Kouross Esmaeli: John McCain Holds No Credibility as Far as Supporting Iranians
By Heather Tuesday Jun 23, 2009 10:00am
Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzales on Democracy Now talked to independent filmmaker and journalist Kouross Esmaeli about the attacks coming from Republicans and John McCain against the President for not speaking out more forcefully on Iran.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask you about the statement—President Obama is now under fire from the right for not speaking out more forcefully on behalf of the Iranian protesters. He responded to this charge in an interview on CBS News Friday.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: The last thing that I want to do is to have the United States be a foil for those forces inside Iran who would love nothing better than to make this an argument about the United States. That’s what they do. That’s what we’re already seeing. We shouldn’t be playing into that. There should be no distractions from the fact that the Iranian people are seeking to let their voices be heard. What we can do is bear witness and say to the world that the incredible demonstrations that we’ve seen is a testimony to, I think, what Dr. King called the “arc of the moral universe.” It’s long, but it bends towards justice.
JUAN GONZALEZ: That was President Obama on Sunday. Kouross Esmaeli, Iranian American journalist and filmmaker, your response to the criticism of President Obama from the right, in terms of his inaction on the issue of the election in Iran?
KOUROSS ESMAELI: What is interesting about the criticisms that are coming from the right is that it’s been coming primarily from Senator John McCain. The Iranians know Senator John McCain as the man who sang “Bomb, bomb Iran” during the elections of last year. The man holds no credibility as far as supporting Iranians or seeming like he’s got the best interests of the Iranians at heart. And that, for Iranians and for this issue, that discredits him altogether and discredits this whole attack on President Obama.
President Obama’s stand, I think, has been the most sensible, and it’s amazing that the President of the United States is taking such a sensible stand. And that—everyone I’ve talked to in Iran has said the same thing, that we do not need any symbol of Western, especially American, interference in Iran’s internal politics. And the fact that America does not have diplomatic relations with Iran really ties its hand, as far as how far he can go in really supporting Iran. So the only thing they can do is to just scream as loud as they can, which will be immediately used by the Iranian authorities.
AMY GOODMAN: Kouross Esmaeli, give us a brief history lesson. Talk about why especially the sensitivity to the United States interfering with Iran.
KOUROSS ESMAELI: The Western presence in Iran has been there for about 200 years, from the British and the Russian, who took parts of Iran under control up to World War II. And after World War II, it was the US that stepped in and started supporting the Shah of Iran as their favorite dictator in the Middle East. There was a coup d’état against a popularly elected prime minister that had come in to nationalize Iranian oil. And that has really remained within the Iranian consciousness ever since, ever since 1953, and Iranians harbor deep mistrust for the US, that was seen as orchestrating a coup against their popularly elected leadership. And in 1979, when the Islamic Revolution took place, the biggest sort of fear of the Iranian people was a repeat of the coup d’état. And that’s why the—that’s a large reason why the hostage crisis took place. They took hostages to make sure that the US does not come in, invade, orchestrate another coup again. And that has remained the dynamic within the Iran-US relations: mistrust on both sides.
And at this point that the US does not have diplomatic relations, it really makes no sense for any administration to get political points for seeming like they’re standing up with some demonstrators somewhere in order to score points with their constituents here. Over the weekend—and what’s amazing is the way the media in the US has been really helping spin this for the Republican right wing. I mean, there were images on CNN and Fox over the weekend of President Obama, I think, buying ice cream for his daughters while the demonstrators in Iran were fighting for their democracy. And they were likening that to President Bush when he was playing golf right after he invaded Iraq and equating the two. It was like, how heartless could Obama be, when he could be—I don’t know what he could be doing in order to support Iranians. I think he did the best thing he could do in order to support the Iranians.






Login or Register to post comments.
And McCain has about zero credibility on everything...
You beat me to it.
In their world, what he says is very important to America and the world.
McCain has some credibility on crashing planes.
He crashed five aircraft in 7 years.
He logged 20 hours of combat time.
He received 30 medals for bombing civilians.
He has credibility on marrying well.
He is a credible adulterer.
He has credibility among the "Keating Five", a scandal which was characterized as the "most grievous ethics scandal in Senate history."
on the tensile strength of Depends.
Yes, the man who sang about bombing Iran is who we should all be paying attention to!! Yeah, right!
Excellent post, Heather!
when they went on there to criticize Obama. I pointed out that they are the same people who are always calling for killing all Iranians!! Piles of crap!! God, I hate 'em!!
Dumb dumb dumb
Dumb dumb McCain...
After what John McCain did during the election he should be ashamed of himself.
Words cannot express my gratitude to the Obama campaign team.
Americans, Iranians telling this violent old geezer to eat shit. Who's next, the North Koreans?
Unfortunately many North Koreans are political Zombies, with minds that are highly controlled by their government. Public dissension and protest in North Korea would take a new mind set from the population.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg
take away the vocals and it sounds like ZZ Top from Eliminator
... see in neoconspeak up is down and black is white. For example, "compassionate conservatism" means "f*ck you."
So when McCain said "bomb bomb bomb Iran" he really meant to say "I love love love Iran"
It is a common mistake...
For explaining that... It is all so very clear now....
;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ygvg3E54mg
I was wondering the other day whatever happened to transvision vamp! You just went up in the cool-o-meter.
However, that being said... I have no clue what that song has to do with the subject at hand so...
http://www.ratemyeverything.net/image/1219/0/...
Tue, 06/23/2009 - 11:12 — Tyler Durden
(H)e really meant to say "I love love love Iran"
Caffeine Whitdrawal Syndrome
How do you see a white drawing on white paper?
really hard.
LOL
Is that anything like severe impacted penile dyslexia?
I hope not.
It's like being "pro-life" and going out and murdering people?
just like serial adulterers and child molesters defending the "sanctity" of marriage and family. That sort of thing...
inability to sing songs or the MSM's crush on the right win,..er, GOP? We can still call them that, yes?
McCain's and the RNC's calls to support Iranian demonstrators is really a big "fuck you" to them. And when you consider that America taking demonstrators' side in this will result in much harsher retribution, its true.
and they're not fooling anyone. All they want to do is score cheap political points and drive down Obama's approval rating.
They would gladly bomb Iran and kill some of the very people they supposedly want Obama to support.
Didn't we just overwhelmingly REJECT him as President? I mean, if he WERE president, then I suppose his opinion would carry a bit of weight... but DUDE! He got his ASS handed to him. Why in the WORLD is ANYONE asking HIM about ANYTHING???
Because Bob Sheiffer looooves John McCain. I keep waiting for him to genuflect.
When I saw McCain's face on Shieffer's show, I thought, "WHY? Why are you hosting this LOSER on your show? Why not someone from the administration explaining why they are taking the position they have?" But no. Instead we have really badly reasoned, stupid stuff coming out of McCain, which is exactly the reason the American people rejected him in the first place.
I have yet to figure out the direction of television journalism, which is about 180 degrees from Walter Cronkite. And BTW, best wishes to Mr. Cronkite as he is gravely ill.
McCain got shot down in an airplane so in Shieffer's eyes that makes him not only presidential material, but maybe god like.
This morning McCain was on washington journal and he was followed by Shieffer. I couldn't help but wonder if they rode over together.
the ass that was handed to him was Sarah Palin.
She was just a piece of ass.
McCain = McIrrelevant
Decrepit dumb fucker.
Obama just has to realize that regardless of the stance he takes on this issue, he is going to be attacked from the right, and the misinformed.
Here is a perfect example of misinformation being spewed, Congressman Darrell Issa style...
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=1919
...when Buchanan, Will, Scarborough, and Noonan say your rantings about Obama handling of the Iran situation are nonsense, maybe you ought to stop and think. Think? Oh, wait...
Someone who explains what is occurring in Iran with some historical background. If only McCain and the crazy crowd would do the same.
I find it so interesting how neo-cons and their ilk like to cherry pick history. This whole situation is a prime example. It's like they think all of sudden Iranians were magically distrustful of the US in the past 20 years or so for no reason other than they supposedly "hated" our "freedom." It's like they forget everything that happened in the 1950s when the CIA placed the Shah into power over a democratically elected leader who wasn't willing to kowtow to US demands all the time.
One would think John McCain, who is older than dirt, would remember this, but he's just a prime example of conservative politicians who like to pick and choose what parts of history they choose to accept as reality. He's really only doing this for political reasons, which is extremely shameful. You would think that during something as momentous as what is occurring in Iran conservatives/politicians would put aside politics. However, that would be the rational and sensible thing to do, and I forget that republicans and conservatives are neither.
If the President had come out raising hell about Iran, then McCain would have bitched that he should have kept a cooler head on the subject.
Well, we have one more thing in common with the people of Iran, we all think McCain should just shut the fu*k up and eat the shit taco that Jon Stewart so lovingly told us about.
The President said a great thing today at the news conference. One reporter was grilling him about what was he going to do about Iran and the president said, I know you guys live in a 24 hour news cycle, but I don't. It was a beautiful moment as far as I was concerned. In other words he told them he knew they were looking for a quick headline, but he was much more serious about his work than he was about handing them that headline.
It's about time. Let the news media go hike with Mark Sanford on the AT.
While discussing the Iranian quagmire, let's not get too gushy over poor Mousavi who had possibly had the election "stolen" from him. He may be WORSE than Amadinejad!:
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?I...
Thanks for the link abby.
I had the feeling a few days ago we couldn't trust either side here. Best to pull back and deal with our own problems. But no, this is the middle east and it is our responsibility to MAKE these people into what we think they should be.
Here's a new one with the direct article about Mousavi:
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/spytalk/2009/06/m...
The will of the Iranian people is actually none of our business.
They should sort all this out on their own...but it's hell watchin it unfold....
I don't support either candidate because I am not a citizen of Iran, and there is no way I could form an opinion on either based on such small amounts of information on both. One thing I am certain of is there is far more at stake than just the results of an election. This has more to do with how the power brokers of the major industrialized countries can get their hands and control on Iran's oil not to mention logistic implications for moving the oil from Afghanistan and the Caspian Sea.
..on anything "Iran". We don't know who we can trust. The people in the street seem to want a true democracy but know better than to come to us for it. And, there's this Mousavi guy who probably hates us as much as Ahmadinejad or more.
Carter should've been more aggressive although I do credit him for attempting a rescue in spite of its failure. But Reagan, I gave up on Iran when Reagan gave them arms for the hostages.
Iran-Contra, how dare he!
Why do Americans like you believe that how we feel should matter in a sovereign nation's election consequences?
Old habits are hard to break I guess.
and those two DO hate our govt.
But American people, not one bit.
When commentors make statements like "we don't know who we can trust" or "Mousavi hates us more than Ahmadinejad" and "Carter should've been more aggressive" perpetuates the tired old bullshit that it's all about the U.S. all the time. It's not our nation or election process.
Why would any Iranian leader hate the US other than for the fact that we helped topple their democracy in the 50s and instantiate the represive Sha regime instead, only to experiment a reactionary revolution led by insane religious extremists, whose archnemesis was armed to the teeth (by among other people the US) to engage in an 8-yr long war of attrition and horror... after which the US celebrated by shooting down an Iranian jet liner full of almost 300 innocent civilians... other than that, why would any Iranian have anything against us.
Jeezzz what a country of grumpy people!
You may select a turd from toilet one or a turd from toilet two. In Iranian politics only certain types are allowed to float to the top.
IOW, STFU Grandpa.
As has been pointed out other places, Republican condemnation of all things Obama is their only winning strategy. Of 4 possible outcomes -- (1) Obama succeeds/Republicans cheer him, (2) Obama succeeds/Republicans condemn him, (3) Obama fails/Republicans cheer him, (4) Obama fails/Republicans condemn him -- only the final one offers any hope for Republicans regaining power, at disastrous expense to the entire US.
We see something very similar happening regarding Iran, with the extra added bonus that Republican interference in Iranian politics could yield exactly the sort of hopelessly repressed, internationally dangerous Iranian state that would most benefit Republicans. This is the sort of destructive game-playing that might eventually allow Republicans to insist we should've launched an illegal preemptive strike against Iran all along.
Iran.
Why does this rightwing clown have any credibilty. This man's words need to be hollered from the hightest mountain. McBush is a royal pain in the ass.
Now he is being booked all over the MSM!
I have to conclude that the MSM has no regard for rational discourse and no regard for healthy politics and no regard for the welfare of the political process.
Instead, they're going to hang around with their old, disgraced, and in some case criminal Republican friends. Shameful i say. Flat out distasteful to watch.
What else could it be?
Obama maintains COOL... does right thing.
Republican SHOOTS SELF IN FOOT... blames Democrats... goes on TV.
Login or Register to post comments.