Sep
25
Hi friend,Hi, Jadi
I don't know what to ask you. I'm 50 years old, I was born in the state of West Virginia in America I'm trying to understand what you are going through. I grew up in a poor family. However, I was able to work hard and a build a good life in my country. Ahmadinejad was in my country today. He angered me. However, I am not angry at the Iranian people because I don't know them. That is why I'm writing. I know you may not like Americans so I will understand if you don't respond. I would like to talk to someone in your country.
I am glad that you wrote me. I like Americans
There is nor reason to hate anybody in this world. People are People, anywhere. As you know many Iranians and specially the highly educated ones do immigrate to USA to study, work and live.You may not Ahmadinejads views as Iranians views. There are few people in Iran who agree with Ahmadinejad when he talks about eliminating Israel or the absense of homosexuals in Iran. We feel ashamed of him when he talks like this and claims to be the elected president of Iran.
We do not have free elections here. Remeber Saddam, he was also the elected president of the Iran and if Ahmadinejad is elected by the 20% of the Iranians votes, Saddam had 99.9%!
In Iran we have police, we have prisons and we have tortue and execution so don't astonish when nobody tells Ahmadinejad that he is a lier when he says there is no problem in having a satelite reciever and people are free. But good news is if you browse Iranians weblogs (which has a little more freedom), you will see that many people are speaking about homosexuals anf if Iran let Bush to come to the Tehran university and speak against our ideologies
We are friends, we respect others and we love nature, freedom and peace. You may not here from us because MAINSTREAM media is not interested in us. They prefer hatred too. They love the photos of people who want to die for Islam not the people who want to live in peace. Oh! I have recently seen some changes in this pattern. These days we see more and more pictures from Iran in which people are shown as dissidents. For me this means WAR is comming. World should know that “People are not happy in Iran” so the war will justified. Let me finish like this: I am against the WAR. WAR will not help us.
P.S. I've also wrote some of my ideas (not that diffrent from what I'm writing here at Middle east youth.
I'm Jadi, an Iranian blogger from inside Iran. I'm blocked in my own country so I've decided to write in English for outsiders (
Hello Jadi,
I could not understand what you meant in your last paragraph. Are you saying that the western news media are trying to create support for military action against Iran by portraying the Iranian people as being mistreated by their government?
In think most US Americans, (and I am one), believe that a government must be freely and fairly elected by it's people to be legitimate. Most Americans don't see Mr. Ahmadinejad as a legitimate representative of the Iranian people because he was not freely and fairly elected, and so most think the harsh tone of some of the questions asked of him at Columbia University criticism was appropriate. But on the other hand, I hope Iranians don't feel insulted on Mr. Ahmadinejad's behalf.
I heard an interesting interview on the radio yesterday. Check it out at http://thestory.org/archive/the_story_348_A_Voice_Of_Dissent.mp3/view
Hello Jadi. I am a 74 year old Canadian woman living in Vancouver.
I have met a number of Iranians who seem to have the same value system as most Canadians. They frequently go back to visit in Tehran and ared comfortable sending their teenage children back for visits. I actually have a different slant on the speech yesterday. To begin with I think the intoduction was very tasteless and many of the concerns could have been raised in a less offensive way. I also kept wishing the audience would really listen to him instead booing him so often. I don't know what his intentions really are but I think we in the west have much to be ashamed of too. Regarding equality of women, we in the west believe women are liberated but in fact , I believe are increasingly seen as sexual objects. TV programs even refer to inanimate objects as “sexy”. As well, elections can be rigged in the most democratic counties.
A blogger has put up this post with a lot of interesting content and links. Thought you may be interested. Not sure if the blogger is in Iran or not. Ahmadinejad the Liar and Deceiver
oops the short link in the last comment didn't work
here is the direct link to the page:
http://plateauofiran.wordpress.com/2007/09/27/ahmadinejad-the-liar-and-deceiver/
Dear Jadi,
I am an American and what I see is this:
1. America has no right to be in Iraq from the start.
2. America has no business supporting Israel the way we do.
3. There is a big trick going on right now to create tension between IRan and the Arab nations. (It is called divide and conquer) In a greater war on Islam.
As for Iran
1. While I am all for human rights I think that the problems in Iran (whatever they are) need to be solved by IRan.
2. The media is after IRan because of Israeli interests.
3. The Republican voted yesterday to label the military of Iran as a terrorist group hence trying to pave the way for a future war with IRan.
4. If Iran did not want to have the Islamic law enforced in Iran than why the revolution? (I just dont get it)
On the IRanian presidents speech at the UN and Columbia
1. I saw/heard nothing wrong with anything that he said and in fact it mostly sounded true; however the media has not revealed over and over what he said, the media did repeat the same verbage about the holocaust from 2 years ago. (feeding frenzy)
2. I do not aim to judge him, as I am not Iranian, never been to Iran etc…I just wish people would stop distorting the facts and words.
3. I am sure there are problems with him…that is not my point.
Hello friends,
I am a white American male from Maryland. I understand that there is much I do not know about President Ahmadinejad. I do not live in Iran, so I don't know exactly how Iranians feel about the United States. I am very patriotic and I love my country, but I feel that I need to speak truthfully:
I saw President Ahmadinejad's speech in New York at the United Nations on the internet. His speech lasted 38.5 minutes.
Until this point, I knew nothing of the Iranian president except what the American media and Washington had portrayed him as: a fanatical madman.
He was grilled by Columbia University's president and insulted infront of the entire student body. Yet he still maintained his composure and re-inforced his beliefs and progress of the Iranian people.
Likewise at the United Nations, President Ahmadinejad spoke eloquently and with clarity. He proved himself to be intelligent and spiritual despite the claims of my country's leaders.
There was much truth in your president's words. Many Americans have become too content living materialistic lives and are brainwashed by the media. Women ARE exploited and moral values have been dimished. Survival in American society is based on income and possession. I live this way and there is nothing I can do about it.
Family values ARE the most important values. Human Beings ARE sacred. This country has used “freedom” as an excuse to act inappropriately. Our forefathers would be appalled if they could see the direction our nation is headed.
A group of wealthy, powerful men are running this country and the American people have little say in anything that goes on anymore. The intention is that Americans know the war in Iraq is wrong, but there isn't anything we can do about it - short of some form of violent uprising.
Sadly, we Americans are content on driving our gas-guzzling SUV's, watching reality TV trash, talking behind eachother's backs, and having social advancement instead of lasting marriages. Americans are scared. They don't want to loose their material possessions that make them feel a sense of accomplishment in life. They don't want to believe that the world's most powerful nation is “wrong”. that would mean that the American people have settled for less.
If Iran needs nuclear energy and is willing to follow all International Atomic Energy Agency policies, then why should Iran not have it? Do you believe that your President intends to help the Iranian people with this nuclear energy?
My friends, I see many truths in what your President says. I would like to know more about the state of Iran and your
opinions on Mr. Ahmadinejad. There are many questions I have. Are their truly no homosexuals in Iran? Are the rights of the Iranian people violated within your own country?
Jadi, I can't wait to see your reply to the “Peach”.
'4. If Iran did not want to have the Islamic law enforced in Iran than why the revolution?'
This is a complicated issue - the Shah was in power before the revolution and it can be argued that his regime was corrupt, he was out of touch with the people and that it was also [again, arguably] authoritarian. There were many, many reasons for the revolution and many of them were justified. Iran's Islamic Revolution was not just an 'Islamic Revolution'; there were other points regardless of this.
Revolutions, in any form, happen for a number of reasons and it is nearly impossible to ask 'if Iran did not want this, why the revolution?' and expect a straightforward answer.
Hi!
Having travelled for a short time in Iran I definetly agree on the fact that, normally, mainstream media only shows theology students burning US flags and staff like that…. and of course this is to creat the image of a country without internal disidecnce that could only be changed by militar actions….. But they will never show normal, everyday life in Iran, there is people there cheering for football teams, chatting in cafes, etc… Also media mostly show Iran as a potential enemy to the West, but the seldom care a bout who suffers inside Iran.
JUAN VILLARINO
http://www.acrobatoftheroad.com
Anonymous,
About your reply to Peach (point no. 4), he/she has asked “4. If Iran did not want to have the Islamic law enforced in Iran than why the revolution? (I just dont get it)” .
It says “if Iran did not want to have the (the Islamic law enforced) in Iran than why the revolution?
I agree that revolutions happen for a reason. And, I agree with (arguably) most of the points you've mentioned in your reply. But, I'd say that, apart from certain groups in Iran at the time, mainly those who were very religious, the majority of Iranians did not want to have (the Islamic law enforced in Iran). That was specifically Peach's point. The majority wanted to have “democracy” in Iran. Khomeini lied and promised “Democracy” before his arrival in Iran.
The Islamic Republic constitution, ON PAPER, happened to make all the right “Democratic” points and so on.. however, IN PRACTICE, it never was and it certainly IS NOT DEMOCRACTIC. More so, after Khomeini's death, when many of the articles of the Islamic Republic constitution were changed in order to give the ruling mullahs more centralized and vast powers. There lies a key difference between what the Iranians wanted and what they got from the Mullah regime.
I am unsure to what extent Jadi can talk about the revolution in Iran. I understand Jadi is almost 30 years of age? The revolution happened in 1979, so I take it he was way too young to speak from personal experience about the revolution. Although, I am sure he has heard much about it from those who are considerably older.
Glad to found your blog, Jadi. It's absolutely interesting to show the world Iran is not exactly Ahmadinejad.
I'm a spanish (or spaniard for americans) living in Seville, an old city in Al Andalus, where centurys ago lived perfectly in peace, christians, muslims and jews. I'm agnostician, but the problem is not the religion because God is the same for all. The problem is always the power.
Anonymous, I'm also glad to read not all americans support Bush stupidity. The problem is the same. I sign all the points you write about the problem…
By the way, Jadi. Do you live in Tehran? I'm to visit your country in next february. I'd like to meet with you.
Sorry, it's not anonymous whom I agree. It's Peach…
Peach, Espinalu et al :
I appreciate that you guys have an opinion.
I want to outline certain facts and events that you people either choose to overlook, dismiss or simply aren't aware of them:
Do you realize that the events in the mideast didn't start a decade or two ago? Do you realize that Jimmy Carter and his administration (the liberal/left) actually helped, among other elements, Khomeini's rise to power in Iran? Most Iranians are well aware of it. The coming to power of Khomeini was a well orchestrated event that did not simply involve the Iranians alone. Many 'outside' factors were responsible too. Regardless of whether Bush is stupid or not or whether his administration knows what course of action and policy is best to address the Iran issue (and the mideast region), the facts remain that the American Government(s) - Republican or Democrat - have always played a significant role in the politics of the mideast. What we are now experiencing is the result of a chain of events that began decades ago because of the American Governments' policies and actions. Suddenly, when now the going has gotten tough, there seems to be a move to isolationism by many Americans: “it isn't our business”, “it is Iran's business”, “we have no right to be there”, “we don't understand, because we aren't Iranians”. What the Americans need to understand (forgive me if I'm being harsh here) is that you guys need to learn more about history and other peoples' cultures and so on. Americans, whether you like or not, don't live in another sphere. This is a well connected world and events in parts of the world do affect America and the Americans.
Peach: There is tons of information about who Ahmadinejad is and what the aims of Islamic Republic in general and Ahmadinejad are. They affect not only Iran, but America as well. All you have to do is educate yourself. You say: “I just wish people would stop distorting the facts and words.” What people and who are you referring to? Perhaps, some actually outline the facts, but you don't want to hear them?
In my view, and because of America's past policies, I do believe that America has at least a moral obligation to help the Iranian People and support their struggle to free themselves from the abominable regime in Iran. War is not the answer, but nor is saying “it is not our problem, because I'm American and I just don't get it”.
And waht means exactly “America has at least a moral obligation to help the Iranian People”.
I know American Gov. past & present policies and that's why your government is not allowed to have policies on other countries. Do you agree with me that being from Spain I have no rights to change the internal politics in USA? Please, ask your governors to do the same in all the countries. One thing is having an opinion and another much different is acting against them.
Please sorry for my english.
Hello,
I'm a British blogger who's very concerned about the West's and in particular the US's and Israel's clamour for war against Iran on the nuclear issue.
Let me be clear: I'm not a fan of President Ahmadinejad, whom I believe to be an anti-Semite and a Holocaust-denier. However, such views do not make one a potential mass-murderer. The latter, we are constantly told, must be true because the President has allegedly called for “wiping Israel of the map”.
There is however considerable debate here in the West regarding whether that statement is actually correct or rather a self-serving Western mistranslation from Farsi.
I would like to post a blog post on my blog, using first-hand evidence, that is the viewpoint of actual Iranians and not Western conservative patriots who clearly have motive for the demonisation of President Ahmadinejad and Iran.
Please send any information, evidence and links to Gert.Meyers@gmail.com or post them in the comment section of my blog.
Thanks in advance.
Espaliu:
“I know American Gov. past & present policies and that's why your government is not allowed to have policies on other countries.”
lol.. The fact is that it has already happened (has been the case for the last 50 years). And, it has significantly contributed to the current mess we see in the mideast (particularly in Iran as relevant to this post). The least the US can do is to help clean up the mess. That is my point about “moral obligation”. I didn't say the U.S. should start a war with Iran. I said: “it should help the Iranian people and support their struggle to free themselves from the regime in Iran”. Please re-read my previous comment.
As a separate point, I think your comment as quoted above is naive & very idealistic, regardless of whether I agree with it. Governments, as a rule, are ambitious and do have policies, take action and interfer in other countries' “internal affairs”. It doesn't simply apply to the U.S. — Islamic Republic, at the very least, indirectly, has been interfering in the “internal politics” of the Lebanon, the Palestinians and Iraq too. USSR did so in many instances in Eastern Europe, Middle East and more. Current Russia still does, so does China…. Please ask all of them to stop! It won't happen. However, when there are serious human rights issues and so forth, mainly brought about by the “internal systems and government” of a given country, the international community is responsible to help the People who are being affected. But, unfortunately, most Governments (including many EU countries) are self-serving and primarily think whether they can directly benefit from intervening or not (either economically or politically or otherwise). Most aren't altruistic in their actions. That is politics.
Espaliu:
P.S. — When you said: “I know American Gov. past & present policies and that's why your government is not allowed to have policies on other countries.”
So that you are clear, I am an Iranian, not an American.
First of all, my english is not as good as I would like it and that's probably why you think my comments are naive. For sure i'll give you more explanations on my comment if you understand spanish, but anyway i prefer not to be helped by any government if I was Iranian. It's a problem that needs to be solved by iranians inside and outside Iran. We could help them trying to inform the more people we can, but governments always have dark interests and really, this is as naive and idealistic you think my comment is.
Please, consider US Gov. is not acting this way last 50 years, but last 150 years. Consider some interventions in Argentina in last XIX century or war with Spain in 1898 where American Forces sunk Maine vessel with more than 300 dead people acussing Spanish Forces to have done it.
Obviously I don't agree with Mullahs regime and they are against real democracy and human rights, specially women but I don't agree third countries shoul hep them as we know how we (I include spanish gov.)use to help.
Anyway, I like to read your comments and I appreciatte yor answers. That's democracy.
1. I agree, as I've said in the last two comments, with 'governments always have dark interests'. They are self-serving.
2. I disagree that informing non-Iranians about the situation in Iran will be of much help to the Iranians in Iran. Many people in the West, similar to what you and peach have said (if I understand correctly) believe that: Iranian people's problems are their problems, not ours and we will not and cannot do much about it.
Besides, there seems to be more of a deliberate focus and preference, in the west, on America as being the culprit than on the Mullahs, who have more than regional ambitions and are power driven.
3. I agree with “it is a problem that needs to be solved by Iranians inside and outside Iran.” However, they won't be able to do much inside Iran, without outside support both from Iranian outside, and from the International Community. Most democratic movements and any protest (even peaceful ones) are immediately crushed by the Mullahs inside Iran, and very often lead to mass arrests, imprisonment and more executions.
4. The international community can support the Iranians by stopping their support for the mullahs regime. However, the international community doesn't want to do this, mainly, because of vast economic ties with the Mullahs (particularly in the case of EU, Russia and China) which benefit both the Mullah regime and the EU (not the majority of the Iranians).
5. The 50 years or so, as I've mentioned, refers to America and the mideast region (not the wars in the Americas 150 years ago to which you refer). America's influence in the mideast really began after the end of WWII. Before that, the British and the French played a key role in the middle east and north africa. Btw, the French and British still do.
I appreciate your comment and am very clear on your stance.
Also, thanks to Jadi who is letting us have this exchange on his blog!
Should we just leave Iran alone, then? What if the people don't have the resources they need to start grassroots movements that would spur changes in their social and political climes? How much power do the common secularists of Iran have over the more conservative, pro-Regime groups of society?
By “It's none of our business” are we just afraid of war? Because if war is the problem, then leaving Iranians alone - specifically those that are active and involved and fighting for more ethical ground against the Mullahs- isn't the solution we should be looking for. In fact, Iranian human rights violations are happening today and if you feel something isn't morally right about their culture but we can't help them bc we want to let them do it themselves…that's an ideal but not realistic. The Iranians who are trying to spread grassroots changes would benefit from the help of people on the outside with the resources and skills necessary to help train and provide intellectual guidance to them….
yes, some people want to go to war and whether we like it or not, war is a part of our society and that isn't going to change anytime soon…what also doesn't change are abuses by states against the people so why not kill one bird with two stones? Help people within Iran by not demonizing and just focusing on their human rights issues but also highlighting the commonalities, the grassroots movements they have, the students and organizations of the youth that we can reach through the Internet..
I haven't seen anything from Jadi for a couple of weeks; hope he's doing okay.
Anonymous has it right. The US was complicit in Iranian affairs at the close of World War 2, largely due to the interest of self preservation following the Cold War. The CIA's involvement in Iran during this time is documented fact and is largely responsible for the chain of events leading to the present relationship.
That said, does the US have a moral obligation to help Iranian citizens? I would think so, but another question would be “how?”.
My guess is, to do what is asked. Our two civilizations are polarized due to extremist behaviors and myopic media coverage that borders on stupid.
Anonymous has it right again, in that a grass roots effort is required to change the course of this history. How should we add to the momentum of this progress?
If you think Ahmadinejad and mullahs are right about all the vices and gripes YOU have about America, why don't you move to Iran?? That way you may find out about all the other questions you've asked in your above comment first hand.
And, why don't you read jadi's other posts and this post to learn more homosexuals in Iran and more!
@ Anonymous @ 2007-10-02 23:26
That’s cute how you mention Carter but neglect to say anything about Eisenhower (D - c.1957) when Muhammad Mosaddeq was overthrown by the CIA, or Ford (R - c.1976) when Rumsfeld and Cheney were facilitating nuclear power plant sales from Westinghouse and General Electric. Or Regan (R - c.1980’s) when he was selling arms to Iraq and Iran, using those profits to fund Nicaragua and using Hezbolla in false flag missions to generate western sympathy. You don’t mention Bush 41 (R - c. 1990) giving a tacit go-ahead to Saddam Hussein to attack Kuwait and then being bullied by Margret Thatcher into launching a counter-attack or subsequent plans from Cheney and Rumsfeld revisited to use Iraq as a staging area to unleash their brand of “democracy” on the middle-east, specifically targeting Iran and Syria. You notice I don’t mention Clinton (D - c.1992)? That’s because he was too busy meddling around with potential NATO countries and creating a budget surplus.
But nevermind that most of the vile atrocities the US has committed in the middle east have been under a Republican watch, this is not a partisan issue. This is all about corporate imperialism and our American businesses not being able to get their hands on the money they think they deserve. Ahmadinejad could eat kittens for breakfast and drink the blood of puppies and our corporatocracy would not care and the media would find a way to spin it in a positive light, just as long as they could get those lucrative contracts back and have their hand on the oil spigots.
Anyway, I know I’m about a year too late here and off-topic to boot. Anonymous just pissed me off and it needed saying. I think Amadinejad is a little nutty… and he’s in good company… we’ve got Bush the Rerun. We should put those two on a small island somewhere, let them fight it out, and the rest of us could get back to trying to live together on this rock in peace.