, (not verified) on

It is tragic that most of the frequent commenters (mostly Islamists/leftists, western phobic, Ommatists, Antiuated communists...)on this site exploit this site as their own propaganda platform.

Good job Ben.


KB

Mr Madadi

by KB on

Back in Iran my uncle owned a book shop and I often found myself there helping out and spending time with my cousins. To entertain ourselves during the slower times we would pick up a RESALEH by some prominent mullah and fall about laughing at the stupidity of some of the stuff written in it. Things like you can drink from a pond that a dog has pissed in but not one that a dog has drank from, or do not use a toothbrush as it is haram and is there to make money for the manufacturer.

Reading your article (and previous ones) reminded me of a RESALEH because just like the mullahs, your only point of reference is your own observations and what you have clearly spent a long time writing, is not really based on fact but your own beliefs and prejudices.

Whilst it is blatantly obvious that IRI is on a charm offensive and Mahmoud was well prepared for the interview, he presented his side of the arguments articulately and accurately (well more accurately than your piece). As previously said, he is ignorant but not stupid.


default

Excellent!

by Looti (not verified) on

Mr. Madadi, 100% correct. Thank you. This Ahmadinejad character is a joker and evil.


Shini Head

Re: Playing dumb?

by Shini Head on

Mr. BiMadadi

Your problem is that you trust west in general and US in particular too much. For example, have you even once asked yourself that if US is so concerned about human rights in Iran and human rights in general, about freedom, and etc., why did they do what they did to Iran in 1953 and then subsequently after Iran's revolution during the war with Iraq? Don't you look around you and realize  that most of the poorer countries in the world  did not really have to be poor if it wasn't for the mischief of US and its so called "allies" in that they want to plunder their resources, and steal their human dignity? .... and on and on ...Could it be that you are too stupid to understand the reality?


varjavand

Here we go again

by varjavand on

Here we go again

Another one of your articles reflecting your apple-polishing attitude toward the West in general and America in particular even at the expense of trashing your own country, what do think you can get out of this, I don’t know?

Please consider the following points:

1. Iran does have7000 years of traceable history. Please go watch the documentary “Seven Faces of a Civilization.

2. Hostage taking was in fact carried out by a bunch of over zealot students revolutionaries and never sanctioned by the government. In 1998, president Khatami came close to apologizing for that incident while addressing the American people on CNN.  Even though, none of us support hostage-taking, you should consider it in the context of time and the history baed on which it regrettably happened.  The US government has interfered in the internal affairs of Iran for over fifty years and no US official has ever offered anything even close to an apology to our nation

3. Contrary to what you said, the Iran-Iraq war was instigated by the West, however, covertly. Saddam started the war and he had to bear the consequences.  You sound as if you are shamelessly blaming our country for the war that costs us most Iranian families, including my own, so catastrophically.

4. On nuclear war issue, You stated that “The fear (of Iran) is genuine and it is based on precedence” When was the last time Iran used nuclear bomb? It was the US, not Iran, that used nuclear bomb before.“The Iranian regime has not stopped interfering in other countries' affairs to create instability, whether it is in Israel, Palestine, and Lebanon, or more recently in Iraq”. If US had slightest evidence of Iran’s interference in Iraq, or any other country, believe me it was on public display and on US mass media 24/7. There reason you don’t see that is that because there isn’t any evidence of such interference unless you have something in your sleeves mr. Kasseh dagh tar as ash. When it comes to interfering in internal affairs of other countries the Oscar goes to American government. Next time you want to claim something as dramatic as the ones in this article make sure to check the facts and don’t try to trash your country simply because you want to appease the west or the US

Varjavand

 


default

Please...

by Shamshod (not verified) on

America... Israel... democratic world... bla bla bla...

If Ahmadinejad was so pathetic, then people like you and your "western democratic world" wouldn't be dedicating so much of their pathetic attention to him.

I wish these stupid articles were shorter.


default

My two cents

by Roshanbeen (not verified) on

Mr Ben;

1)1953 Coup, removal of democraticaly elected government. If it still in power, the whole ME and the world would have been better place to live.

2) I think he is talking about Aryans

3)Agree

4)Countries interfere in the affairs of other countries(I wish no one did)due to common cultural, religous interests. Most of Iraqi and Lebenese shite which comprise majority of the population of their countries have close family and religous ties to Iranians which can not be ignored, citizens this country fight in military of foreign country in broad daylight. so it is not specific to Iran. Ironically, some of IRI's tactics and strategies are copy cat of their advesaries.

By the way, I don't agree that world is democratic. you won't find many people agreeing with you.

5)The bitter truth is that is not the case when you count all 70,000,000 not just people who live abroad(even that is dewindling) and shoomaleh-Tehran.

6)-

7)-

8)- summer 2006.


Mehdi

Why Israel is so afraid of Ahmadinejad?

by Mehdi on

If Ben is right and Ahmadinejad is only ranting and "should not be taken seriously" then why is Ben's country, Israel, so afraid of Ahmadinejad? Why does Ben and his countrymen think that if governments had talks with Ahmadinejad it would be devastating? What are they really afraid of? If Ahmadinejad is a ranter, then he should lose credibility immediately and Israel has nothing to worry about! Why do they work so hard to block Ahmadinejad and not allow him any possibility of explaining himself? Is Israel taking decision on behalf of everyone and thinks that people are stupid and may be fooled? Is that their concern? Or maybe they are afraid their Mafia would be exposed if they let him talk? Clearly, unlike what Ben claims, Larry King himself was quite impressed with Ahmadinejad and realized that he had been lied to by "the media." It was definitely a terrible setback for Israel, especially after the Columbia University embarrassment Israel suffered. Too bad, Israel, people's eyes are opening. And Ben, for God's sake, stop writing for governments and start writing for people.


default

well, it is obvious that the

by Ben B (not verified) on

well, it is obvious that the writer of this Article is not every well informed of the History of Iran and the history of the Political animosity between Iran and the U.S.. Ahamadinejad didn't say much worth repeating here, but this article's claims are no more objective or factual than Ahmadinejad's.