48 votes

Why is Ahmadinejad considered "evil"?

I have tried to Google this question and can't seem to find an answer. I know that Ahmadinejad is called "evil" and "wants to wipe Israel off the face of the earth" (which I know is a misquote).

Both of my parents are faithful Republicans who I have tried to speak to about America's horrible foreign policy and the masquerade that is the presidential election. All they know is what Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh tell them to believe, and I haven't had success opening their eyes to these real issues. My father usually says, "We can't just pull out of other countries. We need to stay in Germany and Japan (yes, still) for our national security." They believe the lies about Iran just as they believed the lies about Iraq.

My question, therefore, is why is Ahmadinejad considered evil?

I can't seem to find the proof that makes him so hated. I want to know what bad things he has done before I try to talk to my parents about why there is no reason to go to Iran, other than oil and the dollar monopoly. I know that I will need a rebuttal for whatever "terrible" things he has done, but I can't come up with one until I know the facts. I don't want to go into it seeming that I don't know what I'm talking about.

Thank you for your help. I'm only 22 and found Ron Paul in January, so I'm still learning and building my knowledge base.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran says this:

"...the Islamic Republic's army, and the corps of Revolutionary Guards...have responsibility not only for the safeguarding of the frontiers, but also for a religious mission, which is Holy War (JIHAD) along the way of God, and the struggle to extend the supremacy of God's Law in the world."

It also says this: "Article 154

The Islamic Republic of Iran has as its ideal human felicity throughout human society, and considers the attainment of independence, freedom, and rule of justice and truth to be the right of all people of the world. Accordingly, while scrupulously refraining from all forms of interference in the internal affairs of other nations, it supports the just struggles of the mustad'afun against the mustakbirun in every corner of the globe."

These seem to contradict each other. Their military has a mission of "Holy War," but the Islamic Republic of Iran refrains from interfering in the internal affairs of other nations?

Here are two links: the first is to the unofficial,internet version of the Iranian constitution; the second is to an article entitled A Detailed Analysis of Iran’s Constitution:



I don't defend him. But I

I don't defend him. But I won't be drawn into hating a leader who is no worse than many others, including our own. Who has more blood on his hands? Obama or Ahmadinejad? You completely misunderstand those of us who refuse to the demonization of a leader, simply so that Western interests can get their war on! I believe that Iran will begin to evolve to a much better place once we stop our belligerent threats toward it.

So in that line of reasoning...

If Ron Paul was elected, would the Iranians be righteous in assuming that he is a tyrant because the U.S imprisons and tortures without trial, and is the biggest warmongering country in the world ?

Freedom is a byproduct of acceptance - judge not.

Yeah, not that I think we

Yeah, not that I think we should be bombing Iran, but the guy sucks, and is pretty evil.

One world, under government, with power and money for the elite



TMOT short- 1m43s

Road to World War 3- 13m48s

Robert Newman -full length- 45m44s

history bits...

Iran- 9m48s

Iran, SAVAK, and the CIA- 43m39s

Wes Clark- Policy "Coup"- 8m13s

Mullen: Declaration of War Power- 1m43s

a bigger picture...

Here is Scott Horton's final interview
for Antiwar Radio...

Iran hasnt invaded anyone since the late 1700's

that alone is enough to ask why are they controversial in the first place?

A true flower can not blossom without sunlight and a true man can not live without love.

Agree it's Iran, not Ahmadinejad.

Here's the post/video clip that best explained it to me.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Here is another good analysis.

This is an analysis of the Brookings Institution's 2009 report entitled "Which Path to Persia" which lays out the strategy being used by the US government to engage with Iran and overthrow the Islamic government there.


This is a little more in depth than the other links I posted but it does give one a very clear understanding of the thinking of the US Administration vis-a-vis the regimes in the Middle East that they have targeted for change. The Institution has apparently recently removed the pdf's of their reports from the Internet but Tony Cartalucci at Land Destroyer has retained them at Scribd.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

It is not about Ahmadinejad

It is about any person who happens to hold his office.

If Joe Smith held Ahmadinejad's office, then Joe Smith would be "evil."

It is about taking over Iran, nothing more.

Ask your parents if they think Ahmadinejad hates Jews.

When they say yes, ask them why is it then that the Iranian parliament has Jew representation for the Jewish population that lives in Iran.

Yes, there was a misquote where he gave a speech and he quoted Khomeini, who said that the Israeli regime (government) is the problem in the Middle East and it must evenutally vanish from the pages of history for there to peace in the Middle East, just like the governments of the old Soviet Union and Nazi Germany eventually vanished. That was then misquoted to "wipe Israel off the face of the map."

I have read that in more recent times Ahmadinejad might have had more comments that are anti-Israeli, but could you blame him? His people are being destroyed because the neocon socialist psychopaths want control of the Middle East - just like they wrote about in 2000 in their paper, "Rebuilding America's Defenses."

There is a video out there that shows someone talking about how Iraq was just the first step, and they then would be going after Syria, Libya, and all the other countries they have actually gone after, and ultimately going after Iran.

Sure, it is about the oil. But ultimately, it is about central banking. As of the year 2000, which countries did not accept central banking tied to the World Bank?

Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc. Of course, there is also North Korea and some in Africa, but those are countries that either nothing can be done about (North Korea has nukes) or there are no resources to care about (most of Africa).

The problem in explaining this to the sheep is that it is a complicated issue and their head will explode if you try to give it to them all at once. They will just discount what you say.

So, you might try asking them questions. Instead of you trying to defend a particular position, get them to defend a position, then get it down to a PRINCIPLE, and then ask them what it would take to show them they are wrong (if they say nothing, then they are saying they are infallable and have absolute knowledge, etc.).

Q: So, what do you think about Ahmadinejad?
A: He is evil.
Q: What do you mean by that?
A: He wants to kill the Jews.
Q: And why do you say that?
A: He said so.
Q: Did you hear him speak in his native language, or did you hear him speak in his broken English, or did you hear someone else tell you what he said?
A: I heard it on Fox.
Q: So you didn't actually hear him say it with your own ears, but you heard someone else's interpretation of what he said, right?
A: Right.
Q: You know that sometimes quotes -- especially in politics -- are taken out of context or people are misquoted, right?
A: Right, but I know that's what he said.
Q: You just said you did not hear him say it yourself, right?
A: Right.
Q: And you know that in politics, sometimes people are misquoted, right?
A: Yes.
Q: What if I could show you that Ahmadinejad was misquoted and he never said he wanted to kill the Jews?
A: That's nonsense, EVEYBODY KNOWS IT!
Q: If he wanted to kill the Jews, why hasn't he already killed the thousands of Jews who live in Iran -- and why does he let them have representation in the country's legislature?
A: ???
Q: If I could show you -- PROVE TO YOU -- that Ahmadinejad never said that he wanted to kill the Jews or to wipe Israel off the face of the map, what would you think about that?

At this point, it becomes an issue not of what Ahmadinejad actually said, but whether or not the person you are talking with WILL BE REASONABLE. When pushed into a corner, and when you frame it in larger principles, it is very difficult to blatantly be unreasonable about a PRINCIPLE, such as if I could show you proof ...

If they still stick to the idea that they will not accept any proof that they are wrong about what someone else told them a person said that is in a foreign language, then you could just tell them they are being unreasonable and let them defend themselves.

At some point, you SHOULD be able to get them to acknowledge they would be willing to take a look at what you can show them.

Either that, or they will end the conversation and get angry. If (when) they do, you know you have had an effect on them and you can come back later and hit them again until they accept that they are being unreasonable.

At THAT point, you can make some inroads.

First, ya gotta break 'em down -- down from their irrational perch of holier than thou. Then ... you can educate them on the truth.

Ahmadinejad is not the Supreme Leader of Iran.

Under the Iranian Constitution the President does not enjoy the kind of power wielded by the American President. He is the public face of the Iranian government but the real power is held in the Guardian Council and the Supreme Leader who is presently Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei. You should read these entries from Wikipedia to gain at least a modest understanding of what you are talking about:




Iran is a country of 70 million people with many divisions that can be exploited by foreign powers to further their agendas. The Wikipedia articles are of course written from a Western point of view that on the one hand will be more acceptable to anyone you are speaking to but on the other must be read with some caution and balanced with other articles.

As you will see Dr. Ahmadinejad is quite an ordinary person with modest habits and of a devout nature. He is no longer as popular in his country as he used to be no doubt due to the economic strictures that have been imposed on them in the same way that Iraq was crippled from 1991 until the 2003 invasion. His term of office comes to an end in August 2013 so he will no longer be the cynosure of Western propaganda after that time. They will have to conjure up another bete noire to pin their hatred on if the war has not started before then.

Interestingly enough the current Likud government of Israel comes to the end of their term around the same time so if the Likud fail to win sufficient support the main actors in that region will all change. This is probably why Netanyahu is pushing so hard for an attack on Iran. It will help his prospects in next year's elections. This may seem to be somewhat cynical but it is how I have learned things work in Israel.

It is most important to avoid comic book characterisations of political figures. That is the kind of thinking that will inevitably lead to war but it bears no relationship to reality and should be consistently opposed at every turn. The most obvious example of this is the labelling of Dr. Ahmadinejad as a present day Hitler. Nothing could be further from the truth but as we know truth is the first casualty in any war and war is exactly what we have going on at the moment although still in its early stages.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

LOL Under our Constitution

LOL Under our Constitution the President doesn't wield the kind of power he has either. Just goes to show you how twisted Govt can become.

Blessings )o(

The Iranian Constitution is actually followed in Iran.

Unlike the US Constitution that is honoured in the breach as we all know. The Iranian Constitution was put in place after the revolution in 1979 and it has religious underpinnings which place the real power in the hands of the religious authorities.

Even the US Constitution was followed for more than seventy years until the Civil War. Even after that the decline happened relatively slowly until 1933 when FDR started the real revolution into a socialist state.

If you are suggesting that somehow the Iranian Constitution is "just a piece of paper" then you are engaging in the same kind of projection that afflicts many in the West who refuse to understand other cultures and see them as caricatures of their own, usually pejoratively.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)



Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

it isnt what he did... it is the system of governance your

parents hate. your parents hate shariah law, but you could just say "look Israel has no constitution and its laws are all Jewish pre-dominant, to support Israel is no different than Iran, because they both have integrated church and state". then say "what is good now is that they cant reach our country, but they will try to if we continue occupying their lands."

ask them to look up what a structure adjustment loan does to these country's.

if they could care less about these people just say that the troops have financed Ron Paul, the contractors financed Romney, so if they think they're being Patriotic than they better wake up before they find themselves on the wrong side of history. show them documentarys and books.

and if they still dont mind this is economic war and they still dont care; well your parents are heartless.

A true flower can not blossom without sunlight and a true man can not live without love.

Same with two of my best friends; and MY QUESTION IS ALWAYS

how in the world can parents believe what a t.v. personality says over their own kids?

I have to scratch my head everytime this comes up... and it comes up a lot

A true flower can not blossom without sunlight and a true man can not live without love.

Because you are "young and impressionable"...

without the "life experience" needed to reach the proper conclusions concerning such things.

Except that I'm 55 and apparently still lacking in those experiences that provide such understanding...and through it...persuasive powers. Some things never change...

(Never mind even trying to overcome the collectivist, federalist indoctrination of a 1950's West Point education)!

Sheesh...150 I.Q....and still Bill O'Rielly, and Newt Gingrich both seem smarter to my father.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?


you hit the key with YOUR age.
that means your mom/dad are probably 70+. Which means, IMO, that they are the brainwashed generation which thinks "the government" will make it all right. Even if they hate welfare, this was cemented in their mind as a result of WWII.
West Point or not, the military and our government in conjunciton with the military ARE ALWAYS RIGHT!!! NEVER WRONG!!
I would bet their mom/dad were democrat and they might have been also early in their lives?

Jackson County Georgia

War is an instrument entirely inefficient toward redressing wrong; and multiplies, instead of indemnifying losses.
Thomas Jefferson

Yep...all were Democrats

And my grand-uncle on my grand-mother's side was a Democrat Senator from the State of Maryland...Ambrose Kennedy. My grandfather a Democrat, a Colonel in the Army, one of the lead designers of the Jeep, assigned to Willy's in the 30's, and commander of the Quartermaster Corps for the Pacific Theater...supplying MacArthur. He never made general for love of Alcohol when after the surrender of Japan, he took over the Quartermaster Corps in Europe and climbed into a bottle. In fact, my grand-mother had pretty much married off my father to Patton's daughter before he met my mother at a West Point dance and screwed up grandma's plans, breaking it off with Patton's daughter. My grand-mother never liked my mother because of it. All Democrats...through and through. Two uncles, Olympic Gold Medalists for rowing (8's) in Tokyo...both West Pointers and Democrats who believed the government should do everything.

I think my father was bucking his father when he voted for Goldwater and became a life-long Republican...seemingly without knowing what Republicans were supposed to stand for. He seemed to, at one time had a touch of rebellion in him...don't what happened to that.

Of course I became a rubber stamping Republican myself...for a long time until Ron Paul pinched me and woke me up.

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

geez, with all that stuff

what did you do to top that, discover the cure for cancer?

Those democrats allowed the republicans to grab their "handles" amd pull them to the gop. Their handles were gay marriage, abortion and legalizing drugs, the big three for the gop until lately.

Jackson County Georgia

War is an instrument entirely inefficient toward redressing wrong; and multiplies, instead of indemnifying losses.
Thomas Jefferson


No, I'm definitely the Black Sheep of my family...a dope smoking long-hair in my youth. A drop-out and an enlisted man in the Coast Guard (to escape my father's control and keep out of Southeast Asia) in my late teens and early 20's.

Then I bummed around the West Coast, playing music and hunting chicks for a while before I returned back East and took up position behind a bar...and blew most of what I made in front of a bar.

Didn't go to college until I was 27 when after too many bologna sandwiches for dinner, I decided to grow up. I took a pretty good paying job as a bartender in a popular night club in Baltimore, had a second job as a Male Stripper for a few years, and 5 years later, after getting a totally free education (Pell and Other Race Grants) graduated at the top of my class as an Accountant and one of three white boys on the all black campus of Morgan State University,

I got a position quickly and then spent all of 6 months counting other people's beans. I hated that like you wouldn't believe (too many uptight assholes), and went back to bar-tending in nightclubs...which being single...I loved.

Fast forward through a few failed business endeavors, and a very successful stint working out a near bankrupt blue collar overhead door business for a friend who had had it plopped into his lap by an ailing father, I got fired by a lawyer on the phone, rather than the equity I had been promised by my "friend". But hey, I learned a lot...especially about myself! I knew that I really sucked as an employee...but knew business well. I then was committed to being an entrepreneur. (with no money) LOL.

A MLM swing here, a Manufactures Rep swing there and I finally got a base hit in debt collection...specifically...judgments. I hated that too, but it was mine and soon I became quite successful.

It was then that I began to learn about the markets and trading...no easy endeavor but one that I was committed to, to a degree most people would never understand. You see, no one grows up wanting to be a debt collector and even though I did very well, all I could think of was the day when I could put that behind me. And already knowing that I NEVER wanted to babysit myopic employees again, trading was the only path I saw to where I wanted to go.

So here I am...having survived the years of pain that the market metes out to all who court her...still wearing black wool sweaters...sober...and happy as a trader, a husband, and a father. (The happiness BTW, is listed in reverse order)

Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

Maybe its that they just want the easy answers

they cant bear to hear something worth fighting for... it's easier to keep up appearances without tackling facts.

if only....

Tim Leary, as crazy as he was, said something I wont forget "when you find out you are different than all the rest look for the others"

maybe some people aren't cut out to mind the truth

A true flower can not blossom without sunlight and a true man can not live without love.

His nation dares to assert its sovereignty...

...and rejects Anglo-American hegemony. Ipso facto, he is "evil" to Anglo-American elites.

The masses, being largely ignorant of foreign nations and history, follow these elites blindly, trusting them and their corporate media propaganda arm.


he is not evil,

usually whatever the mainstream considers is actually the opposite,

putin is a bad man too ohhh that nasty putin, he stole the election over there ohh

cough ... cough... romney, and from the look of last nights debate obama is lookin to take a fall, i dont think he cares to be president for much longer

most posters here are right on point


"He's this eccentric Ghandi-Like figure that you cant touch with the normal bribes that people respond to."
the man Doug Wead on DR. RON PAUL

1. Because Iran has a lot of

1. Because Iran has a lot of oil and they are not allowing US companies to bring their oil to market.
2. Because Iran is not a member nation of the IMF.
3. Because Iran talks of taking something other then the US dollar in trade for their oil.

All answers below are true

All answers below are true from what I can tell. Personally, I think our Govt hates Ahmadinejad because he speaks the truth about the US, Israel, and our motives. God forbid the American people are exposed to the truth. From what I can tell, he's an honorable man who is getting smeared by our Govt and Israel to further their fascist ambitions. Poor guy, I expect he'll end up like Sadam Hussein and Ghaddafi, both of whom were installed by the USA before we decided to hate them for selling their oil for gold.

Blessings )o(

Honourable man

I didn't know anything about him until about a week ago when I followed a link from the DP and read the transcript of his address to the UN. It didn't take me long to realise that unsurprisingly, everything that the MSM have been saying about him is either propaganda or just lies.

Since then I have watched another clip posted here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCw-oWp1wf8 and this sealed the deal as far as I'm concerned. This man stands for truth and justice as much as Ron Paul does. Is it any wonder that there is a correlation between how the two of them are treated by the establishment ?

The people who condemn him are blindly accepting mainstream rhetoric without due investigation. I would hope that the people who read this web sight would be compassionate and wise enough to keep their minds open.

Freedom is a byproduct of acceptance - judge not.

The way I see it

Is, he is labeled Evil because our foreign policy requires it to be so.
We have been meddling in the Middle East since the 1920s for some nefarious purpose and we are not done yet.

Secondly there is nothing in Japan or Germany that benefits our "National Security" by being there. Absolutely nothing. There is no continued WWII, there is no continued Cold War. Though by our current actions in the Middle East there might be a renewed Cold War or even WWIII...
Of course then some will bring up the war on "Terror". These folk, to man and a woman, all fail to recognize that the civilian deaths we cause in the name of our "National Security" do more for creating "terrorists" than any other thing I am personally aware of. Some places have this number of civilian deaths approaching a million last I knew. The potential recruit base these "terrorists" organizations have is huge now.
I rationalize this by what my own reactions would be. If some country came over here dropping bombs for whatever reason and said bombs killed any one of my family members I would grab the gun and go a hunting. Dont care, dead family member. That is the only reason I would need. So to is my belief that is the same for many of the unfortunates in the Middle East.
I myself supported Afghanistan but as we all know Osama is "officially" gone and yet the troops remain as does the continuation of innocent civilian deaths in a place we can no longer rationalize our continued presence.

Third on the topic of "National Security" our borders remain unsecured. So any tinpot loser can cross, grab a charter plane and fly it into whatever building they desire. Or go blow up whatever they desire. Nothing prevents this. You cannot have true "National Security" without secured borders and our troops overseas do nothing to address this little problem. In fact they do nothing overseas these days except fight needless wars of aggression. The Iraq war did nothing for our "National Security", our continued presence in Afghanistan does nothing for our "National Security". Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan all do nothing for our "National Security". The civilian deaths these wars and military actions cause in fact make us less secure...

As a reality check, ask China if it feels less secure for not deploying troops haphazardly all over the world...

Because his words about

Because his words about Israel have been consistently mistranslated. And because most people are bigoted toward Muslims.