Monday, August 14, 2006
President of Iran interview with Mike Wallace 60 Minutes
I just watched on CSPAN 2 versions of the interview presented to the public last night, by 88 year old veteran reporter Mike Wallace, of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
I must say that both versions were of interest, but the uncut version which was run exclusively on CSPAN tonight was the best. I am of the understanding that the Iranian President requested that CSPAN run the uncut version tonight, and I am glad they did.
It is very obvious that the Iranian President is not Israel's biggest fan calling Israel and everyone he does not like zionists. He never once said the word Israel to what I could hear and he still seems to be confused about the holocaust. He thinks that there needs to be more research on the subject and thinks that there is governments or people out there not allowing further research into the gruesome subject. He wonders why if the Nazi's caused the holocaust why it is that the Jewish people claim in his words Palestine as their new homeland, and not somewhere else.
He stated the Iran is a peaceful country having not initiated an invasion or caused a war with any country for over 200 years. He was quick to quote that since the US has been in place he is of the opinion that the US has started 105 wars or invasions....
He was very cagey and evaded the direct questions with a smile and another question. Some people are commenting that Mike Wallace was condescending to the Iranian President, but I couldn't see that. I am sure if he was interviewing George Bush or Tony Blair, or Helen Clark for that matter that he would have been just as direct with them.
It seemed very clear to me that in the interview the Iranian President was trying to reach out to the west by saying that he believed in peace and that his interests in nuclear technology is for generating power for the future of his country. He feels that the west wants to control the generation of power so as they can push their ideas upon the rest of the world, and he does not like oppression that he says US is putting upon his friends in Iraq.
The question was put to him of what he thought of US President George Bush. He managed not to say anything derogatory per SE, but inferred that his letter (all 18 pages of it) to the US President he was trying to I guess give him advice and ask questions as why a man who believes in Jesus would be invading other countries and supposably causing oppression... He did bluff over the question that Iran is supplying ammunition to hezbollah by saying that USA is supplying ammunition and technology to Israel. He quoted UN resolutions a few times by stating that anyone is allowed to defend their home.... Seems that he has prepared for the interview.
He stated that it has been 26-27 years since high level correspondence has been between the USA and Iran. He says that it was not Iran that cut ties, and is seems rather obvious to me that by writing his letter, creating a new blog, and doing this interview that he is interested in talks with the USA, or at least sympathy from the general US public.
Having said that I still think he is a dangerous man who cunningly accepted this interview with Mike Wallace so as the UN (who he may well think of zionist's too) will not be as harsh on Iran when it is time for sanctions and anything else that may come Iran's way.
He shot down that comment that his letter to President Bush was a publicity stunt and I can see some folk over here wondering why George Bush didn't reply....
I think that what his plan was.....
The interview was interesting.... If you get the opportunity to see it do so.
After watching the interview, I guess I have some questions.....
Do you think that the President of Iran should have been given the interview, and do you think that George Bush in good faith should have replied to the President of Iran's 18 page letter?
Posted by Rob Good at 10:53 PM