There was a conference recently in Iran about the Holocaust, sponsored by that country’s President, as an exercise in “Freedom of Speech”. A gathering of Holocaust deniers and former Ku Klux Klan heads.
I find it rather hypocritical that while the conference was touted of one for freedom of speech, any negative report about the government in Iran, from within Iran, would not meet with the same enthusiasm by the government to “speak the truth”. As reported by a BBC reporter, it would seem that the Iranian government feels completely comfortable when freedom of speech is used to help those who deny the greatest man-made catastrophe in humankind, yet if that same reporter were to make a negative comment about the goverment and publish it, their fear of his effect on public opinion would lead them to censor him/her.
I have a strange feeling that the president of Iran has gone beyond even that which is acceptable to his people. This is a country which is quite unlike any other in the Middle East. Iran is not an arab country, yet it is often lumped in with them as such by those who do not understand its distinct character. While women agree to be covered in public, once inside, they take off their veils in discos that would rival the best the West has to offer. So while acceptance of the law is overt in public, its refusal is covertly done for fear of reprisals. Is this the president’s definition of “freedom”?
Although I have no personal connection to Iran, I firmly believe that its people will one day rise strong enough to permit a change of course so that it can take back a rightful and respected position in the world society. This leader is an anomaly in its history and the same students which rose up against their restraints under the Shah will one day lead the same type of revolution against the same type of strangling authority which deny them true freedom of speech, and freedom of life.
Sass