“

Sometimes, in the face of certain events, we know that we must comply. Compliance is absolute and decisive….

Those who rebel and understand the power of their rebellion, know that they are not yet together. The time needed for them to solidify their collective movement has been taken away from them. What remains for them is an uncompromising rebellion, a friendship with an unwavering commitment, a bond that unites and strengthens them.

Maurice Blanchot – Refusal Note – Published in the magazine “July 14th”.

When we talk about Siamak Ghaderi, we are exactly talking about the “unshakable certainty” against any form of censorship and any kind of tyranny, which may distort the communication and turn it into a deception. This unshakable certainty is evident in the actions of the judicial power of the Islamic Republic and the behavior of the government towards this journalist.

What I am saying is that the unshakable “no” is a definite characteristic of someone who did not succumb to the tyranny of government-controlled media. Someone who, in the position of a journalist, had access to many official documents and memos from various governments, but proved through their work that they are always a few steps ahead of this bureaucracy and pressure from above. It was right after their field reports that the usual bureaucracy would take on a progressive and reformist facade. But it was not always like this, because the truth of honesty does not always hold power over the existing reality, and in a system where truth is not considered from the perspective of self-interest, it is meaningless!

In this regard, it must be claimed that one of the distinguishing features of Siamak Ghaderi is his ability to not fall short of the truth, unlike many other colleagues (who attempt to work according to the unamended laws of the Iranian media), and to insist on a impartial stance in narrating the events that shook the absolute tyranny of the 88 uprising.

His extraordinary report on the white soil of Tehran, if it had not existed, would have conquered and taken Tehran with it today. The path he took was critical and noble in many ways: he introduced himself as a smuggler for a whole week and went to the white soil area to be able to report and publish a report on it, which led to the intervention of law enforcement and the evacuation of this area.

After Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s statements at Columbia University where he said there are no homosexuals in Iran, Siamak Ghaderi interviewed and prepared a report with a group of Iranian homosexuals; a report that ended up costing him dearly, with the accusation of “committing a sinful act.”

According to this pen, in a system where everyone only thinks about themselves and their personal interests, the measure of commitment and loyalty is to the unstable concept of sovereignty. The presence and “being” of people like Siamak Ghaderi has a specific meaning: saying “no” to a culture that, whether desired or not, pits citizens against each other in a competition to prove their servitude and submissiveness.

The subject that makes Siamak Ghaderi stand as a “hero” alongside other independent journalists in a higher position than their colleagues, is perhaps the belief in saying “no” to any pressure from below. Because through his field reports, he has proven the integration of the theory of “no” to authoritarianism in practice.

Bari; on the verge of freedom, Siamak Ghaderi should only hope for the fact that he, like many honorable humans, stands for his ideals and will not give in to any benefit.