Slashdot Mirror


Iran's President Launches Blog

02bunced writes "The BBC is reporting that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has started his own blog, the launch of which was announced on Iranian State TV. This is perhaps slightly ironic, given that the Iranian Government actively censors blogs on the Internet."

4 of 472 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Looking forward to reading it by owlnation · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I'm sure all his posts will be calm, reasoned, factual and well stated.
    Sure, that'd be nice. Though I don't see why his blog should be different from all the others.
  2. Re:He Had No Choice by BobTheLawyer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are almost no Holocaust deniers who say that "there was no Holocaust" - instead their standard operating procedure is to claim the numbers were exaggerated, say the deaths were an unintentional or inevitable part of the wider war, and to claim there is uncertainty about the history without making the slightest attempt to read the extensive literature (which must amount to literally millions of pages). Those who take this approach *are* denying the reality of the Holocaust, as it is generally understood, whether they admit it or not. Ahmadinejad's rhetoric - his use of the word "myth", his attempts to setup a Holocaust Conference, fits right in with the likes of David Irving, and it is not at all unfair to say that he is a Holocaust denier.

  3. You want his words, here they are by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From here:


    "'Imam [Khomeini] said: 'This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history.' This sentence is very wise. The issue of Palestine is not an issue on which we can compromise.


    "'Is it possible that an [Islamic] front allows another front [i.e. country] to arise in its [own] heart? This means defeat, and he who accepts the existence of this regime [i.e. Israel] in fact signs the defeat of the Islamic world.


    "'In his battle against the World of Arrogance, our dear Imam [Khomeini] set the regime occupying Qods [Jerusalem] as the target of his fight.


    "'I do not doubt that the new wave which has begun in our dear Palestine and which today we are also witnessing in the Islamic world is a wave of morality which has spread all over the Islamic world. Very soon, this stain of disgrace [i.e. Israel] will be purged from the center of the Islamic world - and this is attainable.


    The phrase "purged from the center of the Islamic world" is pretty damn close to "wiped off the map".

    So much for your apology for genocide.

  4. Re:Informative??? FLAMEBAIT!!! by Knara · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The fact that we are not animals. We are rational and, therefore, we become conscious of the suffering of others.

    If you feel it is necessary and proper for us to be guiding the fates of other countries, I suppose.

    The fact that they aren't extinct yet.

    Israel would be extinct without our aid, obviously. This, however, does not mean the Jews would be extinct. You're committing the common error of equating Jews with Israel. This had not been the case for almost 2000 years until mid-last-century.

    If the Gypsies had an original homeland, yes. But, different from Jews, their culture was never associated to any particular land. Homosexuals are not a nation. I'm not saying that any group of people have a right to their own land, only those groups which came to exist associated with a land, like Germans, Italians, Scots, Tibetans, Navajos, Kurds, Armenians, etc.

    See above. By your logic we should be not only evacuating the US to allow the native american tribes to take back their ancestral homelands, but seeking out the proper persons who are the true heirs to Babylon.

    So, if you are willing to roll back history cancelling the effect of foreign domination on that land, it should be given to the Ottoman Empire, which ceased to exist in the 1920s.

    Not only that, but really if you want to go the whole way on that, the Caananites had it first, even by Jewish reckoning. I have no problem giving the land back to their descendants. Do you?

    The same can be said of Palestinians.

    Sure. Except that the Palestinians were there for the Jews' 2 millenia absence from the place.

    Why do you assume Brazilians would be more willing to give up part of their territory than the Arabs? If that's a solution, then why doesn't Iran or Syria give part of their countries to the Palestinians?

    Simply put, because there's more usable, unoccupied land in Brazil than in the middle east. But that wouldn't satisfy the people who believe, rather irrationally, that the Jews *need* a state (as if a concentrated effort by a organized nation state couldn't conquer them just as well all in one place as Nazi Germany did with them spread out across Europe), nor the American evangelicals who believe the return to existence of Israel is a sign of imminent messianic return.