U.S. Focus on Ahmadinejad Puzzles Iranians

[democratic]

Source: NYTimes

Political analysts here say they are surprised at the degree to which the West focuses on their president, saying that it reflects a general misunderstanding of their system.

Unlike in the United States, in Iran the president is not the head of state nor the commander in chief. That status is held by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, whose role combines civil and religious authority. At the moment, this president’s power comes from two sources, they say: the unqualified support of the supreme leader, and the international condemnation he manages to generate when he speaks up.

“The United States pays too much attention to Ahmadinejad,” said an Iranian political scientist who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. “He is not that consequential.”

That is not to say that Mr. Ahmadinejad is insignificant. He controls the mechanics of civil government, much the way a prime minister does in a state like Egypt, where the real power rests with the president. He manages the budget and has put like-minded people in positions around the country, from provincial governors to prosecutors. His base of support is the Basiji militia and elements of the Revolutionary Guards.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/world/middleeast/24iran.html

[Kali]

1. yep

wish we could say the same about our asshole in chief

[Enrique]

2. he's the boogey-man

he's the incarnation of pure evil.

He's Iran's kitten-eater-in-chief.

[Grandrose]

3. Well Saddam's dead.....

The new replacement and distraction and one of the axis of evil...don't cha know!
Besides the cabal want another war and need a bad guy to feed to the MSM and right wing nuts! :eyes: :kick:

[ohio2007]

4. an Iranian political scientist who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal.

?
what does he have to fear of in Iran ?
sounds like the scientist has theocratic theories on where the US should focus its rhetoric.



WOnder how thin skinned those rulers are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4D_ashQnQA&mode=related&search=

[dweller]

5. US'ians pay too much attention to the speck of other's

while ignoring the log in their own I.

dp

[FREEWILL56]

15. You got that right.

And to divert from the pain of the log in our I they give us Saddam and now Iran's so called leader that I have trouble pronouncing let alone spelling. It is all diversions and they telling us it's a patriotic duty to follow their lead in going after the next bogyman when the real culprits that attacked us run free. People buy this shit too.
:wtf:

[Harper_is_Bush]

6. What did the Columbia U President call him? A "dictator"! Amazing the President of a University

is so ignorant.

[Spazito]

7. Bingo! Either he votes republican and is spewing their rhetoric or...

or he is intellectually ignorant,hmmm, in my mind both are the same, lol.

[Spazito]

8. Well, it seems the same 'mistakes' are being made that were

made prior and during the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. A total lack of understanding of even the basic underpinnings of countries the bush cabal wants to attack seems to be the order of the day.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. I saw that article today, and I think it needs to be posted several times in

GD and sent in to every media outlet.

[Strelnikov_]

10. Posted and repeated every hour

kinda hard to be a 'Dictator' when you have no real power.

[Canuckistanian]

11. So he's the equivalent of an American vice-president?

That's a relief.....

[Spazito]

12. Not even close, if your intent was to align the positions as similar to

that of Cheney to that of Ahmadinejad, does NOT compare.

[Canuckistanian]

14. Yeah, I know

I was just messing with everyone.

[calimary]

17. Perhaps it's the same kind of arrangement they have in Texas,

where the governor is actually not the one with the power. From what I understand (which could be somewhat lacking here, not being a Texan) it's the Lt. Governor and the Speaker of the Texas Legislature who pull the big strings, and the governor is a figurehead. Which would explain bush's appeal when he was still governor - he could strut and act up a storm like some hotshot when he really didn't have much to do of that serious significance. A typical job for him - where he gets the big title and the big salary and somebody else, somewhere else, does the actual heavy lifting.

I just watched all ten clips from the CBS interview. I'm not sure how I feel, really. Instant reaction has me not trusting our friend Mahmoud. But he said a lot of things that made sense, even if he was probably being a poker player. Scott Pelley just towed the party line. What disturbed me most is the premise Pelley used - operating from a viewpoint of taking the bush administration's word over Ahmadinejad as a "devil's advocate" type approach. I can understand taking that stand, but what's disturbing is the implication that Pelley has no recollection of the shit track record of the bush administration for saying ANYTHING truthful about the purported adversaries we face in the foreign policy arena. But I suppose his job was to be adversarial in order to provoke some sort of headline-making response. Still, ANY reporter, by now, who knows (or SHOULD know) the lousy track record of pronouncements by bush/cheney/etc. - that NOTHING they've said so far, from the very beginning, has held up as being true.

[provis99]

13. would they feel better if we told them Khamenei was a nutjob too?

[Chulanowa]

16. We need a reason to kill all those puzzled Iranians, duh

We have to save them from themselves, and if that means obliterating them, well, then that's just what we'll have to do. Silly Iranians, don't they know that having a president who puffs about the Holocaust is a great excuse to systematically murder millions of Iranians?

[Javaman]

18. The U.S.'s mad man du jour. nt

[Hawkowl]

19. Idiot press corps again!

What are Iranians focussing on say, our glorious leader Harry Reid, who really controls the government? We certainly are stubbornly pushing for the dumbest democracy in the world.

[Robbien]

20. Iranians angered by treatment of leader

Source: Associated Press

Many Iranians reacted angrily Tuesday to the combative introduction of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by the president of Columbia University, calling it "shameful" and saying the harsh words only added to their image of the United States as a bully.

In a part of the world where the tradition of hospitality outweighs personal opinions toward a person, many here thought Lee Bollinger's aggressive tone before Ahmadinejad's appearance - including saying that he exhibited the signs of a "petty and cruel dictator" - was over the top.

. . .

Mahmoud Rouhi, a nurse in Tehran, said of the president: "I don't know why he stayed there and did not leave the meeting. Their attitude was an insult to the nature of the meeting. They should not treat him as a suspect." State media did not broadcast the event live in Farsi on Monday, but a recorded version was shown Tuesday.

"The meeting and their approach showed that Americans, even in a cultural position, work as cowboys and nothing more," Rasoul Qaresi, who was buying food at a grocery in central Tehran, said Tuesday.

Read more: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/25/africa/tehran.php

[Waya]

21. Well, wouldn't we be?

.....if an American President was treated that way?

[fenriswolf]

26. actually i loved it when the

australians mooned bush, actually I laughed my freaking a$$ off.

[Robbien]

34. Which Australian official stood up on international television and mooned Bush?

Sure a protester, but WHICH official?

Not even a comparison. Yours is just as rude a comment as our cowboy administration made.

[fenriswolf]

41. how is my comment rude?

i'm just stating i loved the way the australians protested pres. bush's visit to australia and their own presidents pandering to him. I think your comment is just flamebait.

[Robbien]

44. I thought you were comparing an Australian protester's reaction to Bush as equal

in offensiveness as all our officials' very public treatment of Iranian's President.

Sorry if I misread your comment.

[fenriswolf]

45. oh ok, no prob.

[Waya]

36. Ok...that's why I said......

.......an American President - leaves the BoyKing out.....doesn't it?

[rmgarrette64]

33. Apparently not

See this thread F*ck Bush Column. I'll not that in that thread, the majority of posters support the columnist.

R. Garrett

[LakeSamish706]

22. I gotta tell ya, I am a Canadian and I agree with the Iranian people on this one...

You invite the man to speak at your University, and then treat him like shit! There needs to be a serious check on manners here....

[DrDan]

24. well, I am an American, and I agree with you . . .

he was obviously influenced by the reich-wing that refuse to acknowledge an equal footing with those from other nations . . .

[eagler]

51. Second that.

[Robbien]

25. I couldn't even watch the news or open threads here at DU

too embarrassed by our complete rudeness.

[Arkansas Granny]

52. I agree with you completely. This was a lack of civility, not a protest.

[PianoBlack]

54. Exactly!

It is a slap in the face! The Iranian president went there because he was ASKED TO just to get talked down to when he arrives? That is ridiculous!

[spotbird]

23. If they're mad now,

wait until we nuke 'em.

Oh yeah, they'll welcome us then.

[partylessinOhio]

27. Don't joke. The horseless cowboy has no brains.

[spotbird]

35. I wish I were kidding,

but BushCo is hell bent on it.

[soleft]

28. with candy and flowers

[On the Road]

29. Once Again,

"patriotic" forces in this country have succeeded in uniting an unruly population behind an unpopular leader.

[MrModerate]

30. Ahmadinejad is a whack job for sure . . .

And he plays America and the West like a violin. He made that speech precisely to evoke the response he got -- uncivilized, inhospitable, moralistic and hypocritical. Thus bolstering his shrinking street cred at home and allowing him to return to Tehran in triumph, having bearded the lion in its den.

Bin Laden does the same thing -- pushing all our buttons and getting exactly the reaction he wants to further demonize the West in the eyes of his followers.

When are we going to grow up and stop handing these guys such easy wins?

[Robbien]

38. Just goes to show this country is full of dullards if it cannot at least be polite

No wonder our reputation on the world stage is in the toilet.

[frogcycle]

31. they are absolutely correct

talk about the 'ugly american'

we will take decades to recover any respectability

[MADem]

32. YAAAAY!!!!! The Midget is thinking "It WORKED!!!!!!!!!!!!"

The Supreme Leader will likely give him a cookie for doing such a swell job in Amrika!

Now, the people of Iran are distracted from:

--Crumbling infrastructure.

--Ancient, inefficient oil rigs; insufficient refining capacity.

--Onerous gas rationing in an OPEC country.

--IMPORTING gas in an OPEC country.

--Disfunctional social services.

--Widow's pensions from the war not keeping up with cost of living.

--Spotty telephone and electrical service. Seven year wait for a landline phone, absent a hefty bribe.

--Rampant inflation and shortages, despite no sanctions (yet).

--Salaries not keeping pace with costs.

--A small middle class getting smaller. Real poverty on the rise.



Hell, he's probably on the phone, crowing, with George now..."Say man, are your peeps distracted, too? Man, we pulled that one off in fan-fucking-tabulous fashion, there, Boosh-bro!!!! Bet they're so busy ripping on me that they aren't even talking about your shitstorm in Iraq, now, are they? I gotta say, I did do a good job--you OWE me, maaaan...."

[FuJun]

37. Wait...

I'm confused, does your list describe America or Iran? ;)

[partylessinOhio]

39. I had the same thought.

:think:

[MADem]

48. Like they say, one hand washes the other. We have a similar list.

Ours has the war and the economy well at the top, too!

[Robbien]

40. Oh, I thought your post was about conditions here in the US. Sure fits

Bush sure has us distracted by making sure we are fed propaganda and know nothing about anything but are consumed with hatred for those he tells us to hate.

[MADem]

49. Well, it IS. Each leader got something from this bullshit exercise--a huge DISTRACTION.

And that's what they wanted. And we peeps, and the peeps over there, oblige with dithering and blathering--bread and circuses, on opposite sides of the globe....

Forget about that war in Iraq, forget the mess in the Stan, forget the economy...worry about the Midget Mayor!!!

And over in Teheran, they're saying similar shit on NIRT broadcasting!

[dipsydoodle]

43. They've got oil

but lack refineries - hence the shortages. Oddly enough I think the same might apply to the USA with regard to refined product so I wouldn't crow too much about it.

[MADem]

47. Who's 'crowing?'

Jesus, it's amazing how people "see" attitude based on their own perceptions.

It's true. We lack refineries, because of the NIMBY factor and environmental concerns. That's not a problem in Iran. though. The refineries aren't in garden spots, and a third of the country lives in Teheran.

[yava]

57. MADem, you don't see what is happening!

I used to study this stuff when I was student.
In the last years of the Shah of Iran (US ally), with Iran population about 35 million in 1977 (as opposed to twice that now, there was:
1) Crumbling infrastructure.
2) Good oil rigs; refining capacity but money went to Big Oil or armes purchases or corruption.
3) Disfunctional social services: no high school access for most kids in rural areas, mostly no electricity in villages.
4) Spotty telephone and electrical service: NO TELEPHONE IN VILLAGES and the US had not yet invented cell phones :)
5) Rampant inflation: SAME as now
6) Salaries not keeping pace with costs: EVEN WORSE than now.
7)A small middle class getting smaller: NO MIDDLE CLASS, just upper class and slaves.

Since then there has been an empowerment of the ordinary people, schooling for the poor and the best development of infrastructure and education in the developing world, illiteracy now down to <20% (thats why they aim at nuclear now).

Of course this has been achieved at the cost of political freedom and of speech but not movement or economic choice. People from Iran can travel, invest etc. It is somewhat like the China model but islamic.

You don't have to like the regime of the Ayatollas and I hope with you that it evolves/disappears into a democracy but your vision is false. Don't side with Cheney or Netanyahu please.

And even if you do, it would be very bad for you and those who disagree with you (like me) if you do so while under-estimating your enemies. It would just start another war with no end, paid by printed US$s. Hell, if you are not rich, you might even lose your job for it! Or if you don't we might!

[MADem]

60. I LIVED in Iran in 1977--the infrastructure was great.

I don't know what books you were reading, but I speak not from books, but from personal experience. The roads were smooth and new (German construction), the buildings and the road stripes got painted, the flowers were planted in the public squares, the parks were mowed and groomed. The electricity was reliable, the gas was five cents a litre, bread was five cents too. The rigs were pumping, there wasn't inflation, foodstuffs were VERY affordable (unless you bought imported things like Swanson dinners or Maxwell House coffee in the 'supermarts' which most folks didn't use), and the middle class hadn't yet started an exodus in earnest. That happened when news of Shah's cancer came out, and Khomeini's tapes started being heard from the rooftops--but that was a year later, in 78. And even at that, it took till 79 (and I was still there, then) for Shah to leave and Khomeini to come. And that's when the mess started in earnest.

[Solon]

64. Isn't that kinda like praising Mussolini for having the trains run on time...

and neglecting the whole oppressive nature of his government against the people? I mean, sure, Iran in 1977 had clean roads, nice parks, cheap living, but then again, nearly every Iranian at the time knew of or was related to someone who was "disappeared" never to be seen from again. Many more suffered under the "gentle" ministrations of SAVAK as well.

This isn't to say the at the Revolution of 1979 was good, however, it didn't occur in a vacuum either, it's just too bad that Iran took two steps back on the road to Democracy rather than two steps forward.

[MADem]

65. No, it isn't. I reuted a false assertion about conditions in Iran. Then you turned around and

accused me of "fascist-praising" because I corrected that averred falsehood.

I didn't say the Shah's government was peachy-keen. He was an asshole, too. But the facts are the facts, and day-to-day conditions in terms of infrastructure, social services, and availability of goods and services, were better for average Iranians under Shah, just as day-to-day conditions were better for Iraqis before freedom went on the march.

Go back and read the full exchange.

This shit gets tiresome.

[Robson]

62. That's the USA not Iran

Your list is not all inclusive of problems facing the USA too. We have even more problems.

Thankfully we have the MSM such as Wolf Blitzer and his peers to keep our focus on the propaganda of the day such as Iran or OJ Simpson or Brittany Spears, instead of those that are destroying the middle class and running this country into the ground for their own economic benefit using tactics such as a war in Iraq and unfair trade policies and importing millions of illegal cheap labor.

[MADem]

66. More correctly--its BOTH. Though they're in worse shape than we are.

Their shit has been falling apart since 79.

It's why I included the last paragraph in my post upthread.

[Joanne98]

42. I guess this means they're not falling for the freedom routine!

[ohio2007]

46. Was that a scientific poll of Iranian citizens or

those with an interest in not causing trouble for themselves.

btw
How many in Iran polled actually heard what was said by the president of Columbia university?

[Robbien]

50. What? You think Iranians have no sense of pride for their country?

Of course they would be hurt and upset.

But of course, the propaganda mill would have one believe that all Iranians just love America and would be cheering all American slurs and criticisms thrown at their country and their leader.

[ohio2007]

61. So, you are saying you have pride in president * ? gmab puuhleezz

I've seen posts here where people polled said they were ready to move to Canada.

You call that pride in america eh?


I was bashing the president of Iran and you say they should have as much pride in him as you have in your president . LMAO

I bet you're upset that Iran has been ranting for close to 30 years "Death to America" and death to the american president ( his name here ). mindless state sponsored screeds.


recently
I've seen a poll where most DEMOCRATS polled prefer Bushco as president if the other choice was the the dinner jacket;


Poll
I would rather have as President of the United States...
1501 votes cast
Results

67% George Bush 1017 votes


32% Mahmoud Ahmadinejad 484 votes



http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/23/224950/843

How many Iranian students would prefer bushco over what they have ? I doubt such polls would be published.
moot point as most Iranian voters were disenfranchised and boycotted the last presidential election ..which was stolen by the 3rd place canidate ;)

He believes in his freedoms
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3006479
thats called freedom of the pressin Iran

[sadiesworld]

53. Well, knock me over with a feather.

[MasonJar]

59. The introduction was very inappropriate; either rescind the invitation

or behave in a civilized manner. The students who came to the event knew about this man and so did not have to be warned by the president. No wonder the world looks at us as the Ugly Americans; we are so narrow, even university presidents, so it seems. How does this help us promote change in Iran? It just hardens the Iranian people against us.

[robcon]

55. Bollinger's speech was right-on

I wouldn't change a word.

[LakeSamish706]

56. It would seem that many of here that believe that the rudeness was uncalled...

for... They are discussing it right now on Lou Dobbs and all agree that Lee Bollinger was extremely rude... You invite the guy, treat him with respect at least and as a guest.

[Megahurtz]

58. Yes.

The real BFEE Boogeyman is the Ayatollah Khamenei. It's Poppy's payback and an evil greedy and thieving insatiable desire for stealing Iran's Oil. That is the reason for all of the Hate Iran hype in the MSM. The Evil BFEE at work to kill and steal with Halliburton at their side. Don't forget it everybody!

[Exultant Democracy]

63. Not to mention that he is extremely unpopular at home and a lame duck.

Just like our boy king Bush. In fact they will leave office within about 7 months of each other.