Ahmadinejad's Letter To President Bush
The full text of yesterday's 18-page letter from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to President Bush is not easy for Americans to find on websites of U.S. media outlets. The U.S. media briefly described some of the contents, but left some revealing passages unreported.
I was able to find a United Nations' translation of the full text of the letter on the Hong Kong-based Asia Times Online.
Ahmadinejad begins by questioning Bush's actions in light of his oft-stated belief in Christianity. Mentioning things like starting wars that kill innocents, and holding prisoners without trial.
He brings up U.S. support for Israel, asks why that regime is being supported.
Then points out U.S. opposition of democratically elected governments in Latin America, and mentions the looting of natural resources from Africa.
The Iranian leader gives Bush a list of complaints about U.S. treatment of Iran itself:
The brave and faithful people of Iran too have many questions and grievances, including: the coup d'etat of 1953 and the subsequent toppling of the legal government of the day, opposition to the Islamic revolution [of 1979], transformation of an embassy into a headquarters supporting the activities of those opposing the Islamic Republic (many thousands of pages of documents corroborates this claim), support for Saddam in the war waged against Iran, the shooting down of the Iranian passenger plane, freezing the assets of the Iranian nation, increasing threats, anger and displeasure vis-a-vis the scientific and nuclear progress of the Iranian nation (just when all Iranians are jubilant and collaborating with their country's progress), and many other grievances that I will not refer to in this letter.
Then the Iranian leader gets to the part which I find very intriguing. He condemns the 9-11 attacks, then adds:
All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property and good standing of their citizens. Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection and intelligence systems - and even hunts its opponents abroad. September 11 was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services--or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren't those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?
Ahmadinejad is clearly referring to the key to the 9-11 attacks--how the hijackers were able to know ahead of time that the U.S. military was to be conducting hijacking exercises, the perfect cover for real hijackings--on the morning of Sept 11, 2001. The proof that inside help was given to the hijack plotters is the simultaneity of the hijack exercises and the real hijackings. Although this does not point to the specific malefactors, circumstantial evidence of lesser quality has been used to successfully identify countless people suspected of crimes.
The Iranian president accurately points to the information operations since 9-11 that have swayed the American people to support the most questionable foreign policy objectives in decades:
All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens. For some years now, the people of your country and neighbors of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind. After 9-11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people--who had been immensely traumatized by the attacks--some Western media only intensified the climates of fear and insecurity--some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear. Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damages incurred from fear and panic?
American citizens lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place. They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work and at home. Who would be happy with this situation? Why was the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity?
Some believe that the hype paved the way--and was the justification--for an attack on Afghanistan. Again I need to refer to the role of media. In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles. The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs. This was repeated incessantly - for the public to, finally, believe - and the ground set for an attack on Iraq.
Will the truth not be lost in a contrive and deceptive climate? Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values?
Ahmadinejad is clearly aware of, and is objecting to the current anti-Iran info-op which we have been covering here for many months. He knows the goals of the campaign and is issuing his protestation before the bombs start dropping.
The Iranian leader ends his letter to President Bush by trying to stress the commonality of Christian and Islamic prophets and teachings, and tries to reach a common ground between the two men.
Do you not think that if all of us come to believe in and abide by these principles, that is, monotheism, worship of God, justice, respect for the dignity of man, belief in the Last Day, we can overcome the present problems of the world--that are the result of disobedience to the Almighty and the teachings of prophets--and improve our performance?
Ahmadinejad's approach might curry some favor with a truly religious man. Unfortunately, Bush's actions mark him as far from a believer in the teachings of his avowed saviour. That's why the Iranian president's effort to reach out to the American president will fall on deaf ears.
The U.S. media's reluctance to fully report on the letter--understandable in light of the allegations made by Ahmadinejad about media propagandizing--is the reason most Americans won't learn of the full details of this communication between leaders.
I was able to find a United Nations' translation of the full text of the letter on the Hong Kong-based Asia Times Online.
Ahmadinejad begins by questioning Bush's actions in light of his oft-stated belief in Christianity. Mentioning things like starting wars that kill innocents, and holding prisoners without trial.
He brings up U.S. support for Israel, asks why that regime is being supported.
Then points out U.S. opposition of democratically elected governments in Latin America, and mentions the looting of natural resources from Africa.
The Iranian leader gives Bush a list of complaints about U.S. treatment of Iran itself:
The brave and faithful people of Iran too have many questions and grievances, including: the coup d'etat of 1953 and the subsequent toppling of the legal government of the day, opposition to the Islamic revolution [of 1979], transformation of an embassy into a headquarters supporting the activities of those opposing the Islamic Republic (many thousands of pages of documents corroborates this claim), support for Saddam in the war waged against Iran, the shooting down of the Iranian passenger plane, freezing the assets of the Iranian nation, increasing threats, anger and displeasure vis-a-vis the scientific and nuclear progress of the Iranian nation (just when all Iranians are jubilant and collaborating with their country's progress), and many other grievances that I will not refer to in this letter.
Then the Iranian leader gets to the part which I find very intriguing. He condemns the 9-11 attacks, then adds:
All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property and good standing of their citizens. Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection and intelligence systems - and even hunts its opponents abroad. September 11 was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services--or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren't those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?
Ahmadinejad is clearly referring to the key to the 9-11 attacks--how the hijackers were able to know ahead of time that the U.S. military was to be conducting hijacking exercises, the perfect cover for real hijackings--on the morning of Sept 11, 2001. The proof that inside help was given to the hijack plotters is the simultaneity of the hijack exercises and the real hijackings. Although this does not point to the specific malefactors, circumstantial evidence of lesser quality has been used to successfully identify countless people suspected of crimes.
The Iranian president accurately points to the information operations since 9-11 that have swayed the American people to support the most questionable foreign policy objectives in decades:
All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens. For some years now, the people of your country and neighbors of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind. After 9-11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people--who had been immensely traumatized by the attacks--some Western media only intensified the climates of fear and insecurity--some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear. Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damages incurred from fear and panic?
American citizens lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place. They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work and at home. Who would be happy with this situation? Why was the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity?
Some believe that the hype paved the way--and was the justification--for an attack on Afghanistan. Again I need to refer to the role of media. In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles. The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs. This was repeated incessantly - for the public to, finally, believe - and the ground set for an attack on Iraq.
Will the truth not be lost in a contrive and deceptive climate? Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values?
Ahmadinejad is clearly aware of, and is objecting to the current anti-Iran info-op which we have been covering here for many months. He knows the goals of the campaign and is issuing his protestation before the bombs start dropping.
The Iranian leader ends his letter to President Bush by trying to stress the commonality of Christian and Islamic prophets and teachings, and tries to reach a common ground between the two men.
Do you not think that if all of us come to believe in and abide by these principles, that is, monotheism, worship of God, justice, respect for the dignity of man, belief in the Last Day, we can overcome the present problems of the world--that are the result of disobedience to the Almighty and the teachings of prophets--and improve our performance?
Ahmadinejad's approach might curry some favor with a truly religious man. Unfortunately, Bush's actions mark him as far from a believer in the teachings of his avowed saviour. That's why the Iranian president's effort to reach out to the American president will fall on deaf ears.
The U.S. media's reluctance to fully report on the letter--understandable in light of the allegations made by Ahmadinejad about media propagandizing--is the reason most Americans won't learn of the full details of this communication between leaders.
posted by Effwit at 10:30 AM
6 Comments:
...Talk about "Water, water, everywhere, nor any drop to drink" -- N.A. is awash in Mac-media + Mac-info -- but none of it is any more nutritious than the Macfood...
Wish that the letter could get some space in the MSM...
Dena
Dena:
The mass media in the United States is a propaganda arm for the government and the owners of the government--the big corporations.
The American public will not see any stories that impinge upon or reflect poorly on the status quo. And the media (especially the broadcast networks) march in lock step to an embarrassing degree. Usually the network news programs lead with the same story and cover, more or less, the identical roster of "news" stories as is being covered by the other networks. This is especially telling when the lead story on all networks is a manufactured non-critical issue such as "crystal meth" or "the war on obesity" etc.
Last night, the networks were stressing how the Iranian president's letter was an attempt to deceive us into relaxing our vigilence and how it will influence the Russians and Chinese not to back the "West" in the UN Security Council. Not that Russia and China was going to support us there anyway.
The media message is "We are good. Most other people are bad (or possibly just misguided)."
Slick post. Nice contextualization.
The media message is "We are good. Most other people are bad (or possibly just misguided)."
That's so true. And that's exactly what most people want to hear...
(The ambiguousness of reality is too much work.)
Dena
Dave:
Thanks.
Dena:
Exactly. People wish to have their preconceptions reinforced. It is more comfortable that way.
It is by being made uncomfortable about some injustice or outrage that spurs critical thinking towards the conventional wisdom.
That's why the upholders of the status quo don't stir things up very often.
Post a Comment
<< Home