Rouhani's words: Behind the verbiage
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Friday, Oct. 11, 2013, 8:57 p.m.
Before anyone embraces Iranian President Hassan Rouhani as a kinder, gentler Israel-hater, his words of late deserve considerably more scrutiny.
Consider Mr. Rouhani's so-called reversal (from predecessor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad) in “denouncing” the Holocaust, as reported by CNN. Based on a transcript of exactly what he said, provided by the Iranian Fars News Agency, Rouhani didn't denounce anything.
“There, what the Nazis did is condemned, (but) the aspects that you talk about, clarification of these aspects, is a duty of historians and researchers. I am not a history scholar.”
Talk about a tap dance to a non-answer.
Neither is there anything “sheepish” in Rouhani's leadership of Iran's Supreme National Security Council from 1989 through 2003. As Helle Dale documents for The Heritage Foundation, that encompasses the murder of 85 people at a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires and the deaths of 19 U.S. soldiers in the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia.
Rouhani's so-called “charm offensive” comes on the heels of President Obama's indecisive, ineffectual “red-line” response to Syria's Bashar al-Assad. The U.S. fumbled the ball to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who not only ran with it but did an obnoxious end-zone dance on the op-ed page of The New York Times.
And Rouhani wants U.S. considerations? He deserves none until his words, backed up by action, translate into something meaningful.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ObamaCare ‘rates’ & reality
- A union’s distress
- Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
- Alle-Kiski Tuesday takes
- Greensburg Tuesday takes