Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Iran Leader Demands US Apology for Bush
TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's president called Wednesday for "profound changes" in U.S. foreign policy including an end to support for Israel and an apology to the Islamic republic for past misdeeds.
An Iranian woman walks past an anti-US mural on the wall of the former US embassy in Tehran. Iran is expecting "concrete changes" in US policy towards the Islamic republic under new President Barack Obama, the government spokesman was quoted has been quoted saying. (AFP/File/Atta Kenare) Hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also urged Washington to withdraw its troops stationed around the world. He said Iran would be closely watching what President Barack Obama's new administration does and would welcome a real shift in its approach.
"Change means giving up support for the rootless, uncivilized, fabricated, murdering ... Zionists and letting the Palestinian nation decide its own destiny," Ahmadinejad said. "Change means putting an end to U.S. military presence in (different parts of) the world."
His comments come as Obama was reaching out to Muslims. He has stressed the importance of engaging Iran, a country the Bush administration often singled out as the most dangerous in the Middle East. In his inaugural address, Obama addressed leaders of hostile nations by saying "we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."
Without mentioning Obama by name, Ahmadinejad repeatedly referred to those who want "change," a buzzword of Obama's election campaign.
"When they say 'we want to bring changes', change may happen in two ways: First is profound, fundamental and effective change ... the second ... is a change of tactics," he told thousands of people in the western city of Kermanshah in a speech broadcast live on state television.
"We will wait patiently, listen to their words carefully, scrutinize their actions under a magnifier and if change happens truly and fundamentally, we will welcome that," he added. "The change will be to apologize to the Iranian nation and try to compensate for their dark records and the crimes they have committed against the Iranian nation."
Ahmadinejad cited the U.S.-backed coup that toppled the elected government of Prime Minister Mohamed Mossadegh in 1953, its support of the unpopular shah, its backing of Saddam Hussein during Iraq's war with Iran in the 1980s and the downing of an Iranian airliner in 1988 by a U.S. naval ship.
In an interview with Al-Arabiya news channel that aired Tuesday, Obama condemned Iran's threats to destroy Israel and its alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons, but added: "It is important for us to be willing to talk to Iran, to express very clearly where our differences are, but where there are potential avenues for progress."
Later Tuesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters the U.S. administration is undertaking a wide-ranging and comprehensive assessment of American foreign policy options toward Iran.
Clinton also said Iran had a "clear opportunity" to demonstrate some willingness to engage meaningfully with the international community.
Washington is at odds with Iran over its nuclear ambitions and its threats to destroy Israel as well as Tehran's support of the militant groups Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian territories.
The U.S. broke off diplomatic relations with Iran after hardline students stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979.
- Posted in
35 Comments so far
Show AllThe plaintive cry "Why do they hate us?" was heard across the land on 9/11/01. The people of Iran, among others, know U.S. history better than most U.S. citizens, having been on the receiving end of its thuggish policies for more than 60 years.
"O what a gift the Giftie gie us/to see ourselves as others see us."
---Robert Burns
Better than apologizing for Bush, the US could send him in handcuffs to Teheran to apologize for himself.
What the US should apologize for is overthrowing the democratically elected government of Mossadegh to put the puppet Shah in place, and for protecting his regime from any attempts at democracy for 26 years with SAVAK torture and murder squads. And for then unilaterally breaking off diplomatic relations with the new government of Iran after the Shah was overthrown by a massive popular movement, because it was no longer possible to maintain the US Embassy as a low profile, highly functional den of spies and operational headquarters for the CIA in the Middle East.
well I can't speak for the rest of the American people or our government but I am sorry Iran.
MEN run politics and men are war mongers. (Most men). Many (at least 48-54%) of the people in the US do not approve of what George Bush did (and his republican predecessors) and we did not vote them into office.
From one small insignificant woman in the world, who has compassion for people as individuals, I am sorry.
I am sorry our men felt the need to stick their nose in other people's business all over the world. I am sorry for all of the mothers who lost sons as soldiers and daughters who were bombed to bits. I am sorry for all of the people who have been trained to look someone in the eye and kill them. I am sorry for their souls.
I am sorry for the mess we are in with the planet, with population, and the status of food and water, and air.
I am sorry. And I cannot fix it.
you realize that in Iran, its a nation run by MEN who would just as soon stone you for speaking up? Sexism is a nasty 2 way street.
'Yes I'm an extremist, thanks for noticing.'
- Ted Nugent
When was the ever run by women? Can you name once?
Indonesia was led by a woman - Megawati
Bangladesh - Hasina
Pakistan - Bhutto
The above third world countries looks to be more progresive in terms of having women leaders? Where is the US on this?
Other countries that had women leaders:
UK
Germany
israel
India
Phillipines
and much more....
Hank_Hill,
There are 8 women in Iran's Parliament, sworn in two weeks ago. I respect you citing Ted Nugent-he is certainly well known for his progressive opinions on women's and animal rights too!
azjoe.
Sunshine,
You have made a start... and I join you in your apology to Iran.
Have to wonder whether this obviously-Muslim writer actually used the words "hard-line" to describe the Iranian president and "militant" to describe Hamas and Hezbolla, or whether some Jewish AP editor added those words later.
How could anyone say it better than the five before me. Thank you.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, well said!
I doubt Obama will deliver, but I would be happy if he showed me wrong.
Every time the reporters in this country speak about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, they stick the word 'hardline' before his name. It is like a Pavlovinian reflex.
They call such unconscious and servile behavior 'objective reporting', don't they?
"They call such unconscious and servile behavior 'objective reporting', don't they?"
Yes, and supposedly it is also one of the hallmarks of a "free press".
"Ding! Ding!" [drool drool]
Open Letter to His Excellency President Achmedinejad of Iran:
Dear President Achmedinejad: I agree with what you say; but with all due respect, you have a snowball's chance in hell in getting an apology from the US government. Would an apology from me do? Because I for one am sorry that the US had subjected the Iranian people to the criminal Shah. I apologize for the way you and your country have been maligned and bullied by the US. For all of this, I am sorry. May you and your people find it in your hearts to forgive.
Sincerely,
Sean Porter (aka Winning Ticket)
Louisiana, USA
If I am Obama, I would tell Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, "when the Revolutionary Council appologizes for your sorry self, I will consider your request about former (boy it feels so good to write that!)President George W. Bush".
They really are a matched pair Dubya Bush and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad--abrupt, doctrinaire, insolent, and foolish clowns.
Poet
Excellent post. Thank you. And we have the Dulles brothers to thank mostly for that 1953 Operation Ajax of which you speak - both of whom were rabid Christian fundamentalists. Funny how when Muslim "extremists" call for regime change, it is seen as a terrorist act, but when Christian extremists call for it - or, in this case, actually do it - it is called sound foreign policy.
Seventhson and DaveBronstein,
Thank you so very much for these necessary reminders, cuz', yeah, people here in the States tend to forget these criminal and murderous deeds courtesy of our homegrown fundamentalists, who often also behaved like terrorists.
Well heck, as long as we're on a roll here . . .
We shouldn't leave out the other 40 or so attempts (some successful) at regime change or terrorist actions by the US military and CIA since World War II. William Blum's "Killing Hope" is one of the best sources for documenting all of them in one book. He, of course, though, draws his research from many other valuable sources.
Yes, it's amazing to witness the collective memory loss in this country . . . assuming Americans ever learned it in the first place, which most didn't i suppose.
So true! Seventhson. Yeah, just like in the last century, when the U.S. Calvary massacred the Native Americans at wounded knee and other campaigns it was called making the country safe from terrorists,( but the perjorative term was Savages,) but when Custer lost to the indigeneous people and the only"real" Americans, at Little Big Horn; it was called a massacare! Last century, getting rid of the non Christian extremists was also called sound foreign policy.
Like that recent and poignant bumper sticker:
"Homeland Security: Fighting Terrorism Since 1492"
Good post. Asking Ahmadinijad to apologize after the way we killed secular moderatation in his country is like asking the Congolese to apologize for the state they are in after we murdered Lumumba. In both cases we strangled all signs of enlightened independence and self determination. In each case our motivation was having control of resources - oil or minerals. We set up our brutal, narcissistic puppets and let discontent fester among the populace. It had nothing to do with justice or the good of the people in Iran or Congo. Our actions caused decades of misery and millions of deaths.
We have a lot of repentance to do before we can ask anyone to apologize to us.
Joe
Hi Dave Bronstein--
I realize the history of US medling in Iran (for those who have not done so, may I recommend Stephen Kinzer's excellent treatment of the topic in his book "All the Shah's Men".)
First of all I did not ask the Revolutionary Council to appologize for itself, rather, I asked the Revolutionary Council to appoloogize for their wacko President (as a matter of history many, if not most, of the Revolutionary Council find Mahmoud a dangerous and foolish loud mouth many of whose utterances do not speak for them.
Secondly, the '53 coup, as dispicable and problematic as it was for the US and Iran, cannot be linked in any way to Dubya since at that time Dubya was somewhere between kindergarten and first grade in his life. The point of my post (which seems to have eluded you) was that people who live in glass houses (in this case Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) ought not to be throwing stones at others who also live in glass houses.
Poet
I think the US needs to at least take some responsibility for that anger Iranians feel towards them.
Firstly, I was shocked and horrified when I read about the 1953 military coup that was instigated by Washington and the CIA when the legitimate govt of Mossadegh was actually overthrown by the US simply for wanting to control Iran's oil resources. I still think it is outrageous that the US, the self appointed champion of democracy would overthrow a foreign govt, but it turns out that unfortunately this is an old habit. Venezuela, Nicaragua, Chile and Guatemala are all countries that have been destabilized this way. No wonder so many Iranians mistrust the US, if they had their democracy sabotaged and were made to live under a brutal, repressive govt that was not only armed but also created by Washington in order to perpetuate their own interests.
Second, the downing of an Iranian jetliner in 1988. The US Vincennes, stationed in the Arabian Gulf, was responsible for that. 290 Iranians, mostly vacationers on their way to Dubai, died then and the jet was actually INSIDE Iranian territorial waters at that time. George Bush Senior, the then Vice President, calmly told reporters he would never apologize for the US when this tragic attack occurred. I am unsure if the US ever payed any compensation for the Iranians who died, but I do know the commanding officer responsible for the attack was promoted and rewarded in due command.
So I think the US does have to take responsibility for their actions, they have certainly caused a lot of pain to Iran's people.
Americans do not know that thanks to war/fear mongering and 80 billion dollars a year, for 7 years, spent on propaganda and the biggest nation wide spy network ever in history, there is no way an you will here an apology.
Why? Because , we made war on two country's, soon to be three if we are not careful , for the criminal act of 21 people. Yes, it was a crime of murder, not an attack on our country by another country.
Let me help you out, evil men stole aircraft and crashed them into two buildings.
The buildings collapsed killing three thousand people. Every real engineer in the world who has seen the video, will tell you, the damage from the planes could not have collapsed those buildings.
A proper investigation of the murder site was never done. Instead, with war drums beating and revenge in all our eyes raging we were primed for war.
So , before the dust could settle and the cleanup completed the bombs fell in Afghanistan.
Because, our glorious leadership did not want to approach this crime as a law enforcement issue. They wanted to go to the middle east, a neoconservative plan drawn up in the mid 90's by guess who???? You know the cast all to well.
We have been played and manipulated for 35 years with the last 7 years as the big tamale.War, Terrorists, Bank Fraud,Wall street fraud, big bail outs and a 2 trillion dolor military complex bonanza.Oh , lets not forget getting raped by the oil industry, OPEC and speculators.
If Obama has the courage , and we still have real patriots in Washington and the Pentagon, we will put the constitution back as the law of the land, end the War on Terror and call it what it really is , a law enforcement issue headed by the FBI and Interpol to catch a ring of murders around the world.
But as long as we are at War, this is not an America governed by its constitutional laws, but rather a Police State with unchecked powers at the law enforcement and judicial agency's.
And as long as that is the case , and they keep getting their billions,those growing Police state agency's they will fight to keep the status quot.
BronFreeMen
The one false statement here is "Every real engineer in the world who has seen the video, will tell you, the damage from the planes could not have collapsed those buildings."
Other than that it's a good post.
It doesn't take more than a pretty basic physics education to recognize that those buildings had no place else to go but down. If you really want I can show you a simple calculation of momentum conservation that makes it pretty obvious the force of an aluminum airplane against millions of tons of concrete and steel just isn't going to 'knock it over'....leaving the thousands of pounds of jet-fuel and the fire to do the main work. Any structural engineer who actually knows his stuff would indeed tell you that this is exactly how a building of this size would fall down.
The programme "NOVA" on PBS ran an episode soon afterward which went into great scientific detail over why they didn't 'fall over' and why they fell the way they did. They were also rather critical of the rescue workers who proceeded to block staircases in their misguided attempts to 'help' people.
Is it just me, or is Ahmadinejad making more sense than most American leaders?
No, it's not just you, I feel the same way.
Yea, I've felt that for quite some time.
Remember when he wrote that letter to president Bush.
I read that letter.
It impressed me with an eloquence and turn of phrase of which no one in the administration at the time was capable.
It was clear to me that the Iranians had a leader that far better served their interests than the leader we had. I envied them at the time.
Check out mosaic TV, it shows news from all over the middle east: http://www.linktv.org/mosaic
It's a real eye-opener since you finaly get the chance to hear what those leaders have to say, and not the goddamn miniature quotes out context and mistranslations which are subscribed to them by the western media.
After 10 minutes of watching you really know who are the warmonger and who are the victims.
Thank you for the link, Han. I now have that site bookmarked.
And by the way . . . is your last name Solo? : )
As a citizen of the USA I don't care if he was misguided, retarded, insane, or deliberately malevolent, I want to see him on trial for the deliberate murder of thousands of human beings and the maiming of thousands of others.
A nation at war for sibling rivalry? It happened. It actually happened. In the twentieth century. This is like something out of the plays of Shakespeare.
This is insanity. What's next? Richard III?
"... the downing of an Iranian airliner in 1988 by a U.S. naval ship."
I suppose that was an act of self-defense on the part of the U.S., not an act of terrorism.
George C. Brown - We can shut the loud mouth Iranian a bit if we just start a bit of official dialogue. Yes, he's a loose cannon, but that won't change until we call his bluff, and let him make more of a fool of himself.
Yes I agree with this.
Usually, if you give such men all the rope they want, they hurry very quickly to hang themselves.
I remember when Gorby met with Reagan in Helsinki and suggested to him complete dismantlement of BOTH nuclear arsenals....Reagan had to back-pedal like a madman.
All of a sudden, by calling the USA's bluff, Gorby made the USSR look like a country seeking peace and the USA out to be war-promoting imperialists.
All Obama has to do is publically now say something like:
"The USA would like to discuss all these things with the President of Iran. All he has to do is ask us and we will be happy to talk."
I suspect M.A. doesn't actually WANT to talk to the USA. His whole base of power, like Bush's base of power, is completely dependent upon the creation of enemies.
Sorry to say but the actions of the Zionists and the United States has sent a clear message to the world, that is if you want to live in peace, you will need several nuclear weapons. Israel and her Stooge the United states can't be trusted.