Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Foreign Policy & News Iran launches Holocaust miniseries

Iran launches Holocaust miniseries

"It is Iran's version of "Schindler's List," a miniseries telling the tale of an Iranian diplomat in Paris who helps Jews escape the Holocaust - and people around the country are riveted, tuning in every week to catch the latest episode.

That's surprising enough in a country where hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has questioned whether the Holocaust even took place. What's even more surprising is that government media produced the series, and is airing it on state-run television.

Even without Ahmadinejad's past comments, the series would be a surprise. The Holocaust is rarely mentioned in state media in Iran, school textbooks don't discuss it and Iranians have little information about it. "


Interesting.

Interesting indeed, Schlack. I found very few other sources covering this huge event (David Horowitz in the Jerusalem Post informs us that it is the most expensive drama ever produced by Iranian TV), and they weave an intriguing tale. Horowitz, of course, stands in the forefront of the perplexed finger-pointers:
Horowitz doesn't ignore this juicy opportunity to tell some more whoppers about his favorite embodiment of evil:
It's remarkable to me that a man who is so woefully misinformed about someone would consider himself qualified to predict that person's motives and aspirations.

Or, maybe he just has a vendetta.

The AP story reports that
But, the AP insists
Interestingly, the point was not lost on the Wall Street Journal, which is responsible for starting this smattering of interest.
The WSJ, again much to my surprise, also points out that Holocaust Denial is not an official policy among the real Iranian leadership:
Horowitz derides the fact that Iran's Jews have "only" one representative in the Iranian Parliament. In a country of 75 Million citizens, I would say a guaranteed rep for a group of 25,000 people is pretty darn good.

Thanks for the post, Schlack. Lots of food for thought here.

I recently read a very good book the title of which I have forgotten but it is about a Jewish man who goes on an archelogical trip through the Middle East using the Bible as his guide book. In the book I was suprised to learn that one of the largest synagogues in the Middle East is in Tehran. Not only that but there are several synagogues in Iran. It was also a country where he did not feel uncomfortable wearing his yarmulke in public. Another interesting fact was that the big synagogue was located on Palestine St.

We have been led to believe a number of things about Iran that are simply not true. Iran has historically been more like the US than any other ME country, inclduing Israel. That stupid stunt with the embassy hostages was unfortunately successful in pulling our chain and the rest is history.

I know a number of people who go back and forth and who present a very different picture than what we are fed.

I've been away for a few days, but I'm reading on the WWW about a proposed visit to the U.N. Assembly in New York by Iran's President Ahmadinejad. Anyone here know if this is true?

If it is, I find this particular AP photo a little ironic, given the fact the guy is planning a trip to the U.S. in a day or so -

Parade Hosted by President Ahmadinejad on 22 Sept '07





What's up with those "Down with U.S.A.", "Down with Esrail" banners right before a visit to the U.S.?

Ahmadinejad seems capable of spouting extreme good sense on some occasions and extreme nonsense on others. I know it's not politically proper to admire a leader whose nation has been declared an enemy by the State but sometimes he seems so sensible and wise. Other times he seems like, well, a republican.

ROFL, Greger.

Mal, recalling that the US provided only covert support for Iran during the Iran-Iraq War, but openly supported Iraq, to the point of providing raw materials and technology for producing WMD's and logistics to help deliver them, it should come as no surprise that there is some, ah, ill will surrounding those particular events.

Recalling as well that it was Iraq that invaded Iran, and the US stood by gleefully whilst the two nations tore each other almost unto death, whereas ten years later, when Iraq invaded Kuwait for not dissimilar reasons, the US immediately deployed all of its military and diplomatic might to crush the incursion, there may be a sense on Iran's part that they are less than favored by US policy.

And yet, as Phil implies, in Iran just as in almost all other civilized nations on earth, the citizens seem to be able to make the distinction between ordinary Americans and the political leadership that wreaked so much misery upon their nation, from the overthrow of Mossadegh to the current sanctions. I recall a not-long-ago visit to Iran by a peace delegation including a representative of the Quaker organization AFSC. Their report is very enlightening. I recommend it.

An opening for peace with Iran

BTW welcome back Mal. Your contributions to the boards are always appreciated.

World diplomacy is virtually dead. It's almost indistinguishable between so-called good and evil goverments. As far as being able to define the character, desires, and aspirations of the citizens of other countries...welp, those elements seemed to be a complete refection of the leaders of any repsective government.

For most citizens of the world, they will never be travelers and explorers of other cultures. They are, for the most part, slaves to the definitions bestowed on them by government propaganda or the world medias failing to convey the true realities of what others think, feel, and how they are influenced to form opinions and beliefs about the rest of the world.

The good ole U.S. of A. is no exception.

Without genuine dialogue between all nations, problems can't be collectively and mutually defined. When critical world problems aren't being defined...then there obviously will never be solutions.

Steve,

I agree with you that many citizens both in Iran and America are able to make the distinction between ordinary citizens and the foreign policy decisions of their elected leaders. Additionally, it’s also true that America got involved in Iranian politics on behalf of the Brit’s, but why is it that we don’t see any “Death to Britain” banners displayed during those Presidential parades in Tehran? Why is it that so many Americans feel they should be ashamed of their past foreign policy decisions without taking a careful examination of the current foreign policy of the nation we seem to be apologizing for in the first place?

Does Iran really have a legitimate beef with America because of something that happened on behalf of Britain, America and indeed many Iranians several decades considering her own history of empire & military conquest of other nations? After the Embassy takeover, one would think many of the rational radicals (an oxymoron?) might have determined the slate to be clean, given their own nations past empire & current foreign policy regarding intervening in other nations such as Israel & Lebanon.

Given all of the criticism that our current President still receives from labeling Iran part of the “Axis of Evil” six years ago, can you imagine the outcry if he or any other sitting American President routinely hosted military style demonstrations which called for the destruction of any other nation such as Ahmadinejad has?

Just thinking out loud, Steve.


BTW - Thanks for the welcome back. I always enjoy reading your posts as well.

His visit is actually to the UN, which of coure is in the US. He will also make a visit to Columbia University (NYC) but was denied permission to visit ground zero.