Readings — From the February 2008 issue
- Current Issue
SIGN IN to access the Harper’s archive
ALERT: Usernames and passwords from the old Harpers.org will no longer work. To create a new password and add or verify your email address, please sign in to customer care and select Email/Password Information. (To learn about the change, please read our FAQ.)
From “Oliver Stone’s Presence in Iran: Opportunity or Threat?” by Elham Rajabpur, published December 3 in the Iranian daily Keyhan News. Translated from the Farsi by the Open Source Center, a program of the United States Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
They say that a wise person is not bitten in the same spot twice. But it has become our custom to be bitten several times in the same spot and still not learn our lesson.
I am referring to the request by Oliver Stone, Hollywood’s famous director, to make a documentary on our country’s president, Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the mere proposal of which has amazed and worried many friends of Islamic Iran’s honor and power and reputation.
In light of the history of measures by Western media against Iran’s Islamic system and the dominant influence of global Zionism on that media empire, being optimistic about Oliver Stone’s request or hoping that he refrains from deliberate manipulations would be an irreparable mistake.
Oliver Stone is the director of the film Alexander, about Alexander of Macedon. Because of Alexander’s overthrow of the Achaemenid dynasty and the savage mass killings carried out by his army, he is hated by Iranians. Throughout his film World Trade Center, Stone tried to show 9/11 as an attack by the world of Islam against the West. The Doors commemorated one of America’s most perverted, half-mad singers, who enjoyed urinating on the heads of his fans during concerts. JFK drew a picture of John F. Kennedy as a political saint, as ordered by America’s Democratic Party. The film played an undeniable role in Bill Clinton’s successful run for the White House. In Nixon, an overthrown and warmongering president who initiated several conflicts is shown as an innocent and blameless individual. All these facts leave no room for doubt concerning Oliver Stone’s allegiance to America’s key policies, even if some groups, out of ignorance, call him an independent filmmaker.
How can we voluntarily go under this filmmaker’s knife? The outcome of such a venture will not be a realistic portrayal of Ahmadinejad the intellectual and peacemaker but a portrait of Ahmadinejad according to Stone, Hollywood, and global Zionism.