In a tense exchange on Piers Morgan’s show, Cenk Uygur, the host of ‘The Young Turks,’ clashed with human rights activist Goldie Ghamar over the ongoing protests in Iran. Instead of highlighting the courage of Iranian protesters, Uygur opted to criticize Israel and the United States, which sparked an intense backlash from Ghamar.
During the discussion, Uygur acknowledged the struggle of the Iranian people against their regime. He stated, “In this case, the most important thing is that there are two separate issues going on here.” While he claimed to support the Iranian quest for democracy, his subsequent comments focused on criticizing Israel. He accused the country of wanting regime change in Iran for decades and painted Huckabee, the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, as a manipulator acting on behalf of Israeli interests rather than American ones.
Here, Uygur’s rhetoric shifted away from the demonstrations and the real threat faced by Iranians in the streets. Ghamar, clearly exasperated, challenged him directly. She pointed out his lack of understanding about the situation in Iran by saying, “Cenk is not Iranian, so he has no idea what’s going on in occupied Iran.” Her frustration was compounded by Uygur’s attempts to interrupt, trying to correct her use of the word “Persian” instead of “Farsi.” Ghamar’s pointed response emphasized Uygur’s dismissal of her voice and perspective.
The argument escalated as Ghamar insisted, “You do not get to talk over me. You do not get to talk over me or interrupt me when I’m speaking on behalf of 90 million Iranians who are out in the streets right now, fighting for their lives.” Here, she made it clear she felt a duty to represent those risking everything for freedom. When Uygur questioned her authority to speak for all Iranians, she asserted, “Yes, I am.” This confidence resonated, highlighting the fierce passion and unified purpose behind the protests.
As the exchange unfolded, Ghamar took a historical perspective, recounting the events of 1979 not as a revolution but as an “Islamic coup d’État” supported by Western powers. She passionately articulated that the current protests are an effort to rectify a governmental mistake made decades ago. Her conviction was apparent as she expressed support for the return of the Shah as a symbol of a constitutional monarchy that would lead Iran back to democracy.
Throughout the discourse, Morgan intervened to remind Uygur to allow Ghamar her time to speak, yet Uygur’s interruptions persisted. Ghamar’s command of the conversation and refusal to be silenced underscored the urgency and seriousness of the situation in Iran. She concluded with a reminder that Iran was once a constitutional monarchy, contradicting Uygur’s narrative of a long-standing oppressive regime.
This exchange reflected a clash of narratives—Uygur’s approach seemed to sideline the Iranian people’s voices and agency in favor of broader geopolitical critiques. In contrast, Ghamar brought the focus back to the sheer desperation and resilience of the Iranian population. The dialogue serves as a reminder of the stakes involved in the struggle for freedom and the need to listen to those who directly experience these crises. The fervor exhibited by Ghamar illustrates not just her dedication but also the collective yearning for a different future among many Iranians.
"*" indicates required fields
