Thursday, September 25, 2008

Iran

This is coolbert:

"when someone says they intend to KILL YOU, believe them!!" [Holocaust survivor]

[given the fact that the famous American military man David Hackworth, a number of years ago, declared Iran to be the one nation that posed the greatest threat to the U.S., primarily from the stand-point of ideological hatred, this blog entry is pertinent!]

Listening to National Public Radio this afternoon.

They are interviewing this American/Iranian record producer [?], Hooman Majd who is the interpreter for President Ahmadinejad of Iran for when the latter visits and speaks before the United Nations [U.N.]

Man is talking about the public face/private face of the Iranian populace.

What we see on the outside, so this record producer tells us, we must not take so literally. The Iranian is just a lot more mellow and contented than we tend and have been led to believe!

Those Friday prayer services where the masses chant “DEATH TO AMERICA” - - happen very infrequently, and when they do occur, the participants are active in only a half-hearted manner. Most of what occurs and what we in the U.S. see on television is hyperbole and not serious?

And the word margh, in Farsi, meaning DEATH! DO NOT TAKE IT SO LITERALLY! More properly can be interpreted as, “stop your policies”! The word must be understood in the modern cultural context?

President Ahmadinejad for instantce. When he spoke at Columbia Universtiy a year ago and said, “there are no homosexuals in Iran!”! Again, do not take him so literally! What he meant was that there IS A NOT A POLITICALLY ACTIVE “GAY RIGHTS” MOVEMENT IN IRAN!!

Well, it is, the tension that exists between the U.S. and Iran, you can see, all a matter of quibbling over translation, semantics, cultural context, etc.?

And that chanting of “DEATH OF AMERICA!!" I am glad it is infrequent. And I am glad the participants are going at it only in half-hearted manner. This all I am glad about!! I would not want it to be otherwise than infrequent and half-hearted!

Well, diplomacy is quite often centered about the “matter” of translation, semantics, and cultural context, quibbling over fine points to get the essentials, the basics, and beyond that too “just right”!!

WARS HAVE BEEN FOUGHT OVER FIGHTING WORDS!!

Indiscreet language designed to provoke! Such as the Ems Telegram. Precipitated to some degree the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. Made public in a calculated manner by Bismarck. An original and “doctored” version of the document exists!! Language in one is not the same as the language in the other. One to provoke, the other to mollify?

No less a figure than the polymath Leibnitz realized that diplomatic language, translations, semantics, cultural context, all played a vital role in negotiations between nations. Translations, semantics, quibbling over cultural context of words QUITE OFTEN BEING A STUMBLING BLOCK TO SUCCESSFUL DIPLOMACY BEING CONDUCTED!! Leibnitz, for a goodly part of his illustrious career [in a variety of capacities], served as a diplomat and courier to the royalty and ruling elites of Europe. Did engage in diplomatic negotiations at a not so infrequent intervals.

LEIBNITZ ACTUALLY DEVISED A SYMBOLIC, LOGICAL LANGUAGE THAT COULD BE USED BY DIPLOMATS OF ALL NATIONS!! AN INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE, NOT VERBAL [??] THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH TRANSLATIONS, SEMANTICS, CULTURAL DEFINITIONS AND CONTEXT, ETC.!!

A LANGUAGE THAT COULD GO A LONG WAY TO PREVENTING WARS? SO THOUGHT LEIBNITZ?

TOO, it is wrong for the Iranian leadership, regardless of their motivation or context, to stir up the “masses” as they do, even if occurring on “occasion”? Sometimes, to the detriment of everyone, “emotion clouds reason” is absolutely true. A series of unanticipated events can be set off with consequences that no one wants!!

At least - - that is the unfortunate image - - that has been created - - in the minds of many Americans!!

coolbert.

1 comment:

Joseph Moroco said...

Yes, the mullahs provoke and I suspect the interpreter is dissembling.

The thing is, the Iranian people do not like the mullahs. That's why they have to approve who runs for the parliament.

You want to unite Iran, invade.

Of course, we no longer have an army to do that with.