Iran Wins at 3 Card Monty

Dateline: The Washington Post

By John R. BoltonThursday, December 6, 2007; Page A29

Excerpt

That such a flawed product could emerge after a drawn-out bureaucratic struggle is extremely troubling. While the president and others argue that we need to maintain pressure on Iran, this "intelligence" torpedo has all but sunk those efforts, inadequate as they were. Ironically, the NIE opens the way for Iran to achieve its military nuclear ambitions in an essentially unmolested fashion, to the detriment of us all.

Click on the title above to read the essay

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

When I'm Right, I'm Right: Ahmadinejad "Praised in Iran for Entering Lion's Den"

I hate people who say "See I told you so!" However:

See, I told you so!

Found this Reuters news release on Yahoo.com News this morning:

Ahmadinejad lauded in Iran for "Lion's Den" visit

By Fredrik Dahl
31 minutes ago

TEHRAN (Reuters) - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may have faced ridicule in the United States by suggesting there were no homosexuals in Iran, but he won praise at home on Wednesday for taking his country's case to "the Lion's Den."

Generally, politicians and media in the Islamic Republic -- even some who have previously criticized the president -- described Ahmadinejad's visit to New York as a triumph and denounced the university president who called him "a petty and cruel dictator."

But one pro-reform newspaper said that, although the president told his U.S. audience he respected academics, that was not always how it seemed at home.

Ahmadinejad, who often rails against the West, traveled to the United States at a time of escalating tension between the two foes over Tehran's nuclear ambitions and the war in Iraq.

The president spoke at Columbia University on Monday and on Tuesday addressed the U.N. General Assembly, where he told world leaders the issue of Iran's nuclear ambitions was "closed" and that military threats and sanctions had failed.

"By fearlessly and courageously walking into the 'Lion's Den' ... he is sure to become even more of a hero in the Arab-Muslim street than before," the daily Iran News wrote.

Sometimes I'm so accurate it's frightening.

Not really, as I stated yesterday, anyone with half a brain (I guess that lets out all you Liberals) could have seen this coming.

This is the perfect example of why the opinions of our Ivory Towered "Intellectuals" in their prestigious universities should have absolutely no voice in how our nation, our economy and our diplomacy are run. By living and working in their isolated, insulated surroundings, into which the realities of the outside world rarely intrude, their view of the outside world becomes skewed and what sounds great intellectually when discussed among their peers in their little enclaves of idealistic fantasy proves over and over again to be utopian, naive and dangerous.

They are trapped forever in the Never, Never Land of sophomoric ideals and naive, shallow concepts. Their absurd assumption that "as academics, they should allow all ideas [except those of Conservative American politics] to be given an equal stage on which they can be presented, discussed, and evaluated" and their complete lack of foresight as to the propaganda value such a prestigious ivitation provides to a despot such as Ahmadinejad is jarring in its naiveté.

There is a reason that they are called Ivory Towered Intellectuals. The repercussions of this poorly thought out invitation to this caricature of a world leader to be given an academic stage from which to present his propaganda have yet to have been realized. The fact that so many at Columbia chose to applaud Ahmadinejad's performance illustrates just how foolish and poorly served the students of these so called bastions of higher education are.

One is forced to ask how shallow does one's thought processes have to be for them to actually believe the words of a man on who's hands the blood of thousands rests. How much irrational hatred of your own nation does it require for one to take the word of a sponsor of Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists and the man responsible for the deaths of so many of our brave troops in Iraq over the words of your own democratically elected government?

That is the problem with these so-called "members of academia." They are so divorced from reality that the absurd becomes reasonable and the unthinkable becomes desirable.

The motives behind Columbia University's President Bollinger's remarks are transparent. On the heels of the criticism he and his university received for allowing Mahmoud Ahmadinejad this forum, he was attempting with little real success to deflect criticism from himself and his faculty's poorly thought out choice to make this invitation.

Once again we are given a glimpse into the world of academia and the narrow, shallow thought processes (if they can be called that) which occur in their insular communities.

Ahmadinejad has now "bearded the Lion" in his own den, as far as his political partner are concerned and has been given prestige and power far beyond his merit (kind of remeniscent of Hillary in her run for the White House).

For those keeping score:

The winners in this are the oppressive government of Iran, the terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, and of course, Ahmadinejad.

The losers in all of this are the American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the coalition of the willing, the American people, our war against the Global Islamic Jihad, and ultimately, Columbia University.

Remember, it was the Ivory Towered Intellectuals who pressed so hard for the Marxist Revolution in Russia. I was also they who were the first to be executed and persecuted once the revolution succeeded. This is fact. This is what history tells us, yet for those who live in that Never, Never Land; those facts have failed to penetrate the arrogance such an isolated enclave of likeminded individuals engenders.

By the way I feel the need to point out that it is these same "broadminded academicians" who so resolutely object to the presence of the ROTC. Truly these are people who believe in the free expression and exchange of ideas (as long as they don't involve Conservatives, the military, or those who voluntarily seek to help maintain the integrity of our borders-the Minute Men).

Liberals truly deserve their proper label of illiberals rather than the euphemism of "progressives."

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below

Ahmadinejad's Columbia Appearance Reveals the Astounding Naivete of Liberals

Well in an unusual act, I am linking this time not to an article in one of the mainstream newspapers, but to one of the diaries of the dailyKos.com "kossacks."

I do this to demonstrate just how naive, myopic, and reactional Liberals tend to be. I only use StevenLeser's diary entry because it is so typical of what passes for deep thought in a Liberal's mind.

September 25, 2007

Ahmadinejad and his Columbia University Visit – All Happened as it Should

By Steven Leser

I think I am the only one pleased with the way Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to this country played out. It seems that those on the political right were mostly upset with the idea he was allowed to speak at Columbia University at all. Those on the political left were unhappy that people protested against him. Jews in general were understandably upset that Ahmadinejad, accused of being a holocaust denier and someone who has been somewhat belligerent towards the state of Israel, was able to be in the country at all.

Anyone with an absolute objection to the idea of Ahmadinejad speaking at Columbia University has a fundamental misunderstanding of the reason why Universities and other institutes of higher learning exist. Even if you believe that Ahmadinejad is one of the most awful despots currently in power, the whole point of a University is to afford attendees the widest and deepest learning experience possible. Even at religious universities, students learn about evil and darkness as well as learning about those things that are good and pure. That does not mean you provide an evil person a platform all to himself or herself. I have an objection to the appearance by Christopher Hitchens at an upcoming FFRF (Freedom from Religion Foundation) conference because he will have a forum all to himself. Columbia set up an event for Ahmadinejad where he and his beliefs would be challenged by someone competent to do so, in this case, Columbia University President Lee Bollinger. I can think of no better way to teach people to recognize and deal with evil than to do so in a way like that which Columbia University did.

In some ways Mr. Leser is correct. It is a tradition for universities to allow disparate views to be expressed (unless one is a conservative American political pundit) so that students receive the broadest and best understanding of the world in general, and to trust their reasoning ability to discern the true from the false and the good from the bad.

It is in fact a necessity that all Americans be allowed to see such a monster unclothed so that they fully understand the innate deceptive nature of the enemies we face and the reason that America stands as a beacon, "that Shining City on the Hill" as the late President Reagan described us.

Where Mr. Leser, and apparently all (or the preponderance of) Liberals thought processes fail is in their jarringly insular view of the stage President Ahmadinejad was given. He and those like him have given little or no thought to the opportunity and prestige such a stage gives this despot in his own nation and on the world stage, where his appearance will not be broadcast in its entirety, but filtered by state run media outlets and foreign (and largely anti-American, anti-Israel) press organizations.

It is all well and good for academics to discuss and debate issue in the narrow confines of the university environment (would that they were as broad-minded and tolerant of conservative American political views), but there is a vast difference in the perceptions of those who live in America and enjoy the innate freedoms and liberties we take for granted. In other nations, the glimpses their populations will have of this terrorist's performance will be filtered by whatever the dictates of that nation's particular news outlet's biases seek to present.

Mr. Leser presumes, in a pathetically naive manner, that the words of Columbia University President Lee Bollinger, which he so roundly praises, will be heard by those throughout the world, thus allowing them to objectively evaluate Ahmadinejad's appearance and his response to both President Lee Bollinger's opening CYA salvo, and the Q&A session which followed.

Yet anyone mature enough to see what occurred at Columbia University, without the inherent blinders of one with an unvarnished hatred of President Bush and his administration's policies, will also be aware of the nature of censorship which exists in those nations with whom we are engaged in war, both ideologically and physically.

There are a number of synonyms for the word insular, such as parochial, or narrow but my personal favorite is "illiberal." A particularly useful word for those self-descrbed "Liberals" who make light of the war against the Global Islamic Jihad.

Leser's diary is very illustrative of the generally sophomoric logic used by those on the Left. Concepts which, on the surface, appear to be ideal and wise are not examined in depth. Their thinking is on a most superficial level and little thought is given beyond their emotional "knee-jerk" reaction of "What a great idea!"

Others on the Left have a much more malevolent and deceptive intent. Individuals like Mr. Juan Cole, who allows his anti-Bush, anti-American agenda to affect his every thought, goes so far as to accept the words of Ahmadinejad at face value; making no effort to judge his words by his actions.

Here is an excerpt from Juan Cole's article which appeared in Salon Magazine yesterday:

Turning Ahmadinejad into public enemy No. 1

Demonizing the Iranian president and making his visit to New York seem controversial are all part of the neoconservative push for yet another war.

By Juan Cole
Sep. 24, 2007

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to New York to address the United Nations General Assembly has become a media circus. But the controversy does not stem from the reasons usually cited.

The media has focused on debating whether he should be allowed to speak at Columbia University on Monday, or whether his request to visit Ground Zero, the site of the Sept. 11 attack in lower Manhattan, should have been honored. His request was rejected, even though Iran expressed sympathy with the United States in the aftermath of those attacks and Iranians held candlelight vigils for the victims. Iran felt that it and other Shiite populations had also suffered at the hands of al-Qaida, and that there might now be an opportunity for a new opening to the United States.

Instead, the U.S. State Department denounced Ahmadinejad as himself little more than a terrorist. Critics have also cited his statements about the Holocaust or his hopes that the Israeli state will collapse. He has been depicted as a Hitler figure intent on killing Israeli Jews, even though he is not commander in chief of the Iranian armed forces, has never invaded any other country, denies he is an anti-Semite, has never called for any Israeli civilians to be killed, and allows Iran's 20,000 Jews to have representation in Parliament.

There is, in fact, remarkably little substance to the debates now raging in the United States about Ahmadinejad. His quirky personality, penchant for outrageous one-liners, and combative populism are hardly serious concerns for foreign policy. Taking potshots at a bantam cock of a populist like Ahmadinejad is actually a way of expressing another, deeper anxiety: fear of Iran's rising position as a regional power and its challenge to the American and Israeli status quo. The real reason his visit is controversial is that the American right has decided the United States needs to go to war against Iran. Ahmadinejad is therefore being configured as an enemy head of state.

No Mr. Cole, we do not suffer from a "deeper anxiety: fear of Iran's rising position as a regional power and its challenge to the American and Israeli status quo." We fear what may happen in the Middle East should such a terrorist be allowed to grow in power and influence. We fear that he may further expand his already vigorous exportation of terrorism and violence throughout the region.

That Mr. Ahmadinejad supports Hamas and is sending both weapons and special ops troops into Iraq to kill American soldiers and Iraqi citizens in hopes of further disrupting the Iraqi's attempts to create a unified nation cannot be denied.

That Mr. Ahmadinejad is supplying both arms and support to Hamas in their attacks against Israel cannot be denied.

That Mr. Ahmadinejad sent Iranian weapons and support via his surrogates in Hezbollah to destabilize Lebanon cannot be denied.

Those are the facts Mr. Cole, not the bile you spew forth in your despicable attacks against our president and our nation.

In Mr. Cole we have a skilled propagandist whose aim is not to objectively evaluate President Ahmadinejad's presence in the United States, or his appearance before the Columbia University audience of students and faculty, but to castigate the American right.

Mr. Cole has already made up his mind about America and knows that America is planning to go to war with Iran. He has no proof. His sort of purveyor of misinformation doesn't require any proof, his opinion is sufficient for him. He is one of those arrogant Liberals for whom opinion trumps fact and myth substitutes for truth.

Ahmadinejad denies that he is an anti-Semite and that he has never called for the killing of Israeli Jews (this in spite of Ahmadinejad's repeated refusal to answer the question, directly put to him, as to whether he desires the elimination of the state of Israel) thus, in Mr. Cole's view, that must be the truth. No effort is expended in critical analysis; simply take Ahmadinejad at his word. Such dishonesty requires no thought, only, to quote Hillary, Mrs William J. Clinton, "a willing suspension of disbelief."

Yet Mr. Cole intentionally ignores that which IRIB News (the Iranian state News Organization) freely reported in 2005:

Ahmadinejad: Israel must be wiped off the map

Tehran, Oct 26 - Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Wednesday called for Israel to be "wiped off the map".

"The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world," the President told a conference in Tehran entitled 'the world without Zionism'.

"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land," he said.

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to the late founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khomeini.

Addressing some 4,000 students gathered in an interior ministry conference hall, Ahmadinejad also called for Palestinian unity, resistance and a point where the annihilation of the Zionist regime will come.

"The Islamic umma (community) will not allow its historic enemy to live in its heartland," he said.

Mr. Cole would have us take Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at his word that the Iranian state is pursuing nuclear capabilities solely for peaceful energy purposes. Perhaps Mr. Cole should take Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at his word.

An honest broker of information would at least express some skepticism at the words of a proven liar, an exporter of terrorism, and an oppressor of his own people.

Mr. Cole stands out among those who equate the actions of our troops in Iraq and the policies of the Bush Administration to the actions of Ahmadinejad and Hitler. He claims moral equivalency between what is happening in Iraq today with the actions of murderous despots, both past and present.

This "moral equivalency" stems from the Left's irrational hatred of President Bush. Yet we know hatred stems from ignorance and fear, not from logic or reason. These same people who so readily equate President Bush to those two despots have suffered none of the oppression the citizens and victims of despotic regimes routinely suffer. The very fact that individuals like Mr. Cole and Leser can write those words and do so without fear of reprisal, imprisonment, torture or death gives proof of the lies they tell.

They cannot cite a single example of such oppression within our nation. They have no facts with which to back up any of their claims, only assumption, innuendo, and hatred of all things American.

Don't take my word for the claim of censorship in Iran; we can already see some of those filters in active propaganda mode, again from IRIB News, today.

IRI enjoys good relations with world nations

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said, "America did not take proper advantage of good Iraq negotiations opportunity due to Iran's appropriate proposals."

Ahmadinejad made the comment in an interview with Channel 13, 60 Minutes anchorman Charlie Rose, aired on Monday hours before addressing at New York's Colombia University.

Reacting to a question on his viewpoint on authenticity of America's accusations against Iran's involvement in insurgencies in Iraq, Ahmadinejad said, "The Iraqi Shiis and Sunnis are all our brethren in faith, and we enjoy good relations both with the Iraqi people and with their popular government. Why then should we foment crises in Iraq?"

He emphasized that the American politicians are not ready for hearing logical arguments, adding, "We enjoy good relations with entire world nations, including with the American nation, but believe there is a partisan dictatorship ruling in America, not permitting any candidate outside the two big parties to take the lead on behalf of the people."

The President added, "America claims it is observing freedom of expression. Why then are they raising so much hue and cry over Colombia University's inviting of the IRI President to give an address and answer the students' questions?"

Ahmadinejad pointed out that before the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran and during the American backed regime of the ousted Shah, the country was entangled with poverty, its prisons were overcrowded with political prisoners, who were tortured brutally.

He added, "Today, our nation is present at all the scenes and news on the Iranian nation's advancement are broadcast in the world every day."

I guess I missed the part where IRIB News included the pre-rebuttal of Columbia University President Bollinger, or the question and answer portion of President Pipsqueaks appearance.

Sorry Mr. Leser, Mr. Cole, go peddle your lies somewhere else...Oh! Come to think of it you are. The audiences you are addressing are true believers already. They practice "a willing suspension of disbelief" in their everyday lives.

Long winded I know, but I just couldn't let this one go.

Long Live Our American Republic!!!

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below