Blog Roll

« Senate OKs Oman Free Trade Agreement, Rewarding Friend, War on Terror Ally | Main | Today in Washington »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341da99d53ef00d8342abc6253ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ahmadinejad Rants to UN on U.S. Foreign Policy, Structure of Security Council:

Comments

Hepzibah The Watchman

We are not fighting the Iraqis in Iraq, but the Syrians and Iranians who continue to flood across the border.

So Mr. Ahmadinejad - who is occupying who?

John Blake

Truly bizarre. This self-righteous drivel, directed solely to besotted PC types in Western academia, media, and politics,will eventually boomerang on Iran and on Ahmadinejad himself. When cultures and State entities consistently and wilfully delude themselves, over time their extraordinary unrealism becomes unsupportable.

"Radical Islam" is in fact the Islam of 1400 years. Salafism with its Wahabi death-cult has only surfaced since post-WW II, due entirely to the Mideast's wallowing in vats of petro-dollars. When that supply dries up, as it will within a generation, these murderous dolts will sink back into the civilizational cesspools from whence they sprung. Can't be too soon.

I must say, he makes good points. How can the USA have nukes and yet attack Iran in the UN when they too try to gain them? I'd like to point out that the USA is in no way bared from selling nukes as it's never signed the treaty.
True this guys a nut job, but as long as a nation that supports the killing of civilans is on the SC with veto powers, how can the SC work?
I say good job President Ahmadinejad. At least you, unlike President Bush, can speak.

TruthSeeker

Gee John Blake, perhaps you could also be enamored with Adolph, Fidel, Mao... all great communicators. Also, don't you think that a dad that own a gun might nonetheless want to keep one from the hands of (as you say) a "nut job" homicidal teenager with delusions of grandeur. After all, by your logic it is only fair. I humbly think it would not be a good idea to let the teenager have the gun, or the apocolyptic "nut job" have the bomb.

TruthSeeker, I think you meant to direct your comment to the individual who posted with "no name" directly above your post. John Blake's post is in agreement with your thoughts on the threat of Iran.

Endurion

What Ahmadinejad is saying, simply, is that Israel must be destroyed by whatever means - militarily or politically - and that neither the US nor any other nation in the world has the right to thwart this "right" of "the peoples".

All of his nonsense is predicated upon his "God" being the One True God and his expected "perfect righteous human being" who is to come and rule the world for his "God" being the "real savior". Unfortunately for Ahmadinejad, neither of these are what he says they are.

The "commands" that he speaks of, for justice, for compassion, for truth are all lies. If you looked into the "commands" you would see that they are only lies.

TruthSeeker

Absolutely correct - humble apologies John Blake. I guess "no name" had not the courage of his discourse...

Know Your Enemy

Me thinks Ahmadinejad doth project too much.

Unfortunately, though, it's a great speech--the result of 1400 years of public relations experience--and will hit all the right notes with the PC multiculturalists.

Islam marches on.

Morgan

The concept that 'No one has superiority over others', though very PC, is one of the most blatent lies in the world. Places are referred to as first world when they're developed, successful, and at least somewhat respectful of individual rights.
Having a third world country have the same amount of power as a first world country isn't merely a dream (for success begets power), but a deranged dream at that! The common standard of living would fall under such a concept, not rise.
Personally, I'm still contemplating why the United Nations, who abjectly fails time and time again to stop genocides (its main reason for creation) and is deeply corrupt, is still considered a respectable organization.

Endurion

To: "Open your mind"

Did you not READ the speech that Ahmadinjead gave, the very content of this POST? How can this "labelling being the result of propaganda" when the evidence of his "apocalypticism" is completely revealed in the words in this very speech?

HE IS EXPECTING THE ISLAMIC MESSIAH to come and RULE THE WORLD. That is not apocalyptic or hardline? You are the ignorant one "Open your mind", whoever you are.

Try opening YOUR ears: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SDRcirpmXI

Open your mind

Let's not forget that the "deeply corrupt" UN you mention is predominantly run by the US and its allies.

Furthermore, why is Ahmadinejad labeled as an "apocalyptic nutjob". Open your ignorant minds and listen carefully: this labeling is a result of political propaganda, with the media as its vehicle, put in place to ease pre-war tensions.

Every reference to this president is made with derogatory adjectives such as "Hardline President", "Neo-Nazi", "Hitler", etc. This basic psychological technique enforces a negative image of President Ahmadinejad.

Do a search on google.com for "hardline president": 9 out of 10 entries is related to Ahmadinejad, the president who has never been to war with anyone; while other presidents who wage new wars as the season changes, are called freedom fighters.

Do you see this play of words? Don't fall prey to everything you hear. Don't just open your ears; open your minds as well.

matt cooper

It is not at all the case this man is a nut job. I've now read this speech, the one he gave this same time last year, and courtesy of YouTube have watched him on video. I think there is a lot of stuff he can't say that he wishes he could say, but for fear of being assasinated while abroad.

Is it true that norman podhoretz (sic)recently insinuated that a bombing is all but assured after the Nov. elections? If true it is the same as I'm hearing from people in the know in the beltway. Best guess is Mahmoud can read the writing on the wall; it says "we are coming after you."

I'm ashamed at the evil men in our country who are pushing this man against a wall. What are they not telling us?

My mind's open...

My mind is fully open as are my eyes and ears. Iran and it's president are quite possibly one of the most prolific supporters and enablers of mass murder in history. There's a reason why he is associated with Naziism and Hitler. And it's not the media's desire to ease pre-war tensions. The parallels fall right where Ahmadinejad draws them. Hitler wanted to wipe out Jews. Ahmadinejad wants to wipe out Jews. Hitler was willing to use any means necessary to spread his message. Ahmadinejad is willing to use any means necessary to spread his message. These are not trumped up accusations. These are comments that have come from Ahmadinejad's own mouth. His speech to the U.N. is fanciful, it's farcicle, and what's scariest about it, people like you, Open your mind, buy it.

As far as the accusations of him being a hardline president coming from the media to drum up support from the war, what from the media in the last 3 years has led you to believe that they are looking to justify the war? The best thing that can happen for the media is continued struggle in Iraq (as conveniently funded by Iran). A happy, friendly, stable Iraq doesn't buy a lot of ink with which to print headlines. Ahmadinejad speaks. He is labeled accordingly.

And just for clarification, the U.S. and its allies hardly "run" the U.N. In fact, it's becoming more and more apparent that no one does. That's why it can't even fulfill the simplest tenets of its charter.

TruthSeeker

Gracious - facts are stubborn things.
In actuallity, countries in the UN vote against US nearly 90% of the time (see below). Maybe Bush has caused a falling out - OOPS - seems a State Department report in 1995 (Clinton years baby) noted that our vast amount of foreign aid and support of the UN very seldom led to reciprocal support for our interests in the UN.

We do not, thank goodness, conduct all matters with a "by your leave" of the UN, and it is a good thing, since the UN we dominate seldom sides with us.

The results of this tally were even worse (from a U.S. perspective) than the message quoted above indicates, with the countries named voting contrary to the U.S. position on U.N. resolutions an aggregate 88% of the time. (Even though India is neither Arab nor particularly Islamic, we included it in our chart because the widely-circulated e-mailed list did.)

Country Times Voted With U.S. Times Voted Against U.S. % of Votes Against U.S.
Kuwait 10 61 86%
Qatar 9 64 88%
Morocco 8 62 89%
United Arab Emirates 8 61 88%
Jordan 9 64 88%
Tunisia 8 63 89%
Saudi Arabia 7 62 90%
Yemen 9 64 88%
Algeria 9 63 88%
Oman 9 63 88%
Sudan 10 60 86%
Pakistan 9 59 87%
Libya 8 63 89%
Egypt 10 63 86%
Lebanon 7 62 90%
India 14 52 79%
Syria 7 59 89%
Mauritania 7 63 90%

However, we also surveyed the U.N. voting records of several countries generally considered to be close allies of the U.S., and those results were none too impressive either. Only Israel consistently voted with the U.S.:

Country Times Voted With U.S. Times Voted Against U.S. % of Votes Against U.S.
Australia 33 26 44%
Canada 31 32 51%
Israel 56 7 11%
Japan 26 36 58%
United Kingdom 40 27 40%
France 36 31 46%

How much significance one should place in these figures is problematic, because most other U.N. Member States have records of voting against the U.S. that are equally as bad as the records of the countries named in the message above. U.N. votes on resolutions are frequently lopsided, pitting a single nation or a handful of nations against all the others, and more often than not the U.S. is the one nation at odds with the rest of the world. Of the 83 resolutions we surveyed for our informal tally, in ten cases the U.S. was the only Member State to vote against them, and in five cases only one other nation joined the U.S. in voting against them. In fact, in over half the total cases (42 out of 83), the U.S. was supported by five or fewer Member States in voting against a U.N. resolution. So it isn't just the Arab/Islamic states who consistently vote against the U.S. in the United Nations — pretty much the rest of the world does, too.

matt cooper

Hey "My mind's open." Just a preface-Im young and have only voted in two POTUS election cycles, both times republican. Im a conservative; I'm not sure you are, so I'm prefacing this so you will know im opposed to the Democrat party platform.

Understand something. We are an empire. We must control oil flows or foreigners have no need to hold U.S. $$$. Do you know what it means for us if foreigners don't use FRNs to purchase oil? The answer is massive domestic inflation.

Also-do you know Sharia Law prohibits banking and interest as we know it? Do you realize that their civilization will NEVER be compatible with our own as long as they refuse to adopt our monetary supremacy and fiat currency? Do you think that might have something to do with why we are over there?

Iran and Iraq are about global domination by our own banks and corporations over people who want nothing to do with us. Israel is our bully in the region. We need them there to keep rebel countries from breaking off from our empire.

This whole situation is a charade and I doubt there will even be an issue if democrats win-they are part of this system too. Why do you keep insisting we need this war?

Phximan

I hate to admit that I agree with some of this as well as some of what Chavez said. I think that we need to stop trying to push "democracy" around the world. They are looking at it the way we looked at communism. Muslims are not allowed to have a democracy because of the death cult islam. Democracy would mean that men get to set laws. In their eyes only the filthy allah can do that. It is called sharia. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want that in our country.

The only reason that we need stability in that part of the world is to keep oil prices low. Granted we get no oil from iran, but their supply keeps world prices down. What we need to do is allow our oil companies to drill along the entire coast line of the US, from Alaska to Maine. We have enough for about 30 years with no imports. Then we pull our troops home. Let the sunni's and shia kill themselves. Let Russia and China deal with it. Give NO MORE forien aid, with a few exceptions. Take the money we are spending on the war and GIVE it to auto companies and energy companies other than oil companies, to develop the future sources of energy for out cars, trucks, and trains. If we don't need oil, who cares about the middle east.

Let someone else play 9-11 of the world.

My mind's open...

Mr. Cooper,

I'm not quite sure what your comment had to do with anything I said. I think you just needed an opportunity to vent, and you needed a target. Fair enough. My party identity and political leanings are really inconsequential to this conversation as they have little if nothing to do with the fact that this man preaches hate, intolerance, murder, oppression and inequality. To him, and others (note: not all) who advocate for sharia law, with which I am familiar, if you are not the right kind of muslim, you must convert or die. That's where he gets his labels and international infamy. In another parallel to Hitler, if you don't fit the image of the master race/religion, you must be part of the final solution.

As far as the rest of what you had to say, huh? Nice little interjection and somewhat well reasoned, but what does it have to do with anything? Yes sharia law forbids banking. Kosher forbids the eating of cloven-hoofed animals, what's it got to do with anything?

To respond directly to your question, when did I insist that we needed this war? The only thing I said about the war was to accurately characterize our media as critical of it and to suggest that the difficulties in Iraq have been good for circulation. I neither supported nor opposed the war. Either you directed your comments at the wrong poster (understandable) or you put words into my mouth (questionable).

matt cooper

Ok Open Mind-
I did want to vent and you were a target. Nothing personal. BTW I also agree with you that the media puts black on their income statement when the streets of run red.

your comment. "Yes sharia law forbids banking. Kosher forbids the eating of cloven-hoofed animals, what's it got to do with anything?"

Funny indeed. However empires are not threatened by dietary preferences. They are threatened when people do not pay the empire. In order to control this part of the world we need them in debt to us.

Our corporations rightfully realize that their operations can be nationalized by hostile rebel govts in the middle east. The way you prevent nationalization is through collateral. Problem is Iran/Iraq don't need to borrow because they can self-fund through their oil revenues. Before I lend money i need borrowers to post collateral. What collateral do we have over Iran and Iraq right now?

The issue of control is important. Its either everyone falls into line behind the system or the system goes bust. You can't have bank's dominating the "free" world and inflating away our own savings so long as rogue nations like Iran and Iraq are selling oil on their exchanges in their own currency and not borrowing from us. That type of scenario would lead to capital flight out of the empire and and evaporation of the market for the empire's sovereign debt.

That is what I think is going on here. So I'm really loathe to believe much of what I read in our own media as they themselves are in many ways tools of the empire and indebted to the bankers.

I hope Ahmadinejad succeeds in developing nuclear power...he will have even less need for us.

I pray for Christians and Jews in Israel. God knows they have a right to defend themselves. But I do not support sending money to them so they can be our bully in the region.

Jonathon


Your remark about controlling oil flow so foreigners hold US $$$ is
something I've never heard said before. Would you explain what you
mean?

You pointed out the US presence in the Middle East is related to the
fact that banking w/interest is violation of Sharia*, and in
maintaining the US empire in that area. You mean they are there to get
the oil in spite of the incompatibility of the economies?

You said you were conservative, but most conservatives support the war
and so-called imperialism of the US. Your post seemed a bit divided,
though. I couldn't tell whether you were for or against the activities
you were commenting on.

By the way, I'm neutral, I don't care what side you are on. I'm just
trying to learn about the issues.

[*] Sharia also prohibits adultery, but men have affairs and in some
places rape at will with impunity in that part of the world. And
Muslims in this country certainly have bank accounts that earn
interest. So it seems they choose what laws they obey, and when, like
people of most religions.

Redcushion

Jonathan is right on the mark as far as the selective obedience seen by Islamic men to the "Sharia" laws. Adultry, rape, murder, etc have all been documented in so called hardline Islamic government/dictatorships, i.e. the regime of the Taliban is a good example. Indeed at times we as a nation can be "pushy" when it comes to spreading democracy but there are indeed many simularities not only in principle but also in doctrine and practice with what took place in Nazi Germany during the 1930's. Take the time to read some of the speeches delivered by Hitler and you get the same chill down your spine as I did after reading the speech given Tuesday before the UN. A really good url for Hitler's speeches is http://www.hitler.org/speeches/

Loki

All you folks who are blaming the USA for the World's problems are absolutely right. The USA is using impoverished third-world labor to support its insatiable need for cheaper products.

I have an great idea. Since US, Japanese and European firms are taking advantage of those poor folk in under-developed nations, let's on-shore all those call-center and manufacturing jobs that have been exported! I'll bet those poor, disenfanchised workers who have been victims of aggressive Western globalization would thank us forever!

I've been so blind, but it all seems to make sense now!

Matt Cooper

Jonathan,
1st question.
Oil trades in U.S. $$$, these are contracts on futures and commodity exchanges. Site below is ok for details. Essentially there is a need to own reserves that are denominated in the same currency for which commodities are based.

http://www.energybulletin.net/12463.html

Lets take this example. The saudi's sell their oil in u.s. $$$, in turn the U.S., through its bully in the region Israel, and our 100,000+ troop strength on the peninsula since 1991 help keep their regime in power and defend them vs. uprisings and rival govs. In return they agree to only sell their chief export, oil, in US$ terms. This means if a European based refiner wants to buy oil so that he can make gasoline, he must take the euros his customers are paying him and buy u.s. $$$ on the foreign exchange. Then he can purchase the oil. The saudi's in turn use the $$$ to buy u.s. sovereign debt or u.s. stocks. Which leads to question about the Sharia and banking...

Keep in mind that in a fractional reserve system like we have today, our money is in the form of notes (technically debt) that is issued by a private corporation. (the federal reserve,) which is in fact private "Lewis v. United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (1982)". That debt, or "money" as we know it first goes to the U.S. treasury who then distribute it to the govt. who can pay the money to halliburton and your sweet grandmother who is on social security. The U.S. promises this bank will never go into default because it can raise taxes and in fact does so under threat of force in order to pay off the bank. The interesting thing is these notes that are given to the govt. are printed out of thin air! This is why our system is incompatible with rogue arab nations! There Sharia prohibits a fractional system where there is no underlying specie (read hard currency: eg. gold, silver, other commodity)

I'm no expert on sharia mind you. But this definition below looks ok to me. Pay particular attention to the last sentence under "Principals in Islamic Banking."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_bank

We are at war because our govt. must defend itself against a default in its banking system! How did the worlds greatest creditor nation become the chief debtor? Why are a free people slaves to their own oppressive govt?

Jonathon

The US has become a selfish, materialistic society, where we care more about some guy named Beau losing 'American Idol' more than how our lifestyle impacts the world and even our own future.

redcushion

Matt,
"How did the worlds greatest creditor nation become the chief debtor? Why are a free people slaves to their own oppressive govt?"

One lesson that will never leave my mind from my Macro Econ class in college is that Financial Independence is essential to freedom. You mention the governement taxation and funding for blind contracts to Halliburton and the Social Security check for Jonathans grandmother. You answered your question before asking it. Today society is one that demands substance from the Government and as long as that continues, war spending aside we will forever see wasteful spending. Example being those who desire nothing more than to qualify for that monthly SSI check or other welfare support systems. Before you attack the banking system, lets start going after those who rather do nothing more than walk to the bank and cash that SSI check versus geting their lives in order and independant from government dependence. I'm all for taxation to provide to the nations defense, but how dare you take my money and give it to a person who is too lazy to work for even more than minimum wage. You want to know why jobs get outsourced? Because alot of these companies simply are not able to find a work force willing to work at a wage that is fully comparable to the job required. I know this from first hand experience as a former hire head for a large corporation.
I will agree that we are better off with a backed currency, but that currency right now means nothing if there is no one to trade it with, to barter with, exchange and trade with. That is what will happen if Iran develops Nuclear weapons, or North Korea is able to actually launch a nuclear war head as far as they hope for (beyond the Sea of Japan.)
As for Iraq and Afghanistan, the creation of a strong democracy takes time. In todays "now" attitude we quickly forget that our constitution, the worlds model to a democratic republic almost never came to be. In fact is was its own creation and verbage that nearly created "civil strife" among the colonies after their defeat of England. If you don't believe me, search the writings and diary of Benjamin Franklin and personal notes by George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, etc. You will find contentious debate between the founding father over how the government should be structured, created, administered, etc. These are the very same things that are taking place now in Iraq.
Iran does not want a free Iraq. They say elsewise, but it proves to their benefit that a democratic Iraq not exist. If Iran truly means what they say, then let them, Syria, Jordan, etc offer to provide for the security of the Iraqi Government as they complete the crucial and delicate process of establishing their own democracy. But what am I dreaming? That will never happen.

JDC

I'm currently living in Germany, but still consider myself a Patriotic American. Having said that, I also understand some of the criticisims of the US that are currently coming out of Europe and elsewhere. If you do some research about Eugenics, you may start to understand why the rest of the world believes that America is hypocritical, and therefore cant be taken seriously. Things that we have forgotten about, the rest of the world still remembers. Until we can stop speaking out of both sides of our mouths, come up with some effective foreign policy to actually deal with terrorisim, and stop depending on dirty foreign oil, people like AHMADINEJAD will continue to build support by waxing poetic about the Evil United States.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Sign Up For Daily Email

Contact Us

Syndication

  • RSS
  • Rojo
  • Bloglines
  • Yahoo
  • Google feed
  • Pluck
  • Newsgator

September 2007

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            
Blog powered by Typepad

Middle East Map

  • Click to Enlarge

Praise for Vital Perspective

  • "If there were just a hint more thinking like this in Washington, prosecuting and decisively winning the War on Terror would not be the 'controversy' some choose to make it…at the cost of National Security"

    -Threats Watch

     

    "Check out Vital Perspective"

    -Instapundit

     

    "I can't keep up with these guys!"

    -Meryl Yourish

     

    "The smart boys over at Vital Perspective always have their ears to the ground picking up the latest news in the Middle East"

    -All Things Beautiful

     

    "The Instapundit on the Middle East"

    -Le Mont De Sisyphe

     

    "One of the keenest blogs on all the Internet"

    -Joe's Dartblog

     

    "One of the top sites on the web"

    -Power Line

     

    "Man, Vital Perspective is a great blog!"

    -PoliPundit

     

    "A fascinating foreign policy blog"

    -The Washington Post

Site Meter / TTLB



We Support

  • 9/11 Tribute
  • NEFA
  • Genocide
  • Witness
  • Israel
  • Denmark
  • Terrorist Media
  • Free Lebanon