News

Vee Pee of Kay

I am not an Islamist. This is a slander and I can have you flagged, and decapitated. Just kidding (Islamic way)!!

The podium of the UN is not for internal issues. It's designed for International matters, and he used it accordingly.

BTW, Palestinian issue is not religious. They are trying to make it as such but it's all about a nation driven out from their homes by invaders.

My heart is true as steel.

Puck

President of Iran should be worried about Iran. Not about the holocaust. Why are you Islamists so fixated on this? Why should the representative of Iran be obsessed with this. I don't care if he is right or wrong. It is not the topic that matters to me.

This is the problem with Islamism. They put Islamic unity above Iran. I don't want my nation to be a part of some big Islamic "brotherhood". I am not a Muslim and see no reason why Iran should be in the middle of the Palestinian fight.

Got it now!

President or not, he said nothing wrong

Why is that no one can doubt, question or suggest anything about the Jews?

Do they realy think that they are God's Chosen People? 

My heart is true as steel.

loveofliberty

i have pretty much said the same thing as you. except, i think he acts in exact same manner as western leaders. they are not interested in a healthy debate either, are they now? why walk out every single time he speaks? it is not indicative of a democratic mindset.

as for holocaust research, there are people who question the holocaust industry in the west, and they lose their jobs and livelihoods as a result. take norman finklestein for example. it is not a case of a little bit of a backlash. it's a case of an orchestrated onslaught by politicians, academics and the media, all of which are predominantly controlled by pro-zionists.

and as for sincere debates on 9/11, ahmadinejad did ask for an independent UN investigation. how much more 'objective' do you want him to be? although the event happened on american soil, the consequences affected many countries. hence a UN investigation is warranted. 

you may wish to portray an image of a somewhat 'fair' atmosphere regarding such debates in the west, but it is simply not true. we both know it.

Research regarding holocaust

This is an interesting point. It is true that in Europe there are strong limits on speech regarding this issue. That is wrong and shows the hypocrisy in EU. However that is not all of Europe. Nor is it present in the USA. Therefore it is inaccurate to say that holocaust research does not happen. Of course it does and it may. It just happens that most of the research indicates it did happen.

Personally that is not the issue to me. Whatever happened it does not justify what IRI is doing. That unfortunately is the sticking point. For some reason IRI supporters have a logic like this:

• Israel does terrible things. 
• Therefore we get to rob and rape Iranians.

It is this logic or rather lack of one that is the problem.

Niloufar,

Niloufar:  "he questions the holocaust for the sake of questioning it. this is done in order to expose western hypocrisy. on the one hand they defend cartoons of muhammad in order to 'prove' their 'commitment' to free speech, but then they jail you if you even suggest that further research on the holocaust is required in order to verify the veracity of the dominant version of history. now it really does create tension unnecessarily, but it does also gain ahmadinejad an enormous amount of political capital among muslims and those who are fed up with israel's atrocities and western support for them."

But, I don't think you can actually point to any law in the EU or the US/Canada that specifically outlaws Holocaust research.  Of course, for some countries in Europe, certain forms of speech regarding the Holocaust-or any genocide, in general-are curtailed...which could, I admit, present some problems for publication of such research.  But, if the way in which the Holocaust research material is presented is not inflammatory in nature, nor condons such activity, and is objective, then that research can certainly be published.  So, I think it is a bit of a distortion of the truth to claim that, "they jail you if you even suggest that further research on the holocaust is required."

Niloufar: "same as above for 9/11. he outlined various theories. but did he say which one he considers to be right?"

From my point of view, Ahmadinejad's speech was inflammitory in nature since he didn't present any objective evidence that supported his two assertions that the US government was, to some degree, behind 9/11.  So, if he was sincerely interested in having a serious debate about 9/11, why shouldn't he include all possible subjective assertions concerning who was behind the events of 9/11?  Why shouldn't a subjective assertion that Iran was behind the events of 9/11 be open for discussion during such a debate, for example, even if there is no objective evidence available that supports such a claim?

So, if you ask me, Ahmadinejad is not interested in a healthy debate on the topic.  He is just in search of political points in the Muslim world.

NP

If AN wants to help Iran he should start at home. As I said use his office to oppose the inhuman Sharia actions at every step. His calls ring hollow while there are people being stoned to death in Iran. 

I think his passion is mostly his ego. He wants to be known as a great leaders. Instead he is known as a loudmouth who cannot get his priorities straight. Plus I can see where his passion is.

i see Agha Amrikaee

has stooped to the level of encouraging american interference in iran again... nuff said!

vpk

i disagree in that i think ahmadinejad is passionate about what he does, and that his demands over talks are realistic.

we will know whether his approach has worked in due course.

I see NP is making absurd comments again

I could only be bothered to pick out one (but all of his/her arguments are the same):

"he is also a president of a sovereign nation, and one that should live free of foreign interference and threats."

So this only applies to Iran?  What about the islamist (IRR) regime's interference in Iraq, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen and Palestine (and thats not all of it)?  This list doesn't include all the terrorist activities the islamists have carried out in Europe and even in places like Argentina.

NP believes that when the islamists interfere in other countries affairs thats OK, its only when the US interferes that it is a problem.

Hypocrisy at its height.  

SP

My views are simply at odds with yours. That is all either one of us can say. You do not know what people in Iran think. The polls you are referring to have been shown to be inaccurate. Many people have gone into detail why polls in a dictatorship are not accurate. Now you can keep saying it but it don't make it right. The only people stupid enough to beleive those polls are the naive  idiots who wasted their money on them. I bet you don't take them any more seriously than I do.

Beaisdes:

1) I am not an exile. I have valid papers and may come and go as I wish. 

2) I am in contact with plenty of people back home. I know what is going on.

3) What is your definition of "mainsteam"? Only those who are in agreement with you? This is the same BS as rightwingers come up with in America. They claim mainstream wants tax cuts for the rich. Yeh right. 

4) People in Iran that I know just want a good life. They don't want confrontation. They don't want war. They don't give a rats behind about Israel or the Pals.

VPK

Your views on legitimacy are unrealistic, to say the least. Plus, your views are very much at odds with the public perception inside Iran:

//www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/br...

This is the biggest criticism of exiles: they're totally out of touch with the mainstream of Iranians living inside the country. 

NP

You are talking about AN as if IRI was a ligitimate government. If it was then you would have a point. I agrue that IRI is not a legitimate ogvernment. There is no spearation of powers. The courts are not independent. 

Now just for a moment lets assume the courts were independent and AN was legitimate. He could condemn the stoning; go on TV and make passionate appeals against them; use his powers to investigate corruption in the judiciary. He does nothing instead he wastes his time harping on Israel. It is obvious to me that he is far more interested in Palestine and Israel than Iran. Perhaps he should have a post in some international NGO. I am serious. That is his passion not running Iran. He has the wrong job.

Both AN Khomeini view or viewed Iran as means to advance their anti-Western agenda. Or to advance Islam. Well that is not Iran's purpose. Iran is a nation with its own people. It is not its job to fight the West. For the Palestinians: I am sorry but they cannot look to me for help. They need to figure otu their own solutions; it is not Iran's job.

Regarding AN's calls to talk to West. They are unrealistic. When you have neither military nor economic power you don't make demands. This is the way of the world. 

.

.

goodarzy

and shghayegh equation.........

Iran(HER PRESIDENT) has no place to question the worst human tragedy on the American soil if she can not condone it. 

ooh sure mamood is mamoot BUT sargord IS NOT sargord.       Maziar

they will go

NP khanoom how can a nation desire a direct talk with another nation that's been at his constant direct insult verbally and....

saying marg bar amrika for 31 yrs. and holding their diplomats hostage for over a year and all the other signs...

I think America have shown more patience and sympathy with Iran than vice versa.      Maziar

vpk

he is also a president of a sovereign nation, and one that should live free of foreign interference and threats.

and if i may suggest, you take his words far too literally and seriously, not to say angrily. u also blame him for crimes he is not responsible for. let me try to explain:

the rape, stoning and hangings are all related to the judiciary. his influence has been a moderating one, at least recently.

the holocaust thing is stupid. but i have never heard him deny it. his 'obsession' with the holocaust issue does not come from hatred for jews. iranian jews are totally safe, even under ahmadinejad.

he questions the holocaust for the sake of questioning it. this is done in order to expose western hypocrisy. on the one hand they defend cartoons of muhammad in order to 'prove' their 'commitment' to free speech, but then they jail you if you even suggest that further research on the holocaust is required in order to verify the veracity of the dominant version of history. now it really does create tension unnecessarily, but it does also gain ahmadinejad an enormous amount of political capital among muslims and those who are fed up with israel's atrocities and western support for them.

same as above for 9/11. he outlined various theories. but did he say which one he considers to be right?

i know you are aware of all of this. but ahmainejad has made a political judgement as a leader, and in doing so he has decided that muslim and anti-zionist support is more important than western opinion. 

your approach sees iran's political culture aligned with that of the west. he just does not see it like that.

you say he puts iran in harm's way. he may be thinking that iran has been in harm's way for too long, and it is time to end this nonsense once and for all by resisting from an assumed position of strength. let's call it a nuclear power position of strength.

he constantly repeats his desire for direct talks with usa. his only condition is that the talks are held between equals. in other words, two nations talking as equals instead of fighting for ever. american refusal of his call for direct talks is based on pure arrogance. and a fear of sharing power. but this will come. it has to.

Peace

I wish he'd calm down

For the sake of all of us.

Khrushkov could afford acting like a complete fool

Because he had an arsenal of nuclear weapons to back him up, just in case. Ahmadi, on the other hand is still trying to enrich his uranium to 30%, with all his nuclear process control electronics SW infested with some "sophisticated malware"!  

loveofliberty

well i was thinking more along nixon-ist lines...

indeed, time will tell.

WHO COULD CREATE MORE HATE THAN THIS GUY?

I wonder some times what are the reasons this guy and his kind and clerics create so much hate in the country and the broad. they are deliberately setting up hate, even hitler to achive his agenda united the nation.even in other countries which they have a dictatorship trying to please the public somehow and mostly trying avoid the international  confrontation , but when it comes with Iran, we have to be top of the news.confront the countries that could create worst than we can imagine. I think being Iranian is unlawful in the country that is called Iran, being smarter than clerics and Basiji is against the fate of islam, dressing like a human being against the islam, freedom comes for those how could have the right to kill,rape,terrorise the public,what else left for these traitors to do for us and our country.thinking about it makes me sick. 

Putting Iran

first above Islam and Arabism is not being "Westernized". In fact the Islamists are "Arabized" and far more of a problem than so called "Westernized" Iranians. To them anyone who speaks real Persian (not Arabic) is Westernized. If you put Iran ahead of Palestine then you are Westernized.

NP: AN is hated because he is so disgusting. This murderer is responsible for rape; stoning and hanging of innocents. There is no fire in hell too hot for him. The asshole denies the holocaust; 9/11 and puts all the blame on Jews. This Jew hating was tried before. Now he wants to put Iran in harms way just to get his yayas out to prove he is a good Muslim. He more than anything is a danger to Muslims. Since his rods and actions will end up boomeranging on all Muslims. He talks; they pay. 

Well,

Well, at least he didn't make a complete fool of himself yesterday...like Nikita Khrushchev did in September 1960.:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztYwQhKrTJQ&feature=related

Not only he's a Holocaust denier

Now he's denying even 09/11.

What's next ? 

He is a real danger to everybody

Above all, to Iranians in Iran.

his usual hysterical and hate-filled nonsense

A hypocritical racist demagouge, nothing new. .

 He uses Israel as his rabble and hate rousing point much as the bigotted nutcases on the right use illegal hispanic immigrants in the US.

Note his 9/11 rhetoric. He  coveres his behind with his preface to the lunatic fringe theories but it is obvious that he was trying to legitimize rhetoric that is meant to offend.

What does he achieve by creating all this animosity?

Niloufar,

Niloufar: "despite both these leaders' shortcomings, a peace deal is in the offing."

Just don't be too surprised if a Neville Chamberlain-ist "I have returned from (Iran) with peace in our time" conclusion turns out, in time, to be just an illusion.

The future will only tell...

seamorgh the islamist

1. "By the Way, as I had said before, only individuals who have no logical argument resort to Ad Hominem attacks."

2. "to his Savak members (which is very well represented here)"

3. "Rafsanjani and his gang were describes as crooks here in IC. Now they are hailed as heroes. Goes on to say how gullible some are"  

Statement 1 contradicts statements 2 and 3 - back to the absurd islamo-nazi arguments and the usual smear campaign - if you don't agree with their fanatic extremist ideology that must mean you are anti-Iran - ABSURD 

seamorgh

many western people and their media and leaders have decided to hate ahmadinejad, and there is nothing that can be done about it. there is little rationality in how they treat him, and this makes real dialogue rather difficult.

i grew up believing that 'ordinary people' can always overcome such false political barriers. but in this case it is quite the opposite: the much awaited deal between iran and usa will come despite 'ordinary people'. the time is ripe given both countries' needs, and the needs of several others affected.

we saw how an overture was made by the 5+1 for dialogue with iran. not sure how genuine it was, but all sides in this dispute want a resolution despite the likes of israel and saudi arabia.

having said all of that, i have several reservations about ahmadinejad's speech. not that he would care! but a day after the 5+1 made a public statement that was seen by several media outlets as a 'u turn', why did ahmadinejad take this particular line of attack? domestic pressure surely has an impact, but that would be more focussed on not giving too much away in negotiations rather than going on an all-out attack. it is clear that he speaks to a very big audience when raising questions about 9/11. but you could see that the reception to this speech in the assembly was far less enthusiastic than before. people are getting turned off by the tough talk, and there is little to gain from going over the issues of slavery and colonialism day in day out. those issues are given and more time could be spent on looking for real, practical solutions with positivity and humour in a forum like the UN and when the whole world is watching. 

i also found obama's speech quite poor on several fronts. obama has no doctrine to speak of. he is full of stale slogans, and worst of all, he talks as if he leads - or intends to lead - the world. there is no denying usa's power. there is also no denying the loss of its power in recent decades. and the rate of this loss is increasing in time. we do Not live in a unipolar world. how difficult is it for him to accept that? so a wise leader would stop alienating the world with pretty words that are in fact put downs for self-respecting people and countries around the world. he should instead show himself to a real agent of change rather than one dedicated to maintaining the bush doctrine while mimicking dr. king in words alone...

despite both these leaders' shortcomings, a peace deal is in the offing. at least reason would require it. and the reason for this is not related to iran's nuclear programme. it's in usa's need to extricate herself from endless wars in iraq and afghanistan in the midst of an economic crisis, and in iran's need to end her relative isolation.

Peace

IC does not

IC here is not AT ALL representative of the Iranian people. Most have become so westernized that they could not tolerate the Iranians people, their way of life, and their choices even for a second. Majority of people here are the same kind of people who left Iran out of their fears during the Iran-Iraq war and did not sacrifice even a single penny to defend Iran against Saddams aggression. In fact, many IC here are unapologetic supporters of the MEK, which actively helped Saddam slaughter, torture, and rape young Iranian men and women. That is why they are so despised by the Iranian people. The Iranian nation is a proud nation and nation that gets what it wants. To even suggest that they have been cowed is very insulting. Since the Constitutional revolution, they have always stood for their rights and have never allowed anyone who does not represent them to speak on their behalf. Anyone who tried or would try, faces the same destiny. Look at what happened to the Shah, to his Savak members (which is very well represented here), and recently to Rafsanjani and his gang of crooks. It also amazes me to see so many flip-flops here, not long ago Rafsanjani and his gang were describes as crooks here in IC. Now they are hailed as heroes. Goes on to say how gullible some are... By the Way, as I had said before, only individuals who have no logical argument resort to Ad Hominem attacks. Your attacks say a lot more about the kind of person you are than it says anything about me.