When discussing sociopolitical issues nothing is more frustrating than an opponent who is so blinded by his or her political inclinations that he or she is unwilling to properly educate him or herself on the issues at hand. Last night, I published a brief piece on the Iranian president. In it, I presented this madman as the monster he is. In response, MisterE had plenty to say:
Sounds like you may have already been duped. Where do you think the ‘track record’ comes from? I don’t know Ahmadinejah personally, all I know is what the government tells me about him. Since he denies the holocaust, I think him unintelligent and uneducated, unfit to lead a country, but thats all I know about him. After all Billy, I would bet $20 you believed Saddam has weapons of mass destruction when Bush said he did.
My point is, just ask more questions, probe your sources for information, think about things logically and try and walk a mile in another man’s shoes. Only then can you gain better perspective and be more likely to see the truth of a situation. - MisterE
Unfortunately for MisterE, my ideas surrounding Ahmadinejah are built upon mounds of evidence that illustrate a plethora of human rights violations that should not go unnoticed by the global community. Instead of admitting just how terrible this leader has made living conditions for those he opposes, MisterE accuses me of being simple-mindedly influenced by President Bush’s agenda and elevates Ahmadinejah to a man who is simply unfit to rule. Walk in is shoes? Are you sense-retardant?
With the closure of independent newspapers and journals and the suppression of reporting on human rights abuses, treatment of detainees has worsened in Evin prison as well as in detention centers operated clandestinely by the judiciary and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The authorities have subjected those imprisoned for peaceful expression of their political views to torture and ill-treatment. Judges often accept coerced confessions.
While Bush (rightfully) dislikes Ahmadinejah, I choose to research the evidence that has been widely distributed, thus formulating these ideas, inevitably concluding with a negative opinion of Iranian leadership (and the madmen that comprise its structure).
And apparently Hilary Clinton (along with most of the Democratic presidential candidates) are as simple-minded as I am, since they, too, believed that there were weapons prior to the Iraq invasion (although that has nothing to do with what I was speaking of; good diversion, though, MisterE).
Let’s explore some more evidence I use to backup my claims (none of which involves Bush or his ideological tendencies):
The Iranian authorities have systematically suppressed freedom of expression and opinion since April 2000, when the government launched a campaign involving closure of newspapers and the imprisonment of journalists and editors. Consequently, very few independent dailies remain, and those that do self-censor heavily. Many writers and intellectuals have left the country, are in prison, or have ceased to be critical. During 2005 the authorities also targeted websites and Internet journalists in an effort to prevent online dissemination of news and information.
Hmm. Sounds lovely. What a paradise.
Systematic abuses include extrajudicial killings and summary executions; disappearances; widespread use of torture and other degrading treatment; harsh prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; lack of due process; unfair trials; infringement on citizens’ privacy; and restrictions on freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, religion, and movement. Religious minorities, in particular Baha’is, have come under increasing repression by conservative elements of the judiciary and security establishment. The Government restricts the work of human rights groups. Women face legal and social discrimination, and violence against women occurs.
A simple Google search will clue you in. I choose not to walk in the shoes of a madman. But — thanks for the offer.