Sunday, October 4, 2009

Is Ahmadinejad from Jewish ancestry?

I don't have much to add to my previous post. But since according to Haa'retz, Ex-Mossad chief considers Ahmadinejad greatest gift of Israel, perhaps I should just change the title: Ahmadinejad Bastard child of zionism?!

Of course, before this news became "popular", people of Iran have been suspecting a collusion between Ahmadinejad and Israel, and chanting in metro to congratulate the marriage of Basij & Israel!! Needless to say, his religious background is not interesting to me!

What is fascinating is that another conservative anti-reformist, anti-Israeli loud-mouth Habibollah Asgar-Owladi-e Mosalman is also a jewish convert! The "Mosalman" at the end of his name is to ensure he is not mistaken with the non-converted Asgaroladis! (his family converted to Islam during Reza Shah) AsgarOladi, with a wealthy background rooted in Tehran Bazaar, considers himself a follower of Navab-Safavi's path, a radical Islamic fanatic who ran a terrorist group Fadayeean-e Islam, and played an instrumental role in derailing Iran's democracy by participating in the Islamist contribution to the American Coup of 1953.

Those who keep banging the drum of American Coup of 1953, should be reminded that Khomeini and his clerical teachers and predecessors HATED Mosaddegh; and that he Islamists who are now represented by the likes of Ahmadinejad and Asgaroladi helped Americans in 1953.

It is ironic that Khamenei demanded Obama to apologize for the 1953 Coup D'etat given that: (As I recall going to school in Iran)

Unable to exorcise Mosaddeq's ghost, the Islamic Republic has tried to contain it. High school textbooks allocate twelve pages to Kuchek Khan, four pages to Modarres, another four to Shaykh Nuri, and less than two to Mosaddeq -- about the same as given to Navab Safavi, the Fedayan-e Islam leader. Meanwhile, the mass media elevate Ayatollah [Abul Qasem] Kashani as the real leader of the oil nationalization campaign, depicting Mosaddeq as merely the ayatollah's hanger-on. Even more significant, the regime portrays the 1951-53 period as yet another example of leftist betrayal, arguing that the nationalist movement failed because it was stabbed in the back by the Tudeh [communist party of Iran].
If Mosaddeq fell because of a "stab in the back," the stab came not so much from the Left as from the religious Right. From the very beginning, the clerical establishment had arrayed itself against the National Front. Ayatollah Behbehani, the senior cleric in Tehran and the grandson of the famous constitutional leader, had openly sided with the shah. The substantial influx of CIA money into the Tehran bazaar on the eve of the 1953 coup became known as "Behbehani dollars." Even more important, Ayatollah Borujerdi -- a staunch royalist and the leading marja-e taqlid from 1944 until his death in 1961 -- had tried to stem Mosaddeq's popularity by issuing an edict forbidding the clergy from participating in politics. He epitomized the conservative clergy, who claimed to be apolitical but in fact bolstered the royalist regime. Ruhani, Khomeini's main biographer, tries to explain Borujerdi's behavior by claiming that the "imperialists" had planted "agents" around him to isolate him from society.
(Highly recommended source: Ervand Abrahamian)

(Addendum) I should mention that the Green's (Mowj Camp) consider this another "media" distraction designed by the Coup D'etat forces: that this religious frenzy redirects attention from Ahmadinejad's hateful behavior and points the blame to the Jewish minority in Iran, fueling anti-semetic flames while diminishing attention to the responsibility of Ahmadinejad backers in messing up the Iranian's affairs.


Anonymous said...

Hi Naj,

The issue of converting to a dominate religion or force -anywhere in the world- is not new. The history is literally filled with this story. Some people convert out of conviction, some out of fear for their lives or work, or similar.

Most however, never really convert. They keep their old and real faith (and if they know a trade, the secrets of their trade) always with them as a sacred treasure and they transfer their true faith and knowledge from one generation to next. These people very soon become a minority and in order to safeguard their values (and what they think is the truth) form secret societies. In doing so they become the perfect candidate to be exploited by big politics and powers.

Iran, due to its long history, vastness, multi-cultrasim and multi-nationalism has been always a prim example of the above.

I know of Mullahs whose parents were Zoroastrians. In my opinion the ancestors of Ahmadinejad, Moshaii and like, never really gave up their old faith (be judaism or else) Their children now are following the same path and they have the power of the government on their side too.

Naj said...


I just added a link that talks exactly about the same thing. Mehdi Khazali is telling the story of a jewish man who has changed his name to keep his wealth, and acts far more zealously as a shitted, than does a real shiite fanatic!

Anonymous said...

Iran has always been very tolerant towards other religions in all their history (except after 1979). This is because Iran have had periods where they have been invaded by people who are ethnically and religiously different from then and the people have leant to live with these people.

IDHolm said...

Iran's 'new Hitler' is/was a J*w?

.. what silliness next?


Notice that theAge has a differently slanted headline, "Could ... actually be a Jew?" (with a "?") as opposed to tele,UK's "revealed to have Jewish past;" a bald statement. The two headlines, referring to the same item/event, have divergent meanings.

What they're both talking about is A's previous family-name, gleaned, so they allege, from a picture of A's passport.

Q1: What's in a name? A: It is alleged, that a) the name was changed some time in the 50s, i.e. when A was still 'at foot', and (obviously 'the hook') b) the name is allegedly a J*wish one. Gasp!

Q2: So what? Well, no matter what, the story is 'getting legs;' I did a few searches, they show that the item itself seems to have originated with the tele,UK datelined 2Oct, at the time of this writing, a text selection gets about 1,520 hits (your kilometre-age may vary.)


Another search I did turned up the fact, pointed out by a humble blogger: "Too good to check," that this 'revelation' is not exactly new; you could look back to 2005 here, say.

Q3: What changed?

A: Perhaps the US talking (civilly) with Iran in Geneva...

Since then, the Zs have been acting like a turned-over beehive, see the first couple of antiwar headlines, say:

UN Staffers Say Iran Has Data to Make a Nuke (Note: NYT; recall Judith Miller & her lies? No spot-changes expected here.)

Israel Names Russians It Says Are Helping Iran Build Nuclear Bomb (Q: Who would take seriously anything Israel said? I mean, they're not exactly detached, not exactly trustworthy...)

But, but - the IAEA and the '07 NIE, plus lots of people who should know - say that there is nooo evidence - and the CIA, say, ort'a know? (Note: This is *not* me saying that I would believe anything the CIA says, nor any of the raging hoards of other lying Amis either.) But allegations of an Iranian A-bomb are so, so - well, last week, daaarlings!


It's simply Mossad/Z-propagandists gone berserk. And they are pretty simple; who else could keep murdering to steal land for 61+ years, and claim to have the most honourable military on the planet, eh? (Haw!)

The Zs never stop lying and they won't stop their murdering for land-theft either - unless the rest of the world gets some guts, and makes effective moves to reverse the ugly, thieving dispossession of Palestine. Ramb-O-Bama could help; he/the US could stop arming/supporting the Z-criminals.


You're barking up the wrong tree, Naj. A is trying hard to save Iran; the I-wanna-iPod greensleeves will sell Iran out - worse actually, enable the US to plunder Iran - and next-to-no royalties for the looted 'patrimony' (just as now, in Iraq.) But you don't have to listen to me; just do what you want - I know you will anyway. Cheers.

Naj said...


There area few factual errors in your comment that I must point out:

Iran has always been very tolerant towards other religions in all their history (except after 1979).
Incorrect! Iran has been tolerant towards religious minorities AFTER revolution as well--as long as those religious minorities have stayed out of politics. Khomeini issued a decree to ensure the safety and security of religious minorities. Iranian constitution guarantees freedom of belief. Zoroasterian, Jeweish, Christian and EVEN Bahai minorities are by and large free to own businesses and have normal lives.

This is because Iran have had periods where they have been invaded by people who are ethnically and religiously different from then and the people have leant to live with these people.

Here I am not sure if your comment also incorporates the fact of the savage tyranny that Persians have suffered under these invading groups; so I point it out.

Persians have been advocating freedom of religion and practice BEFORE Islam. The Achamenid empire was built on respect for religious practices of the people of areas that were conquered by persians. This is why the Persians are the only empire who gave the Jews freedom to practice their religion and even sent far to built a temple for them.

However, when Arabs invaded Iran, religious freedom was taken away: people were FORCED to convert to Islam or face death and discrimination. In appearance they did, most converted to Islam but continued practicing their own traditions that gave rise to what is today shiism and soufism. The next invasion was by another group of uncivilized tribes: Mongols! They too killed and mimed as many as they could.

In fact, every time a new group of savages attacked Iran, they fist targeted the mosques! Ruining them and building on top of them!

Iranian's tolerance for religion is not because they have "learned" to live with these invading forces, but because they have had to 1) HIDE their own beliefs and 2) slowly TEACH the invaders a few lessons in tolerance. This has not been a voluntary learning, this has been more a case of survival!

Naj said...


Go screw around elsewhere buddy!

The only thing that merits a response from your comment is that "True, rumors of Ahmadinejad's Jewish background are NOT NEW." In fact if you bothered to read the post, rather than barking up your stupid propaganda you will have noticed I brought this up way before UK tele; and the sources I quoted way before I posted on it :)

The Ahmadinejadist-troll you are proving yourself to be has also ignored what is IMPORTANT in the post I made:

HISTORICAL PROOF that Ahmadinejad and Islamists have been curtailing anything that has ever been good for Iran--always in cahoot with the so-called enemies of Iran!

I maintain that the nuclear story is a red herring! And what blindfolded ideological idiots like yourself are not willing to look at is how DESPERATELY Ahmadinejad's kissing Obama's ass and how FAR he has retracted from his first loud-barking stances!

IDHolm, unless you prove to me that you can read persian press and know Iran from personal experience, unless you bring to my attention PERSIAN sources for your "research" you have neither any authority nor any knowledge to advise me ;)

Anonymous said...

[quote]... EVEN Bahai minorities are by and large free to own businesses and have normal lives. [/quote]

Naj, I don't think the Bahai's enjoy religious freedoms in Iran,in fact, the regime has been killing a lot of them after the revolution. Their kids can't get into universities because they are Bahai. Currently their leaders are in prison for absolutely nothing, and they have been in prison for over a year!

why should the religion freedoms be conditioned on staying out of politics? Why should Shias be able to enter politics but not other religions? Aren't they all Iranians? Don't they have the same right to be part of governing Iran?

A lot Jews left the country after the revolution and the number of Jews, although more than any other Islamic country, is still a fraction of the level before the revolution. The good thing for Jews left in Iran is that they have become more religious!

Yes Iran have suffered under those invasions, but my point was until the invasion of the Arabs, Persians have always been able to keep some part of their identity.

Like Ferdowsi wrote in the Shahnameh, Persia never became the same again after the Arab invasion that is why he did not write much after the Arab invasion.

Cyrus the Great was tolerant even in those times! I wonder what has happened to us in this generation.

Naj said...


why should the religion freedoms be conditioned on staying out of politics? Why should Shias be able to enter politics but not other religions? Aren't they all Iranians? Don't they have the same right to be part of governing Iran?

You are absolutely right! Of course they do!

And yes Bahai's are the most "constitutionally discriminated against" minority in Iran--maybe because they are "progressive" muslims!! I think if they were not religious, if they were an atheist cult, they will have been tolerated better!

That said, I many Bahai friends in Iran; and one of my best friends who is Bahai, after living close to 8 years in Europe decided that she was less discriminated in Iran than in Europe; went back, started a business, was campaigning for us to go vote, and although in this current post-election situation is not expressing any political opinions anymore, she is happy with her business which is picking up!

I went to school with Bahais ... and although discrimination was "systematized" I NEVER heard of or saw any assault directed at them by religious students, not by "ISlamist" principals.

Also, they had freedom to go to university, only if they wrote "muslim" (even a lie would have been acceptable) in application forms.

Demeur said...

History certainly does repeat itself. In the case of Iran I don't think it's so much an issue of religion as it is money and power. I think if you'll trace the money trail you'll get to the power. Iran is unique in that there is that strange balancing act between the secular and the religious. As we've seen in the past it's always easy to find a minority group and label them the enemy. It takes the focus off any short comings of the leaders and unifies the general population.
I say this only as an objective observation. And thank you for giving us your views and observations.

Unknown said...

If no converted Jews ever gave up their religion, there would be a lot more Jews in the world, particularly in Iran.

I actually agree that whether or not it is true that AN's father was Jewish the whole brouhaha surrounding the story is indeed anti-Semitic and a way to blame the Jewish minority for the behavior of the appointed president.

Naj said...

Demeur, Tori

Yes. unfortunately in Iran, "enemy-finding" and comspiracy seeking is national pass time!

But what I find beautiful is how rapidly this generation of youth bounces out of the out-dated blame-the-brits and more recent blame-Israel and gets back on track of: So what?! EVEN if they are conspiring--and I will be surprised if they don't; as geopolitically Iran intersects with their interests--, we are responsible for our own actions and decisions!

German said...

Dear Naj,

thank you very much for your Mossadegh-linkg giving your reader(s)/me the opportunity to get familiar with some elements of intriguing Mossadegh-politics and the background of the coup.

Two phenomena are striking:

a) the mechanism of this coup reminds one of the mechanism of the Pinochet-coup

b) the reproach for support from abroad seems to be a, if not THE, politically relevant, constant, "killer argument"/hang-up

[reminding me of course - apologies ! - of Germany during the Cold War, where whenever you dared to deviate slightly from established thinking either in your opinion or your hairlength or your preferred music ... or ... you immediately were suspected of being a Soviet agent and were friendly asked to leave the country and move over to "commmunist" East Germany or Moscow - politics pervading German society in a nightmarishly psychopathic way - unimaginable - to say the least]

By the way, Your general political/social analysis seems to be decisively plausible [to a non-Iranian outsider like me].

Take care and all the best


Naj said...

my pleasure, German!

andri said...

Some Sunni believe that Shiite and Jews has good relation. we cannot denied that Ahmadinejad has Jewish ancestor

Naj said...


Are you from Indonesia?

Having Jewish ancestry is neither a crime, nor a proof that one is "evil"! In Ahmadinejad's case:

A) If you are an Iranian, who is appalled by the advantages that Israel has gotten from Ahmadinejad's behavior, and the corner Ahmadinejad has painted the country in with his anti-Israeli rhetoric, then you will pay attention to his ancestry BECAUSE it is another evidence of Ahmadinejad's hypocrisy.

B) If you are the UK Telegraph, or from opposition to Ahmadinejad, then you will use this news to destroy Ahmadinejad's base amongst his Arab supporters who care about such things!

C) If you are Ahmadinejad, you use this kind of a news to get on the front page and immortalize yourself ... "no business like show business"--that's Ahmadinejad's legacy!

Jerry said...

A-Jad is always good for a laugh. But unfortunately now he’ll be forced to exterminate himself.

ibadah said...

Hi itch,

see this.

whack your post

Unknown said...

@Naj, That's the Iran I found so interesting! The one filled with people who acknowledged both conspiracies and personal responsibility and agency.