Iran's "sacred guest traditions"?

Question

The traditions that Iranians say were violated during their president's visit to Columbia Univ., where were they back in 1979 when a group of students, including future President Ahmadinejad, backed by the Iranian government, kidnapped and forcibly held American diplomatic workers? They were not only invited guests in Iran but supposedly protected by international law. The same law which protected President Ahmadinejad from ANY threats while in THIS country. Do these "sacred" traditions ONLY apply when Iranians decide they should be?

Micheal P. - It was this diplomatic immunity that the prisoners was supposed to be enjoying as well.

Angelkimia - I did not intend to imply that ALL Iranians thought this way but the official government opinion has been reported to be this.

By the way, if it matters to anyone. I believe the president of Columbia Univ. WAS rude as well. If this was his aim he should not have invited President Ahmadinehad to speak.

choori - The polite thing to do with a rude guest is to ask him to leave not hold him in your home at gunpoint.

Answer 1

Why do you see 1979 incident just as you like to see? Yes American diplomatic workers were guests in Iran but they were not good guests at all. In 1953 these guests overthrew the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED Iranian leader, Mohammed Mossadegh. Definitely that’s not a suitable behavior for a guest. But Iranians didn’t do anything to revenge these BAD GUESTS. These guests did many other things and hurt Iranians -their host- but I'll tell just the most important one: supporting Shah to kill Iranians because the Iranians didn’t want that dictator (shah) to rule them anymore. So if they were your guest what would you do with them? But Iranians kept respecting them as guest even after the revolution. Can you imagine how did they respond Iranians extraordinary hospitality? They spied on Iranians. This kind of behavior was not bearable anymore. The students were very angry so they took over the embassy (and there is no evidence to show they were supported by the Iranian government). Then they found there so many evidences that proved American diplomatic workers were CIA agents who were planning to overthrow the revolutionary government. So they couldn’t be called GUESTS or diplomatic workers anymore, they were spies who abused Iranian’s sacred guest traditions. Even then Iranians didn’t hurt any of them. In fact they even treated them very well.
What was Americans reaction? Instead of diplomatic negotiations they began to threaten Iranians. But Iranians wasn’t frightened by Americans threats. So Americans attacked Iran with their most complicated and advanced army units (Operation Eagle Claw). After their failure in Tabas they decided to use the diplomatic way and The American spies were released after diplomatic negotiations. If they used the diplomatic way at first the American spies would be released so much sooner. If all I wrote above doesn’t prove Iranians hospitality, then what is hospitality?
Now I ask you: “When you insult your guest who has done nothing wrong to Americans, how would you react if he did such terrible things to you?”

Answer 2

It's called "diplomatic immunity." It's what prevents countries from shooting other countries' officials during visits, and shields them from being mistreated for other crimes. Of course, this also results in some of their officials getting away with traffic and parking violations, but that's a small price to pay for knowing that no foreign leader would dare shake our President's hand, and then turn to his troops and yell "Fire!" Even if "our President" has caused as much harm as Bush has, killing him is not an answer beneficial to anyone -- especially after the attack we'd launch.

However: None of the 9/11 hijackers were from Iran. Or Iraq, for that matter. 15 Saudis, 3 from the United Arab Emirates (usually referred to by the name of its capital, Abu Dhabi), and 1 each from Egypt and Lebanon.

Answer 3

As with most thing -- traditions only apply when they are to your benefit -- and get ignored when they get in your way.

But before you jump to that conclusion -- look at exactly who is speaking. Did those same people object -- even quietly in their own home -- when Iran did that back 28 years ago? If they did -- then they are being consistent -- and the only difference is how much they are willing to say in front of the microphones, based on fear of political backlash.

But even if the didn't -- hypocrisy is nothing new to any group.

Answer 4

Kinda like the Univited guests that were from HIS country the hijacked a few planes and flew them into the WTC on 9/11...I have no doubt he was Cheering that day and giving a little extra attention to his sheep.........

Answer 5

i hate the president as much as you do, and my parents are iranian.
no, don't talk about every iranian.
in iran, several people honor the U.S. and always listen to U.S. music, eat U.S. food, etc.
dont make assumptions without knowing the whole story.

Answer 6

Of course. Don't you know that there traditions do not apply to "Infidels".

Answer 7

Yup....