Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

[Ujitsuna]

He has just held a speech on invitation at Columbia University in the USA, under much criticism and I'm here to say that some of his comments over the years may have been mistranslated or taken out of context, not to defend him either though. I just feel a lot of the media is kicking up a storm that in some of the cases, isn't there. Although I thought the Holocaust "conference" was horrible, and the people that attended were even worse, doing some research into some of his comments that have become a common reference when talking about the man shows some interesting things.

Lets start with the Holocaust comment, in which media outlets all over the world claimed that he said the Holocaust was a "myth." According to several web sites the exact translation was: "in the name of the Holocaust they have created a myth." In which he is referring to the Israeli regime which because of the Holocaust was established in the Middle East, and not the people of the country (nor the Palestinians). What seemingly every outlet also left out, was the long speech of peace and how nuclear bombs were "un-islamic" before that and how he thought the Israeli-Palestinian situation should be resolved peacefully through elections, instead he has been labelled a Holocaust-denier.

Source: http://www.juancole.com/2006/08/ahmadinejad-we-are-not-threat-to-any.ht ml

Lets move onto the "wipe off the map" comment in reference to Israel, there has been much debate (even though you'll never see this debate in mainstream media) about the translation of what Ahmadinejad actually said. Ahmadinejad was actually citing a metaphorical and spirital phrase that Ayatollah Khomeini had said years before when he was alive, read this article.

[Jowy Atreides]

At the end of the day it doesn't matter what he says, because there is such a thing as lying. He could be telling the truth, or he could be lying; we can't really know.

I personally think he's a real piece of shit, but we have this thing called free speech here in the States that should be respected, no matter what the opinion is. If Neo-nazis can hold rallies in a majority-Jewish neighborhood (Skokie), then Ahmadinejad should be able to say whatever the hell he wants, no matter how stupid he is (and he is pretty damn stupid).

I've looked at some of the reports from the protests, and it looks like most of them don't know much of anything about the Middle East, which isn't surprising.

[Ujitsuna]

Yeah, I agree he could be lying, but the talk of peace and not attacking unless attacked first is at least consistent with most of his speeches both inside and outside Iran, a lot of the media just report on what they want to and leave out parts they don't think will cause a reaction.

We need to remember he is elected, even if the "Supreme Council" moderates who can run for President, a more reformist leaning President could very well be the next in office.

[SwissStopwatch]

I don't know that you could call him stupid. After all, he's a politician. I definitely suspect that saying and doing a lot of the things he says and does (especially the part about flustering and annoying the US) plays pretty well to the people he's dealing with. Which makes them the smart things to say, in some sense. And, of course, he probably does not particularly care how much any one single average not all that important person likes him. Especially if they don't get to vote in Iran.

So sure, a lot of the things he's said are... not necessarily the most truthful. And they seem (in some cases, obviously are) pretty stupid, from an objective point of view. For example, I'm reasonably sure that the Holocaust happened. And I'm pretty sure that there's at least one homosexual person somewhere in Iran. But they do gain him some political capital where he is... So in that sense, the lies are similar to some that politicians elsewhere tell. Come on, think of some that we've been told over the last few years. Say, from 2000 to now. I'm sure you can come up with a few that have had a lot more real impact than saying that the Holocaust didn't happen. (There's more to say on his comments to that effect, but... not right now.)

In essence, for his purposes, it doesn't matter whether or not the things he says are completely stupid from an outside or objective viewpoint. If he can maintain popularity in Iran by saying them, then that serves his purpose pretty well. At any rate, there's no reason he shouldn't be allowed to speak. People get to choose whether or not to believe him. I definitely don't believe many of his statements, of course, but then again, I'm not his target audience.

Anyway, the Supreme Leader is a higher post than the one he holds, and that's the one that really determines a lot of things. The holder of that post (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei right now) gets the final say on almost everything with Iranian policy, actually.

[Jowy Atreides]

We can argue whether or not he's stupid all day, so why bother?

[Ujitsuna]

It isn't that he is maintaining popularity in Iran, in fact I think it is obvious he won't be around forever in that regard. It is that with every effort by the US and/or Europe to condemn him, it only makes him a more influential figure for anti-Americanism in the Middle East.

[Scarlet Assassin]

The gay community at my school issued an official rebuttal to Ahmandinejad earlier in the week. They simply stated "There is no Iran"
_________________

Chief of Beat-em-up Honeys Division, Devoted Protector of Lady Tifa Lockhart

[Luceit]