Home / Culture and Society / Ahmadinejad Sends Delegates Gasping!

Ahmadinejad Sends Delegates Gasping!

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Are we missing some subtle thing with Ahmadinejad?  I think that people don’t appreciate the man’s sense of humor – or maybe it’s not humor;  maybe he just gets a little bang by making these extreme statements. For example, Englishman Nickk Clegg near-to “lost his ale” yesterday when Amaninejad said in his speech to the US General Assembly that it was in fact the United States Government that perpetrated the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and shocked the world. The Iranian President said the attacks were “orchestrated to prop up Israel.”

With a great deal of gasping and disbelief, the American and British delegations stormed out of the chamber! Deputy Prime Minister Clegg managed to speak. He was ready, he declared, to welcome the progress made.. ready to discuss the Iranian nuclear program..!  He was not, clearly, ready for the “bizarre and offensive” statements of President Ahmadinehad from the podium. To make matters worse, the Iranian said it again: “the US government orchestrated the attack in order to save the Zionist regime in the Middle East!”

Extreme statements, as I have suggested, come easily to the Iranian. We recall he is famous – or is it infamous? – for denying the Holocaust. President Ahmadinehad we might consider is as aware as anyone of the history of the world, and of the September attacks; he is perhaps a misguided droll with a nettle in his pants!

Powered by

About John Lake

John Lake had a long and successful career in legitimate and musical theater. He moved up into work behind the camera at top motion pictures. He has done a smattering of radio, and television John joined the Blogcritics field of writers owing to a passion for the liberal press, himself speaking out about the political front, and liberal issues. Now the retired Mr. Lake has entered the field of motion picture, television, and video game (now a daily gamer!) critique. His writing is always innovative and immensely readable!
  • Tempting as it may be, it’s a mistake to treat President Ahmadinejad as a joke. You take him so lightly that you misspell his name once in each of your three short paragraphs. That’s way beneath your usual good standard of writing, John. I’d suggest you take tongue out of cheek and pay more attention to Ahmadinejad’s intentions towards the West.

    As for 9/11 being an inside job, that’s old hat. Substantial numbers of otherwise sane Americans, who call themselves Truthers, have been saying the same thing for years. Ridiculing these people will not make their suspicions go away.

  • I can’t remember where I read it now, but one theory on Ahmadinejad is that in large part he’s basically afraid, and one reaction fearful people (or animals in general) have is to attack back.

    What or who is he afraid of? America of course, and the UK and other Western countries to a lesser degree. And let’s be honest – those same countries didn’t much care for his largest neighbor and look what happened to them…

    Not that this is necessarily a viable solution, but I bet if we just stopped paying attention to Iran/Ahmadinejad, just stopped talking about them, stopped threatening, that he would pipe down as well.

  • Bijan Alamai

    This is perhaps the best book I have ever read. I have no doubt it will become par of the American history in the future. No one has been able to tell the world through his vision and satire who and what Ahamadinejad is. If you do not read this book, I call it a crime, really.The irony of book is that it is not a satire. Please read it today, if not for your own sake, for the sake of humanity.

  • John Lake

    I apologise and feel terrible about spelling the Iranian Presidents name with an “H”. This was caused I fear by a tendency I have to pronounce it that way. It was not my intention to take Ahmadinejad lightly.
    Nice that Bijan Alamai (#3) rates the “Obama Meets Ahmadinejad” book so highly!

  • John Lake

    Saturday, 9/25 – google.com
    President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said Iran would consider halting its 20 percent uranium enrichment if the West provides the fuel for a medical reactor in Tehran, ISNA news agency reported on Saturday.
    “Whenever they give us the fuel and we are in possession of it, we can examine a halt” in enriching uranium to 20 percent, Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying at a press conference in New York on Friday.

  • John Lake

    I might be taking the “There I Said It” option a little lightly. Here is an important link to an AP article about the General Assembly words and walkout.
    Again I should probably apologize for my light spin on this important matter.

    US walks out on Ahmadinejad’s UN speech

    I do share some of Almadinejad’s thinking as to our response to the September 11 attacks, in particularly his words (from the linked article) : “He said the U.S. used the attacks as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq that led to the killing of hundreds of thousands of people, saying the U.S. should have “designed a logical plan” to punish the perpetrators while not shedding so much blood.”

  • John, I see you’re up to your old tricks of misspelling President Ahmadinejad’s name in order to mock him. This time it’s in the final paragraph of your comment #6: “Almadinejad’s thinking.”

    But speaking of old tricks, this act (and I do mean act) of UN diplomats walking out in protest as Ahmadinejad speaks is getting stale. In Geneva on April 20, 2009, the British delegation led a walkout of mostly European diplomats during Ahmadinejad’s address at a UN conference on racism. The only reason the U.S. did not join in is because we, along with Israel and seven other Western nations, boycotted the conference in advance.

    On September 23, 2009, France led a walkout of a 11 other delegations, including the U.S., during Ahmadinejad’s speech to the UN General Assembly in New York.

    And now, a year to the day later, the U.S. leads a walkout during yet another address by Ahmadinejad to the General Assembly. The U.S. diplomats were trailed by their lap dogs the British and other Western delegations.

    This knee-jerk (and I do mean jerk) reaction is especially ridiculous because Ahmadinejad’s theories on 9/11 are, as I said in comment #1, shared by substantial numbers of Americans. Ordinary U.S. citizens have been making similar conjectures for years, and such theories abound on our radio talk shows every single day.

    I suppose this is what is known as political theater. Problem is, Act Three is the same as Act Two, which was the same as Act One. Can’t these guys afford a new script?

  • Ruvy

    Cyrus, the Americans ran out of money to pay script writers a long time ago. And from what I’ve seen of American TV lately, the script writers wouldn’t come up with anything good anyway.

    Problem is Cyrus, is that you Americans haven’t the guts to actually go and execute Acts Two an Three of the play – nuking Tehran, Qom and destroying their source of wealth. You have the guts to bully Jews – who threaten you not at all – out of their homes, but no balls to deal with your enemies. That is why this article – and the behavior of your government – is so pathetic.

  • Ruvy, I wonder what you make of this: the New York Post reported yesterday that during his stay in NYC last week, President Ahmadinejad “shared a hush-hush meal with [Nation of Islam leader Louis] Farrakhan and members of the New Black Panther Party Tuesday at the Warwick Hotel on West 54th Street.” Do you think they cooked up anything besides Persian shish kebabs?

  • John Lake

    I am at this momement preparing an article which will clarify my thinking on this and related matters. It is controversial. It deals in part with the Bush policy of non-negotiation.
    Hopefully it will be forthcoming here at BC

  • Hopefully you will spell his name right. It’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

  • Not necessarily, Al… Cyrus. That’s merely the conventional Western transliteration of his name.

  • Don’t you think a careful writer owes it to his readers to pick what he considers the preferred spelling, whether or not it’s the “conventional Western transliteration,” and stick to it?

    In his title to this article, John spelled it Ahmadinejad, which is also how it’s spelled on the book cover next to his title. Evidently, then, he considers that spelling correct.

    However, in the first paragraph of his article, John misspelled it Amaninejad.

    In the second and third paragraphs, he twice misspelled it Ahmadinehad.

    And in his comment #6, he misspelled it yet a third way: Almadinejad.

    Is consistency too much to ask from the writer of such a short article (239 words)? True, if John’s intention were to mock President Ahmadinejad by deliberately misspelling his name–the way Jay Leno ridicules him by pronouncing it ImaNutJob–then inconsistency is part of the joke. But since John in comment #4 apologized for his misspelling, that seems not to have been his intention.

    In apologizing, incidentally, he also misspelled apologize, unless of course he like you is British and prefers “s” instead of “z.” However, John’s bio identifies him as Chicago-born, and the last time I consulted a map, Chicago was not part of the UK. Using the British form makes John appear either pretentious or illiterate.

    Or perhaps you’re seriously suggesting that it doesn’t matter how we spell the name of the leader of a nation with 75 million people, is second in the world in natural gas reserves and third in oil reserves. To hell with those wogs with the funny names, is that what you mean?

  • Oh, by the way. Welcome back from vacation. Haunt any good castles while you were there?

  • John Lake

    You sir are as cryptic as Ahmadinejad himself. He couldn’t possibly believe that the 9/11 attacks were “supported” by American diplomats. Likewise I suspect you see some matters more important than my poor attempts at spelling.
    In my haste to get back to a more formal article — (This ‘There I Said It’ is not for me) —
    I managed a few extra syllables in “moment”; I do appreciate your not calling that to the attention of readers.
    I may take another course on the updated article. I was going to make the point that
    the Iranian President was in line with some liberal Americans’ thinking in saying that the strikes on Iraq might have been handled differently. When Libyan leader Muammar al-Khaddafi, or Khaddafi, became a threat, we didn’t wreak devastation on Libya.
    In addition, I alluded to the tape from bin Laden a few months ago who took responsibility for the September, 2001, attacks, and his ongoing assertion that his prime interest is in the non-assimilation situation in Palestine/Israel. I went on to suggest that if settlement building in the West Bank area re-commences (which it has) we might see all out bloody war. I think I used the word “Apocalypse”.

  • When Libyan leader Muammar al-Khaddafi, or Khaddafi, became a threat, we didn’t wreak devastation on Libya.

    We did, however, repeatedly resort to military force against Libya. In August 1981, President Reagan authorized a large naval force, led by not one but two supercarriers (USS Forrestal and USS Nimitz), to deploy provocatively close to the Libyan coast. On the morning of August 19, in what became known as the Gulf of Sidra incident, two of Libya’s Soviet-supplied SU-22 fighter jets were shot down by a pair of U.S. Navy F-14 Tomcats in aerial combat.

    On April 5, 1986, a bomb exploded in a Berlin discotheque frequented by U.S. servicemen. Of the 200 injured, 63 were American soldiers; one GI and one civilian died. U.S. intelligence assets had purportedly intercepted (alas, too late) a message from Colonel Gaddafi ordering an attack on Americans “to cause maximum and indiscriminate casualties.”

    In retaliation, the U.S. launched Operation El Dorado Canyon, consisting of airstrikes against targets near Tripoli and Benghazi. President Reagan claimed these counterattacks were justified under Article 51 of the UN Charter as self-defense against Libya’s state-sponsored terrorism. Like the Berlin discotheque bomb, Reagan’s airstrikes caused maximum and indiscriminate casualties, killing several civilians, among them Gaddafi’s two-year old adopted daughter.

    Luckily for us, Gaddafi was more vulnerable to such up-close-and-personal intimidation than Saddam Hussein. So it wasn’t necessary for us to, as you put it, “wreak devastation on Libya.” We got Gaddafi to toe the line on the cheap, so to speak. After all, what’s one less two-year old Arab girl in exchange for geopolitical stability?

  • Ruvy

    @ comment #9:

    For a long time, Muslims considered the NOI fake Muslims. If anything, this was the Big Shi’ite reaching out to what is considered in the Muslim world a bunch of wannabes. If Farrakhan and his crew can contribute something to Ahmadinejad’s war on the Big Satan, then more than a mere kebab was discussed.

    We would seem to have a problem of conflicting messiahs that the two gentlemen have to overcome. Obama is the messiah of Farrakhan. The Mahdi is the messiah of the Shi’a, and Ahmadinejad claims to have met the fellow in the flesh. It had been that the Persian messianic carpet was to fly to the Temple mount to present the Mahdi as the ruler of the earth there. At least, that is where matters stood in 2006.

    Who knows? Maybe, instead of cooking up a kebab, Farrakhan and Ahmadinejad were playing “Duelling Messiahs”….

  • John Lake

    But is it odd, is it not, that my recollection of the pressure on Libya tends to suggest a hasty re-writing of history — because my recollection involves a “Rattle-snake” missile through a bedroom window, killing Khaddafi’s daughter and ending the threat.A review of Google will not confirm that; it will restate the air-strikes. One report within the first 5,6 pages at Google seemed to me to suggest that Khaddafi’s daughter was at a club which was bombed. Perhaps the “Rattle-snake was launched from the air; perhaps there is little discrimination between bombing, and missile launching. But the matter has bothered me for some time.

  • John Lake

    As to Farrakhan and the Western Black Muslims, he is a holy man in comparison to our Chicagoan Jesse Jackson. Chicago continues to be a leader in racial fairness; Jackson and various Chicago radio outlets continue to feed the fire. They would have listeners and followers believe that black men are being drawn and quartered even as we speak, from trees, and in Chicago alleys.
    Ruvy, I see that you and I are moving away from the Almadinejad issue. We should be working up some insight into the threat of war in Palestine/Israel.

  • Ruvy

    I alluded to the tape from bin Laden a few months ago who took responsibility for the September, 2001, attacks, and his ongoing assertion that his prime interest is in the non-assimilation situation in Palestine/Israel. I went on to suggest that if settlement building in the West Bank area re-commences (which it has) we might see all out bloody war. I think I used the word “Apocalypse”.

    While you ‘raise the Curtain’, I’ll wait for the missiles to rain down from the enemy, John. They aren’t, yet, so I can pursue other projects in the meantime. The commanders beat the war drums here, but there are only pathetic and cowardly Arab terrorists attacking Jews, while the Security Minister pours his contempt on us settlers. May he hang and die a slow death for his treason.

    When there is massive war here, there will be massive war. But John, there is war here every damned day, with Arabs intent on killing Jews every damned day, day in, day out. Until the leaders of these Arabs (Hanieh, Abbas, and the little Persian puppet running HizbAllah), are hunted down and killed, along with their families and assistants, and a pack of civilians to make sure the Arabs know we mean business, there will continue to be war here every damned day.

    And now I’m getting off the puker for 24 hours or so. I have a hot date dancing with Torah scrolls during that time, and staying on here is against the rules.