Why does the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad make such outrageous statements?

119 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Why does the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad make such outrageous statements?

._.

NorthReport

Ahmadinejad Holocaust jibe 'totally unacceptable': Moscow

 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's statement that the Holocaust was "a myth" is "totally unacceptable", the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement Saturday.

"Such statements, wherever they come from, contradict the truth and are totally unacceptable," ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko said in the statement.

"Attempts to rewrite history, especially as the 70th anniversary of the start of World War II is being marked this year, are an offence to the memory of all victims and all those who fought fascism," he added.

Nesterenko said Ahmadinejad's comment "does not contribute to creating an international atmosphere that would foster a fruitful dialogue on issues concerning Iran."

Iran and six powers -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States -- are to meet again on October 1 on Iran's nuclear programme amid fears that Tehran is planning to build an atomic bomb.

Ahmadinejad made the statement as he addressed the annual Quds Day rally in Tehran on Friday, reiterating earlier comments that had sparked outrage around the world.

The United States, Britain, France and Germany all issued statements slamming his latest outburst dismissing the killing of some six million Jews of occupied Europe by the Nazis during World War II.

"The very existence of this regime is an insult to the dignity of the people," the hardline Ahmadinejad said of Iran's arch-foe Israel.

"They (the Western powers) launched the myth of the Holocaust. They lied, they put on a show and then they support the Jews.

"If as you claim the Holocaust is true, why can a study not be allowed?" he said to chants of "Death to Israel" from the crowd gathered for the annual display of solidarity with the Palestinians.

"The pretext for establishing the Zionist regime is a lie... a lie which relies on an unreliable claim, a mythical claim, and the occupation of Palestine has nothing to do with the Holocaust," he added.

"This claim is corrupt and the pretext is corrupt. This (the Israeli) regime's days are numbered and it is on its way to collapse. This regime is dying."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iDWXVz_37v4MbpB-FMjG0...

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

He's an idiot.

George Victor

But is he all alone, Boomer?

martin dufresne

"This (the Israeli) regime's days are numbered and it is on its way to collapse. This regime is dying."

I just hope he's right.

Ken Burch

If his being right meant the status quo in Israel/Palestine would be replaced by a humane, progressive alternative that treated everyone as equals, it'd be great.  Not sure we can say that simply getting rid of Israel would automatically be an improvement.

 

Ghislaine

martin, in the context of the way he means that quote - your comment is disgusting. I think you are just naive though, not intentional.

 

re: the thread title question: because he's an anti-semitic dictator who doesn't believe in human rights?

martin dufresne

Thank you Ghislaine. I commented a specific statement, Ahmadinejad's statement about the current Israeli regime - and not "Israel" as Ken writes. (It is debatable whether the statement about the Holocaust constitutes the context, or vice-versa.)

NorthReport

martin dufresne wrote:

"This (the Israeli) regime's days are numbered and it is on its way to collapse. This regime is dying."

I just hope he's right.

I think what is more likely to happen is that Israel, or the USA, or both, are going to be taking out the Iranian nuclear installations before too much longer. I'm not sure what will happen to the Iranian government when that occurs.

Ken Burch

Nothing positive will happen if that occurs.  It will simply lead to global war, since every developing nation, (and in fact every OTHER nation on Earth, since no other country on earth would defend such an act) would join in outrage against the U.S. or Israel(and thus also the U.S.) for such a despicable act.  There's no reason to even consider the idea. 

martin dufresne

...every developing nation, (and in fact every OTHER nation on Earth, since no other country on earth would defend such an act) would join in outrage against the U.S. or Israel(and thus also the U.S.) for such a despicable act...

You mean like they did when the U.S. levelled Iraq?

Ken Burch

No, more like Che figured they would have if the U.S. had actually nuked Cuba in '62.

martin dufresne

So you are suggesting that the discriminating factor would be the use of nuclear weapons. But if Israel and the U.S. conventionally carpet-bombed Iran('s alleged military nuclear program installations), it is safe to think that that would be met with Canadian and world tolerance/approval, right?

sanizadeh

Ahmadinejad saying nonsense? So what is new?

This is the guy who said there was a halo of light around his head when he was speaking at the UN last time!

We are getting prepared for his upcoming trip to New York next week. Will be the largest protest by Iranians in recent years.

Prophit

I have a deep respect for expatriat Iranians who speak out for courageously against the tyrants and idiots in Tehran. We all must support them in any way we are able.

remind remind's picture

How about exporting that philosophy to action the idiots and tyrants in Israel?

Ghislaine

remind, there are plenty of threads about Israel - why not make your comment in one of those?

remind remind's picture

Because ghislaine, prophit is clearly working a pro-Israel mantra, in this thread.

Ghislaine

How so, remind? He never mentioned Israel.  There is going to be a huge protest against Ahmadinejad, as sanizadeh outlined. Are all of those protesters working a pro-Israel mantra?

remind remind's picture

No they are not, but prophit only has 1 agenda here.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Quote:

There is no point in wasting time refuting Ahmadinejad's claims, but it is worth saying a few things about them. Setting aside questions of probity, Ahmadinejad's argument does not even amount to a particularly effective attack on Zionism. It concedes the wholly false idea that the legitimacy of the 'Jewish state' derives from the Nazi holocaust - the logical corollary of his point being that if the judeocide did take place, which it did, then Israel has legitimate grounds for existence. It concedes the lie that Zionism would be a natural and logical response to antisemitism, pogroms and extermination - it was and is nothing of the sort. It is as if the ideological bases for Zionism were not established well before WWII, as if the project was not already well under way under British tutelage, and as if its founders had nothing to be embarrassed about in terms of their relationship to the Third Reich (see Francis R Nicosia's The Third Reich and the Palestine Question). I would infer that the reason for Ahmadinejad's focus on the Nazi holocaust is that he thinks that Zionism is about Jews, not about colonialism or ethnic nationalism as such. He thinks that if he can undermine the claim that Jews have suffered horrendous oppression, he can undermine the moral basis for the "Jewish state". It is an antisemitic argument, precisely because it concedes so many of the intellectual underpinnings of Zionism.

The interesting thing about this is that anti-Zionism among Palestinians is far more historically sophisticated. The PLO never adopted "revisionism", as it is euphemistically called. Its official position was always that the Nazi holocaust did take place, that it was a tragedy, and that this did not remotely justify the oppression of the Palestinians. Even Hamas, who are often attacked on this question, have been increasingly distancing themselves from that idiotic 'charter' with its references to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Hamas leaders have been openly denouncing Holocaust-denial, because they understand that it is no alibi to their cause. So what Ahmadinejad is doing is retrograde even in the context in which he would prefer to have it understood, that of the Palestinian struggle....

No doubt Israel's apologists would prefer to cite Ahmadinejad's nonsense as proof of some 'genocidal' intent toward Israel. This is rather cheeky given the frequency of explicit genocidal sentiments coming from authoritative sources in Israel. Consider the Israeli defence minister's threat of a 'Holocaust' in Gaza. Or the rabbis indoctrinating IDF soldiers with exterminationist doctrine and venerations of the racist murderer Baruch Goldstein during the assault on Gaza. Or the messages left by IDF troops and settlers in Gaza and the West Bank: "Arabs need 2 die", "Die you all", "Make war not peace", "1 is down, 999,999 to go", "Die Arab Sand-n****rs", "Exterminate The Muslims" and "Arabs To The Gas Chambers". Ahmadinejad has nothing on these guys.

[url=http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/09/ahmadinejad-on-question-of-zionis...

Ghislaine

[url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32950027/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/] Ahmadinejad proud Holocaust words spur rage [/url]:

 

Quote:

 

"The most important message of this year's visit by president to New York is peace and friendship for all nations, fighting suppression and interaction with all nations in the framework of justice and mutual respect," Mohammad Jafar Mohammadzadeh, a spokesman for Ahmadinejad's office told IRNA.


Too bad he has no respect for history or for his own citizens' rights.

kropotkin1951

Strangely enough this man receives significant support in elections.  Whether or not he won the last election outright is debatable but the fact that he received over 40% of the votes cast does not appear in dispute. Obviously either his Israeli remarks resonate with the population or they see them as insignificant in their choice of leaders.  

I suspect that the Israeli propaganda that consistently argues that pre-emptive military strikes against Iran are Justified might just not play that well with the average Iranian who will be bombed for the sins of their leaders.  Why should Israeli leaders on one hand talk like a war hawks and then demand their enemy sound like an appeaser.  I know that I would not be very receptive to any country that said bomb Canada in response to any question about our foreign policy.

sanizadeh

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Strangely enough this man receives significant support in elections.  Whether or not he won the last election outright is debatable but the fact that he received over 40% of the votes cast does not appear in dispute. Obviously either his Israeli remarks resonate with the population or they see them as insignificant in their choice of leaders.  

It is impossible to put a number on his real support as long as there is no free and democratic environment for people to choose and voice their view. However I can say that the issue about Holocaust in general is insignificant or even unknown to Iranians (except the embarrassment it causes for hearing someone as our president denies it from an international podium), as it had little to do with us in any way. Iran helped a few hundreds French and Polish Jews to escape from Europe during WWII, but aside from that, it is as relevant to us as asking a Chinese person how s/he feels about the inquisition period in dark age Europe.

 

remind remind's picture

Interesting and useful analogy, sanizadeh.

KeyStone

"Nothing positive will happen if that occurs.  It will simply lead to global war, since every developing nation, (and in fact every OTHER nation on Earth, since no other country on earth would defend such an act) would join in outrage against the U.S. or Israel(and thus also the U.S.) for such a despicable act.  There's no reason to even consider the idea. "

The world you live in, is much nicer than the real world Ken.
For some historical context, all one needs to do is see what the response was to Israel taking out the Osirak reactor in Iraq in 1981.
They had a few informal condemnations and that was about it. No retaliation, no sanctions, no reparations.

I expect a repeat if Israel takes out an Iranian reactor. It's all well and good to shake our fists, and have rallies, but when it comes to Western governments taking action against Israel to defend a country that we don't have great relations with, don't do a lot of trade with, and don't have a lot of influence, it's not going to happen.

Even the Arab countries are going to look after their own first. They all know that Israel is far more powerful given all the arms that the US has been giving them for decades.

Ghislaine

[url=http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Canada+boycott+Iran+speech/2022648/sto... Canada set to boycott Iran's UN speech [/url]:

 

Quote:

 

Walking out of the chamber is seen as a strong diplomatic show of disgust at the UN -- and since the 192-member chamber is generally packed on the first day of the annual summit, Canada's empty seats will not go unnoticed.

"President Ahmadinejad's repeated denial of the Holocaust and his anti-Israel comments run counter to the values of the UN General Assembly, and they're shameful," said one Canadian official.

"He uses his public appearances to provoke the international community, and that is why Canada's seats will be empty."

The gesture is stronger than one announced Tuesday by the German Foreign Ministry, which asked other European Union member states to walk out of the General Assembly chamber if Ahmadinejad again denies the Holocaust, or makes anti-Semitic statements.

 

Star Spangled C...

Wow. The Harper government actually giving us a reason to be proud of it for once.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

The Harper government knows nothing about diplomacy. They regard it as a last resort, when all else fails, including war.

First you start with the threats and posturing, then you move to economic sanctions, then to war, and only after it's clear you can't win the war do you actually resort to diplomacy.

Really makes a fella proud to have a government like that.

Star Spangled C...

Um...yeah. Cause Canada has already imposed sanctions and gone to war on Iran?

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Staging temper tantrums at the UN is not"diplomacy", pal. It's under the heading of "threats and posturing" - Stage One.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

The top of the list of reasons for my disgust with this government and my growing embarrassment for this country is its foreign policy.

Star Spangled C...

M. Spector wrote:

Staging temper tantrums at the UN is not"diplomacy", pal. It's under the heading of "threats and posturing" - Stage One.

Boycotting a speech is "staging a temper tantrum"? I guess Judy Rebick, Naomi Klein et al threw a "temper tantrum" at the Toronto Film Fest then. You seem pretty keen on boycotting Israel. Is that a temper tantrum? Or is it only a temper tantrum when government officials boycott a crazy Holocaust denier who steals elections?

melovesproles

Quote:
The top of the list of reasons for my disgust with this government and my growing embarrassment for this country is its foreign policy.

Same.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Star Spangled Canadian wrote:

Boycotting a speech is "staging a temper tantrum"?

Staging a walkout is a temper tantrum. That's what Harper is planning.

Quote:
I guess Judy Rebick, Naomi Klein et al threw a "temper tantrum" at the Toronto Film Fest then.

What did they boycott? Did they stage any walkouts?

Besides, drawing comparisons between the tactics of political activists and the international relations between heads of government is nonsense. Of course, I wouldn't expect anyone who has been living in the USA to understand anything about diplomacy, since that has been a dead letter in your country for sixty years.

Star Spangled C...

I was at a convocation ceeremony where colin powell was the guest speaker and several students walked out before he got up to speak. Is that a temper tantrum? I think getting up and leaving when someone like the president of iran gets up to speak is actually a moral obligation. he can't be given any legitimacy from the international community.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

"Is that a temper tantrum?"

Maybe it is.

So fucking what?

Government leaders aren't supposed to have temper tantrums. They are supposed to try to avoid conflicts and wars, not start them. I know that's hard for a pro-Zionist resident of the USA to fathom, but we'll try to forgive you.

 

Ghislaine

Well MSpector...Neville Chamberlain tried very hard to avoid conflict and war and be nice to Hitler - along with the rest of the world.

Star Spangled C...

Right. If only the Canadian delegation sat politely through his speech, I'm sure he would have an epiphany, realize he's been wrong, schedule a new election with international monitors, suspend his nuclear program, and turn to the Israel delegation and merrily wish them a happy Rosh Hashana.

Polunatic2

Quote:
"He uses his public appearances to provoke the international community, and that is why Canada's seats will be empty."
And based on this logic, he was successful in his provocation. Canada has been reduced to nothing more than a proxy for Big Oil and Israel when it comes to the international stage. Harper couldn't even be bothered to attend the UN Climate Change Summit yesterday. Who provoked him that time? 

Unionist

There's no point discussing with these people. Diplomacy doesn't work with supporters of Harper's foreign policy. I'm not suggesting war - just smile and ignore. Eventually they'll realize they've stumbled on the wrong discussion boad.

 

Ghislaine

I don't support Harper's foreign policy - I think we should get out of Afghanistan yesterday, not in two years. I do support not sitting through Ahmadinejad's speech though. I canot understand why would support sitting through it.

martin dufresne

Israel: Jump.

Canada: How high?

All of these preparations for the next principled massacre on our nickel.

Unionist

Ghislaine wrote:
I don't support Harper's foreign policy - I think we should get out of Afghanistan yesterday, not in two years. I do support not sitting through Ahmadinejad's speech though. I canot understand why would support sitting through it.

Because it's the same as sitting through the speeches of all the other two-bit thugs that head up the world's countries. How about the Russian president? How about various African leaders? How about Pakistan? What about Afghanistan? Or the thug in charge of Colombia? How about Obama (or George W. Bush, if you entertain the notion that there's some huge difference between the two)? How about Stephen Harper? Sarkozy?

How about the murdering woman-hating fascists in charge of Saudi Arabia? If they say, "ah, the Holocaust" - you'll sit through their shit?

What's your litmus test? Holocaust denial??? Just pronouncing this shows how the Zionists have degraded the Nazi genocide into a dirty political tool.

You think Stephen Harper likes Jews? As the child of Nazi genocide survivors, let me tell you what my nose says.

In short, unless and until the world community decides to ostracize a country or a person, you behave diplomatically in diplomatic forums. Otherwise, the day will come when people also treat you the way you richly deserve - and you'll find that war has become the norm, because you can't even talk to each other.

Star Spangled C...

Unionist wrote:

Because it's the same as sitting through the speeches of all the other two-bit thugs that head up the world's countries. How about the Russian president? How about various African leaders? How about Pakistan? What about Afghanistan? Or the thug in charge of Colombia? How about Obama (or George W. Bush, if you entertain the notion that there's some huge difference between the two)? How about Stephen Harper? Sarkozy?

Yeah, lots of bad countries in teh world, eh? Funny how certain people, yourself included, only seem to call for boycotts of Israel. I wonder what that is all about. As the grandchild of Nazi genocide survivors, let me tell you what MY nose says...

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

Oh please, do tell...

 

kropotkin1951

Could some one provide a list of countries that Canada should boycott as well as Iran.  What is the criteria? Should it begin and end with Iran?  

How about Burma or China or Honduras or Columbia or Saudi Arabia or Israel or the United States or Russia.  What is worse, saber rattling like Iran does or invading like Israel and the US do?  Last time I looked Iran had not invaded anyone.  If it is arms dealing that is not good then Canada would have to boycott itself since our arms dealers are some of the most prolific in the world supplying a number of nasty regimes and dictators. As for Iran's nuclear program has none in our foreign office noticed they are surrounded by states with nuclear weapons from Pakistan and India to Israel and Georgia and Russia and Turkey but somehow it is totally illegitimate for them to want the same kind of weapons as the people who call them evil.

When the west destroys its nukes and imposes strict regulations on the countries that have them like India, Pakistan and India then we might have some moral authority to speak about nuclear proliferation.  Lets face the fact that Iran not buying a Candu reactor is why they didn't already have nukes, so much for Canada's high ground on nuclear proliferation.

sanizadeh

The Iranian activists here also petitioned the world leaders to walk out during Ahmadinejad's speech. Last time the guy came back from UN, he claimed in local papers that all world leaders were "listening to him without blinking for half an hour". When clips came out that showed the salon was actually half empty, it became a sort of embarrassment for him. Though the guy is either delusional or a pathological liar, so he is certainly going to repeat his claim this time.

Ghislaine

unionist, I would be quite happy if people walked out on countries that refuse to recognize human rights. I think the UN has become useless due to the fact the some of the worst human rights abusers have positions on human rights councils or whatever the hell they changed the name too.

If Harper was making a speech and other leaders walked out in protest of our treatment of FN I don't think this would be any sort of war declaration. I think it would be an embarassment and an act of solidary with FN people here. Hopefully it would cause further pressure on gov't to act after being embarrassed on the world stage.

 

kropotkin1951

How about we walk out on all the countries with militaries occupying foreign countries.  Seems to me in international politics invasion of another country is as bad as it gets.

As for UN committees lets point the first finger at the Security Council.  Imagine the world's biggest arms dealers being the ones given responsibility for peace and security in the world. I think the UN has become useless because it is controlled by the global industrial military complex.  The US has military bases in at least 180 countries but they are the shining light?

martin dufresne

"I think the UN has become useless..."

That line from Washington seems to be turning into a meme. Shall we soon have children write assignments developing that proposition?

Pages

Topic locked