A Quote by Mir-Hossein Mousavi

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's dictatorial ways have hurt Iran's image across the globe and could be a prelude to dictatorship. — © Mir-Hossein Mousavi
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's dictatorial ways have hurt Iran's image across the globe and could be a prelude to dictatorship.
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claims there are no homosexuals in Iran, just like there are no gay conservatives in the US.
The Cold War philosophy of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD), which prevented the former Soviet Union and the United States from using the nuclear weapons they had targeted at each other, would not apply to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Iran. For him (Ahmadinejad), Mutual Assured Destruction is not a deterrent, it is an inducement.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran ... in one shot on his website he appears to be dressed only in flowers. Oh - here's the page, you'll see what I mean.
Democrats should run Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for president. He's more coherent than Dennis Kucinich, he dresses like their base, he's more macho than John Edwards, and he's willing to show up at a forum where he might get one hostile question - unlike the current Democratic candidates for president who won't debate on Fox News Channel. He's not married to an impeached president, and the name Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is surely no more frightening than B. Hussein Obama.
Among other things, Netanyahu is a master of timing. His emphasis on irrationality coincides with the annual burst of anti-Israel, anti-U.S. malevolence, delivered from the podum of the United Nations by Iran's bombastic and somewhat clownish president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
I really believe that actually Ahmadinejad undermines Iran far more than he enhances Iran's status. And I think we have to go back to what FDR said, you know, speak softly and carry a big stick. I think Iran under Ahmadinejad, they speak loudly and carry a small stick.
The legitimacy of the leadership depends on what that country thinks of its leaders. When we lay off, more and more Iranians tend to be critical of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The more abusive we are and the more pressure we put on them, the more nationalism fuses with fundamentalism in Iran.
I can't speak for all Iranians, but I think that many of them would be uncomfortable with Ahmadinejad if Iran had nuclear weapons and he had his finger on the button. But the reality is that Iran's system of government is actually very complex. It has a lot of checks and balances, and neither Ahmadinejad nor any Iranian president would ever have his finger on the button. There are too many people involved in a decision of that magnitude.
For what is delusion but the prelude to hurt. And what is hurt but the prelude to rage.
Rex Tillerson is 's in the business of exploring and finding oil across the globe. You have to go where the oil is at, and the fact that he actually has a relationship with people like Vladimir Putin and others across the globe is something that shouldn't be - we shouldn't be embarrassed by it, it's something that I think could be a huge advantage to the United States.
The most important individual in the Iran is not President Ahmadinejad. It's the supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. He was elected, but we're not talking about free and fair elections in Iran. There are certain vetting processes which take place.
An interesting thing about the religious people who run Iran is that one of their problems with Ahmadinejad, who they thought would be one of their guys because he's so religious, is that he actually has some really nutty ideas about religion. He's too religious. He's too literal. I mean, there are plenty of people in Iran who like Ahmadinejad's religious beliefs, just as there are plenty of Christian fundamentalists in America who like George W. Bush's beliefs. But there are also plenty of people who are very uncomfortable with his overt religiosity.
I think whenever Ahmadinejad opens his mouth in forums, especially in front of the U.N. General Assembly, those that are listening, especially Western officials, European, American, even Chinese and Russian officials, I think, after listening to Ahmadinejad, they have even less confidence that there exists a mature political leadership in Iran which is amenable to some type of a diplomatic compromise.
Every movement that seeks to enslave a country, every dictatorship or potential dictatorship, needs some minority group as a scapegoat which it can blame for the nation's troubles and use as a justification of its own demands for dictatorial powers. In Soviet Russia, the scapegoat was the bourgeoisie; in Nazi Germany, it was the Jewish people; in America, it is the businessmen.
A hurt body and mind aren't just like a dictatorship; they are a dictatorship. There is no tyrant as merciless as pain, no despot so cruel as confusion.
There is, of course, nothing wrong in a program that aims to please everybody, except that as a rule it is a prelude to dictatorship.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!