President Ahmadinejad was interviewed by Charlie Rose last night and chewed up Rose as bad as he chewed up Mike Wallace previously.
Its hilarious that "journalists" like Rose and Wallace act so differently with a president they don't like than the fawning interviews they do with politicians they like.
Rose thought he could get at Ahmadinejad with pointed questions, but Ahmadinejad was able to point out the fallacies in the assumptions behind virtually every one of Rose's barbs.
I was laughing uproariously to see Rose so befuddled.
For a limited time the video is available at Charlie Rose's website.
It clearly shows that the US spokespeople like the President of Columbia and Rose don't treat Ahmadinejad fairly.
For example Rose gives an introduction that says Ahmadinejad avoids questions and then he shows two clips that prove him wrong where Ahmadinejad is responding appropriately, not avoiding questions.
Ahmadinejad calls for the eradication of all nuclear weapons and has rejected nuclear weapons as useless and outmoded in the today's real world, and points out that the USA won't allow international inspection of USA nuclear weapons facilities while Iran does allow IAEA nuclear inspections. Do you disagree?
Ahmadinejad says that Iraq should be allowed to govern its own affairs and that the US should not interfere. He says that after Saddam's fall that the US should have had a plan to withdraw immediately. Do you disagree?
Rose holds up a newspaper that shows his photo and says "THE EVIL HAS LANDED". What a hoot. Ahmadinejad says, "We want to be friends with the United States." He says "the authorities here are over sensitive." Do you disagree with that?
Rose presents the NY Times as if it is gospel truth. Do you agree with that?
Ahmadinejad asks Rose if the entire West is supportive of the Zionist regime. He says the West does not deal with the plight of the Palestinians. He says the American people are sensitive about how the Palestinians are being treated but the US politicians are not responding to the terror that the Palestinians are living under. Do you disagree?
Rose doesn't know how to deal with a man who wants to be active in a dialogue rather than accept the premise that he should be a passive victim in an interview.
Rose asks "Why don't you agree with your Arab brothers" as if he thinks Ahmadinejad is Arab not Persian.
Ahmadinejad says that he will listen to what the Palestinians want for peace and asks if the US is able to do that? Don't you agree?
I don't agree with every thing Ahmadinejad does or says, but in this interview Rose presents US ideology as innocent questions and Ahmadinejad responds with finesse and doesn't get caught up in the premises of Rose's ideology.
Rose asks if Iran can have friendly conversations with the US and Ahmadinejad asks Rose to ask the US politicians why they backed Saddam's invasion of Iran, and why today they are backing the incursions and attempts to destabilize Iran.
Rose says Iran has supported terrorist organizations, and Ahmadinejad asked which terrorist organization? Rose says, "In the definition of the US Hezbollah." Ahmadinejad says, "Who started terrorism in Afghanistan?" pointing to US intelligence behind al Queda. Ahmadinejad then points out correctly that Hezbollah is a nationalist defense organization and is not doing anything outside of Lebanon or exporting terrorism to anybody. That it was Israel that invaded Lebanon and bombed Beirut.
Rose says, "Israel withdrew from Lebanon" as if that somehow makes everything that they did in their attack on Lebanon was made moot by their retreat. Rose is transparently illogical.
Rose says that Iran can avoid santions if it takes the offer from Russia. Ahmadinejad says "please pay attention to this point. If you were in our place what would you do." He says that Iran had nuclear agreements with five countries including Candada and France but they unilaterally and illegally withdrew from those contracts. So why should Iran be dependent on other countries who can cut their contracts? He has the point.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I received a comment this week from an "anonymous" person stating that Mr. Ahmadinejad is Arab and not Persion. Unfortunately, the comment was so racist (for example calling Mr. Ahmadinejad an Arab because of the color of his skin) in its content that I felt it could only be published if the writer had accepted responsibility for it and provided his or her name.
That said, I refer the reader to Mr. Ahmadinejad's Wikepedia entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad to draw your own conclusion. Apparently his family on his mother's side claim some ancestral connection to the Prophet but that is certainly of no real evidence by itself.
In my view, calling Mr. Ahmadinejad an Arab and denying his Persian heritage is just racism. Because of the Muslim invasions from the Atlantic to the Pacific, there are people in all Muslim nations with some Arab ancestry. That does not make tham "Arabs" any more than the spurious "one drop" theory of White Supremacy makes anyone with a distant drop of African Ancestry a "Black" person.
Post a Comment