Ahmadinejad: Wikileaks plot

Dismisses US documents showing Arab support for bombing Iran

BBC: Iran's president has dismissed as propaganda the leaking of US cables detailing Arab calls for Washington to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the release by the Wikileaks website of thousands of extracts from US diplomatic messages was simply psychological warfare against Iran. He said the release would not affect Iran's relations with other countries >>>


Recently by Jahanshah JavidCommentsDate
Hooman Samani: The Kissinger
Aug 31, 2012
Eric Bakhtiari: San Francisco 49er
Aug 26, 2012
You can help
Aug 23, 2012
more from Jahanshah Javid
No Fear


by No Fear on

I guess we just have to wait a few more days to see what comes out of the negotiation. Having said that, I personally support a hardline non compromise approach towards our nuclear rights in the current timing and strictly from the strategic point of view.

In regards to IR judiciary, your point is valid.  More needs to be done to make our judiciary less political.

When Ahmadinejad took office, many committees from the parliament and the Judiciary who worked parallel to the administration and were interfering with the administrative role defined in our constitution, were shut down. These were hard fought battles and Ahmadinejad succeeded in giving the "administration" relative independence from other government bodies.

We must look at events from the "evolution" stand point and support " progress" or any steps in the right direction, even if it seems insignificant. The dime a dozen jujeh revolutionaries on this site might disagree with this method though.

In regards to political prisoners, as i recall , there was a time not long ago when you didn't even knew the names of these political prisoners let alone having their voices heard and published freely. Freedom of speech and expression improved dramatically during Ahmadinejad's era. You can see the effects of these freedoms on many aspects of peoples life even in the music scenes.

The judiciary and the parliament ( both controled by traditional conservatives who are allied with reformists ) pressured the government of Ahmadinejad tremendously to curb these freedoms and launch complain against public rights and interests. But Ahmadinejad has refused to follow their advice.

Ironically, these relative freedoms has come back to bite this administration in the butt. Its seems odd to me how Iranian intellectuals must be defined as "anti establishment" or "anti government" in order to be accepted as intellectuals. Ahmadinejad has been taking a lot of unjust criticism without firing back at people. But i guess this is the price he has to pay for giving a voice to the opposition.




No Fear

by norooz on

I agree, they do smell.

I think, Iran should fight this nuclear issue from the legal stand and file complains with UN and other agencies and perhaps file lawsuits on the countries breaking the international law with respect to Iran's rights and those countries involvements in criminal activities toward Iran, instead of being the recipient of the complains and lawsuits. Iran should advocate nuclear disarmament. The more we do that, the more it proves that Iran is not after nuclear bomb and the sooner states such as Israel and others will be forced to disarm. 

The bigger problems for Iran are the human rights issues such as false arrests, political prisoners, tortures and executions and etc. If the justice system is not fixed right, nothing will ever be fixed. 


No Fear

I smell a fish.... Norooz

by No Fear on

Other wikileaks recently published memos claimed that after the fall of Saddam, IRGC death squads infiltrated iraq and tracked down former iraqi pilots who flew over Iran during Iran / iraq war and assassinated them. The report claimed over 180 pilots were hunted down by IRGC death squads.

The more i read these reports, the more suspicious i get.

The timing of these leaks just before Iran sits down with 5+1 countries is also ineresting.

Are they trying to alienate Iran by exposing ( creating ? ) a rift between Iran and its neighbors?  Kind of getting them on board for future blockages , sanctions or war ?  Why not get the Iranian public to display their disgust at the back stabbing arabs?  Would the Iranian politicians follow?

How about those two scientists who were assassinated?  Or the cyber sabotage of our centrifuges? That can put tremendous pressure over our nuclear negotiation team to accept a solution or to witness more of our scientists perish.

Indeed these are critical times in our politics. The west has played this hand very well.

What do you think our negotiation team do? Should we continue the same non compromised policy without giving up any of our rights or should we take these gestures seriously ? 



No Fear

by norooz on

Thank you. Of course, I just write my opinion. I have read most of your comments and have learned alot.  This was one of my worries. that if Obama is used to accuse Iran of building nuclear weapon it will be more convincing for the world than Bush did. After all, he is Hussein and talks peace and Farsi.  Now, these reports show that Obama is no angel. The same public trust in Wikileaks can be used against Iran.


I wrote, I liked to hear what the Saudis have got to say about the reports. Meaning, I agree that Iran should have perhaps waited so the Saudi officials to deny the reports, but that is my opinion.  Ahmadinejad has his own reasons.  Clearly preventing tension is one of the reasons. Maybe Saudi officials talked with Iranians and discussed the issue before Ahmadinejad made those comments and some other reasons.

You wrote, I didn't answer your question about Iran-Iraq war. What question is that? I have always answered any question i was asked. Then again, I am not "Allameyeh Dahar" either.  You are free to ask others who know more about the subject.

You asked,  Ahmadi Nejad is right again?  About what? 

On saying that these reports will not change anything. Meaning, west and Israel will not change their behaviors because of these reports.  Meaning, they will continue to kill and destroy either way. Meaning, United Nations as usual will not do anything about them,  Meaning, there is nothing new in these reports that Iran and the world haven't already witnessed. The lies, the violations, the crimes and etc.  Meaning, even if Obama wants to do good, he can't.  Meaning, Obama administration is continuing on the same path as Bush did.  Meaning, the actions speak louder than words and they can not be trusted with or without Wikileaks reports.  



No Fear


by No Fear on

Your analysis was sound, rational and offered a fresh outlook.

I can not understand how anyone can write such non sense to your last reply.

Please do not be discouraged. Many like me enjoy reading a balanced and rational comment.


Re:Aynak, I agree, As i wrote

by aynak on


norooz Jan,  you remind me of some Mojahedeen supporters I knew in college.   Whatever the leadership did, they had a justification.   Wikileaks was praised a couple of months  back by Ahmadi Nejad government.   Now suddently they are plotting.   But the funniest thing was whatever Rajavi did, to them it was the "right thing to do".   This got all the way to the point were someones wife had to divorce her husband (and become Maryam Rajavi).   That one, I thought left no room for defending, yet my Mojahed friends reaction was:  Oh, can you believe the foresight  and sacrifice Massoud had to make?!!

there you goes your statement:

"So Ahmadinejad is right again. "

Ahmadi Nejad is right again?  About what?   I asked a simple question, which like our Iran-Iraq War discussion you can not answer yet you maintain your opinion.       Why did Ahmadi Nejad need to be the first to comment  about this?   Whose face is he trying to save?  Why not wait for a month, or at least get a reaction from leaders directly invovled, instead of the blank check of dismissing the reports?  It looks to me he and his policies are more like A Kabk with his head under snow than anything else.

I think next you think Ahmadi Nejad will wipe U.S off the map, much like my Mojahedeen friends used to say, we will take over Iran in just a few more days.   One can not argue with delusion.



Aynak, I agree, As i wrote

by norooz on

Aynak, I agree, As i wrote before, i liked to hear what Saudi Arabia has got to say about that.  But Ahmadinejad knows most Arab States are friendly enemies, so it wouldn't make any difference to him if Saudis accept or deny those Wikileaks reports about Saudis.   Ahmadinejad also knows the enemy. So he would rather deal with the enemy first and with the friendly enemy later, if they insist to stay friendly enemies rather than being friends.  

Also Ahmadinejad downplayed the importance of some of these reports because,  Wikileaks have gained the trust of many around the world and if Wikileaks gives a false report that Iran is building AB, then the world would assume it must be true because it came from Wikileaks.  So Ahmadinejad would rather not to take such a chance with any reporting agency that directly or indirectly can be effected by criminals.

Ahmadinejad also knows, the western and Israeli crimes are known to everyone, but west and Israel have continued on the same path and some reports from wikileaks will not make them change their behaviors and as we see he is right, because the responses to the wilileaks reports from the west have been how to charge the founder of Wikileaks rather than changing one millimeter of their policies and behaviors. 

So Ahmadinejad is right again.

Below is a link yolanda attached.  It shows I wasn't the only one reading the possibilities.  By the way Yolanda, are you another proud Persian named Yolanda? Like Fred and the anti Islam mahmoud.



Aynak jaan: there is a flaw in your analysis

by Bavafa on

You are expecting logic, common sense, smarts and statesmanship to be the employed by AN and company. These are attributes that are absent in IRI regime and play book.



Ahmadi Nejad screws up (or rescues the "enemies") one more time

by aynak on

Once again, it is baffling, how Ahmadi-Nejad can save the face of his "enemies" by opening his mouth for no real benefit.   (Remember after 3 weeks Gaza war, when instead of condemening Israels war crimes, in a visit to Europe,  he said, Jews must move back to Europe, and thereby forcing Europe to condemn him instead of Israel?).

So the leak says, all these neighbors are scared of Islamic Regimes nuclear program, but more than that, it says they have actively asked U.S to bomb Iran.   This is either true or false.  

If it is true,
Why should Ahmadi-Nejad rush and make a foolish statement, when the intention is clear?   Who is he trying to fool?   U.S already knows it.   Those who cable these already know it.  Answer:   Ahmadi-Nejad and VF like to say it is us (the whole Moslem world) against them.   This proves him incorrect.   Before one jumps here to say, but the rulers are different than the masses in the Moslem/Arab world, then that would automatically beg the question,   WHY would Ahmadi Nejad want to save the arse of these leaders in front of their own people, by saying no this is not true?  It is not like him opening his trap will change these countries policies toward Islamic Regime is it?
Why shouldn't he just keep quiet and see how things pan out?

So the only logical conclusion if the statement is true is that Ahmadi Nejad is trying to tell Iranian people that our policy is popular, when the facts show otherwise. Or simply he is trying to fool Iranian people.

If this news is false,
Why not let those states come out and deny this?   Why would he take the burden of them saying they did not say this, when they have to show or deny it, not Ahmadi-Nejad?

Either way, this quick REACTION by Ahmadi-Nejad is a prime example of his actions, which make you think if he is really a double agent, aimed primarily to destroy Iran?




looking at that picture, there is NOTHING voluptuous about that woman...and...and...and

Ghaddafi looks like shit!!!!!  DAMN!


Anonymouse jan, it's written in Dutch (hollandi)

by Hajminator on

It's said: Gaddafi's nurse, called Galyna Kolotnytska, is from Ukraine. Without this 'voluptuous blonde' the Libyan leader would never travel.

btw, I prefer by far the young version, I don't know how it's possible that this young version became the one beside Gaddafi (too much abgoosht with the leader)?


New photo of Gaddafi with his blonde nurse!

by Anonymouse on

Looks like this is Galyna Kolotnytska and I can't tell from this photo if she is "voluptuous" or not!  It just shows Qaddafi having some aabgoosht (beef stew) with Galyana.

There is also this other article and perhaps a younger Galyana? It is in German and need someone to translate it!  What's going on over there?! 

Everything is sacred


All things aside


unrelated to what this guy thinks or says, the whole "leak" thing is a big pile of steaming horse crap, i sincerely hope you, my intelligent friends, have come to notice.

Nothing about the whole thing, from A to Z makes sense or seems plausible.



by yolanda on

Hi! GR,

     AN has not commented on the leak that Mousavi won the election......when he came to UN a while ago......he said that he has more votes than Obama.....AN's skin is thicker than the pachyderms......sorry, at this point, I have run out of analogies!


thank you!

G. Rahmanian


by G. Rahmanian on

"Thicker than the Great Wall." That's a good one! We used say, 'Ssngeh Paayeh Ghazvin.'



by yolanda on

AN said US released the (unflattering) material of Iran intentionally:


Here is AN's spin:

"When they say they have isolated Iran, it means that they themselves are isolated and when they say Iran is economically weak, it means that it has strengthened," the president reasoned.

This comment by AN really makes me throw up:
When they say there is a dictatorship somewhere, it means that "country is really chosen by the people" and vise a versa,


AN's skin is thicker than the Great Wall!

Curious Joe

Let's Put Things into Perspective

by Curious Joe on

100 years ago, the Ghajar Dinasty in Iran signed a contract with the British who had discovered oil in Iran.  The Ghajars gave Iran's crude oil away for a pittance to the British.  And today, Iran is still giving crude oil away while importing refined petroleum.

 Fast forward to the Pahlavi's dynasty, Reza Shah/Stalin/Roosevelt meeting in Tehran, followed by Mossadegh, and the CIA/MI6 Coup in 1953 to remove Mossadegh and bring back the Shah to power from Rome, followed by the meeting in Guadeloupe with Margaret Thatcher, Valery Gistgard D'Estang and Jimmy Carter, leading to the so-called "Iranian Revolution" in 1979. And here we are today, in 2010, wondering what all this Wikileaks are all about.

 As a staunch atheist, I have no soft heart for fundamentalists such as the Ayatollahs, nor the Pope in Vatican, nor the Orthodox Jews in Israel. But I do see a parallel between what happened with the British Empire and their oil deal with Iran 100 years ago, versus the nuclear energy and today's American Superpower/Empire and her allies in Europe and elsewhere.

I see the current Empire trying to get Iran to buy enriched Uranium to make nuclear energy, turning Iran into yet another economic slave of the west/Russia, just as the previous Empire made Iran to sell its crude oil, but buying the refined oil from the west, at much higher margins -- for the next 100 years.

Bravo AN and a bunch of stoned-age Mullahs !  As George W Bush said:  You fool me once, shame on you -- You fool me twice, shame on you again!

Mardom Mazloom

Listen sponge No Fear,

by Mardom Mazloom on

Your questions are as stupid as your oversmartness, you should stop taking crack before entering the net spreading non-sense. That will not help your A.N. president to get the legitimacy that he doesn't have, haji.

Now be a good boy and go back to bed, boro haji bezar yek-khoordeh bad biad.

No Fear

Listen spongebob,

by No Fear on

So what do you want Ahmadinejad to do about these reports?

Do you want him to come out and call king abdollah names? or should we declare war on Saudi Arabia for conspiring against us? Should we deport their ambassador out of Iran? What ? just what should we do, sponge brain? 

Do you have any solutions for this particular incident? Does any of you readers have any solutions?

This is not about whether there is any "truth" to the report.

This is about how to react to it.


Mardom Mazloom


by Mardom Mazloom on

your friends as well as A.N. were referring to the first wikileaks report as a valuable source discrediting the US.

Now you and them are saying that these new wikileaks reports are an american complot for destabilizing Iran. right?

So if you, the candid, was also saying the same thing for the first report (that those reports were also among a complot). Point on one single blog or comment of yours from that time (around july 2010) backing that. If you have no such link, you're either a parrot or a liar.

No Fear


by No Fear on

How can you pin that report on me or others on IC ?

David ET

What else do we expect to hear from

by David ET on

those who worship arabs for 1400 years and bend over to them 5 times a day. AN is defending saudi king

Mardom Mazloom

care to prove your 'non sense'? Ehemm

by Mardom Mazloom on

Here you are, (wikileaks a source of trouble for the US - talking about the first report) as it is stated in this pro-thug IRI blog. 

Now, haji,  do the same favor than the last time you asked for evidence, put a lid on it and go back to your bed.

No Fear


by No Fear on

Care to prove your non sense?


Mazloom, good point

by Onlyiran on

The last time Wikileaks released documents these same characters were cheering it as the best thing that happened since sliced bread.  Now that there are things in there that disturbs their fantasies, it's a Zionist and U.S. conspiracy.  :-) 

Mardom Mazloom

norooz, so you admit to be a IRI thug?

by Mardom Mazloom on

As I was just referring to them. The other one understood what I meant.  (s)he's now quiet, trying to overcome her/his oversmartness.



by norooz on

You are not reading me koochooloo.  I wasn't suggesting what the report says about Khamenei and others are false. I was suggesting that some reports can be intentionally leaked to benefit from by west. WikiLeaks owner is not bigger than China. If not for sweet deals, under pressure he will cooperate sooner or later, but perhaps they will not tell you that.

Mardom Mazloom

When the first wikileaks were against US actions in Afghanistan

by Mardom Mazloom on

IRI thugs were so happy that they didn't stop referring to it. Now that IRI terrorists are pointed out in these new reports as a big sh"t; brainless IRI apologists try to appear as oversmarts and talk about complot, strategy, etc. Ha ha ha


"staged by US to further divide the region" - LOL

by Onlyiran on

Do you people ever leave your fantasy land?  The "region" has been divided for centuries.  These are the same people who were chomping at the bits and falling over each other to give money and weapons to Saddam to finish up his second Qadissiyeh.  Is it any surprise that they don't want Iran to have nuclear power?  

get out of your la la land.  Persian Gulf Arabs are NOT Iran's friends.  They never will be. 

Mardom Mazloom

نظام به این بی غیرتی// هرگز ندیده ملتی

Mardom Mazloom

چو ایران نباشد، تن من مباد