Translate

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Ahmadinejad Appauded at UN


Were they applauding this? Their offense? Being gay.



Or this? Her offense? Adultery (however they define it)


Today, Iranian nut job Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at the UN. He was applauded. He said that 9-11 was "according to many" carried out by the American government to improve the economy and support the Zionist regime in Israel. The US delegation got up and walked out. The General Assembly sat there and applauded Ahmadinejad's toxic words.

Yet, earlier, President Obama told the General Assembly that the door was open to more negotiations with Iran over that nuclear issue.

Also today, the US Mission to the UN  called Ahmadinejad's remarks "delusional."

Mark Kornblau, spokesman of the U.S. Mission to the world body, issued a statement within moments of Ahmadinejad's attack.


"Rather than representing the aspirations and goodwill of the Iranian people," he said, "Mr. Ahmadinejad has yet again chosen to spout vile conspiracy theories and anti-Semitic slurs that are as abhorrent and delusional as they are predictable."


Can you connect these dots? I can't. Why should we sit down and talk to this man who is "delusional". Does Obama think that maybe we can delude him?

And given the UN's warm welcome of this crackpot, can we now at last get the Hell out of the UN?

Well, it was only a suggestion.

4 comments:

Bartender Cabbie said...

We live in a crazy time.

Siarlys Jenkins said...

It warms my heart to see that American conservatives are willing to stand up for gay rights, at least when it comes to Iran.

The real joke on the UN is, they don't even realize that sending this clown Ahmadinejad is ipso facto an insult to the august international body, sort of like sending a low-ranking clerk to greet the Queen of England at the airport in New York.

As Joe Biden accurately pointed out to the woman who used to boast she had real responsibilities, but resigned them to pursue lucrative book contracts, Ahmadinejad isn't where power really rests. He's a figurehead. Ask Mehdi Bazargan. Ask Mohammed Khatami. This is the latest in a series of people who get to stand in the lime light and bask in the glow of the crowd, but doesn't decide anything.

No, there is no point in negotiating with him. And, Ali Khameini is much more dangerous. But negotiations are based on necessity, its not a popularity contest. The U.S. and Germany negotiated over repatriation of respective embassy staffs and other citizens in December 1941, e.g. Opposing military commanders frequently stop fighting to negotiate truces to remove dead and wounded from the field, before going back to creating more dead and wounded. Richard Nixon went to China, and look at what that did for Wal-Mart.

Squid, said...

I will never forget the huanting image of a young women gunned down by a sniper in the streets of Tehran, left to drown in her own blood.

Is this the what the U.N. Assembly is applauding?!

If it is, may all those who clapped, be haunted by this ever present image seared in my memory.

Squid

Siarlys Jenkins said...

That would have been a great opportunity for guerilla theater Squid. I'm serious, not being sarcastic. Think if, during the speech, someone had unfurled a banner, laser printed with the latest Kinko's technology, of that very photo? It would have had a tremendous effect.

If you don't think so, remember how many of the "third world" nations rose in the UN to condemn Soviet military incursion into Afghanistan. (Pity the poor Soviets. They, like George W. Bush, found themselves saddled with a client administration which was on obvious embarrassment, and shot the man who invited them to assist his government. We can hardly do that, but we're still stuck.)