America's love fest with Ahmadinejad

Schwarzenegger’s embrace of the dubious scientific evidence for global warming to his intent on revitalizing California’s health care system to a socialized health care system has alienated most of his Republican base in California including me. However, I give Arnold kudos for his latest move on signing a bill which will in his words, “give a powerful blow to terrorism.” This latest move has received little press, but Schwarzenegger has pledged to sign on Monday a bill to require the state’s two giant public pension funds to disinvest billions of dollars in Iran-related investments. This is exactly what needs to be done. Individual investors, Mutual Funds and other states should follow suit. Remember the outcry that brought down apartheid in South Africa? Where is that same outcry when it comes to Iran?

Schwarzenegger’s move came at a time when we seem to be coddling the worst terrorist in the world, a little twerp of a man, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad under the guise of free speech. When Ahmadinejad began speaking at Columbia University, he began with a harangue invoking the return of Mahdi. Mahdi, according to Islam, will return just before the advent of the Day of Judgment, the apocalypse. Mahdi will be the 12th Iman who will bring about the restoration of the Islamic Caliphate and a world in which Islam reigns as the world’s only religion under Sharia law. This can only happen with the violent overthrow of anything non-Muslim. So in Ahmadinejad’s opening statement, he was calling for the violent overthrow of America. Neither the audience nor Bollinger even took notice. The reference to Mahdi just went completely over the heads of the erudite academics or as Lenin coined “useful idiots.” Their $50,000 educations seem to have been for naught. This is because very few people in the West understand Islam. Ahmadinejad continued with an incoherent, puerile and boorish introduction mixed with pseudo-science and other nonsensical information.

Of course, to put things in perspective, Bollinger says he would have invited Hitler too given the chance. Well, Mein Kampf is one of the best selling books in the Middle East. Germany has free speech too but Mein Kamp is banned in that country. There is a limit to free speech. Giving Ahmadinejad a public forum would fall under that category.

In fact, it seemed Ahmadinejad received more deferential treatment when he spoke then when the minutemen spoke at Columbia University. The minutemen have been doing what the president refuses to do, guarding our borders.

Anne Applebaum states in the Washington Post the only time we should give Ahmadinejad a public forum in which to speak:

Instead, the university should have demanded genuine reciprocity. If the president and dean of Columbia truly believed in an open exchange of ideas, they should have presented a debate between Ahmadinejad and an Iranian dissident or human rights activist — someone from his own culture who could argue with him in his own language — instead of allowing him to be filmed on a podium with important-looking Americans. Perhaps Columbia could even have insisted on an appropriate exchange: .... Christopher Hitchens or, better still, Ayaan Hirsi Ali — to Qom, the Shiite holy city, to debate the mullahs on their own ground.

These are people who understand Islam and its culture.

We can now expect the Iranian propaganda machine to go into overdrive. Bollinger began his tough rhetoric with a draconian introduction that some have said even insulted the Iranian leader. But regardless, if Bollinger used this rhetoric under pressure or for some other reason, does it really make any difference? When he posed pointed questions such as questions on the holocaust, Bollinger neglected to drill down to get to the root of the situation like any experienced interviewer would do. Instead Bollinger would just proceed to the next question. Of course, it doesn't really matter one way or the other, because just Ahmadinejad's presence served the Iranian leader's purpose. What do you think the Iranians will hear? They won’t hear the boos or the laughter from the homosexual question, but they will hear the applause from the “useful idiots” that seemed to resonate through the auditorium at various intervals, and the questions and answers the Iranians deem appropriate.

Anyone who thinks Ahmadinejad was here for America's benefit is deluded. He was here for the benefit of his propaganda machine period. Free speech or not Ahmadinejad got what he wanted.

The audience applauded both Ahmadinejad and statements or questions from the audience.

"Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator," one person chided. But what will the Iranians hear? They might hear the applause, but it won’t be from a statement the audience says, it will be applause approvingly of Ahmadinejad. The Iranians will walk away believing the Americans are in love with Ahmadinejad, but in reality the audience at the prestigious Columbia University will look like the useful idiots they are.

On Hugh Hewitt's site, he writes:

Iran is smuggling advanced weapons, including surface-to-air missiles, into Iraq to be used by extremists against American troops, the US military charged on Sunday.
US military spokesman Rear Admiral Mark Fox told reporters in Baghdad that Iran was shifting sophisticated arms such as "RPG-29s, explosively-formed penetrators (EFPs), 240 mm rockets and Misagh-1 surface-to-air missiles" across its borders into Iraq.

An EFP is a feared roadside bomb which when it explodes emits a white-hot slug of molten copper that can cut through the armoured skins of US military vehicles.
Fox reiterated that Iranian national Mahmudi Farhadi, detained on Thursday in the northern province of Sulaimaniyah, is one of the kingpins in the bomb smuggling operations.

"He is a member of the Ramazan Corps, the Quds Force department responsible for all operations in Iraq," Fox said.

And we grant this tyrant a podium in which to speak. What appalls me even further is Bush’s apathy on the entire affair. What happened with Bush’s address to the nation on September 20th 2001 when he said,

We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime?

Instead, we let the terrorist walk among us. Who would have thunk?

And now, we have Buah and this little twerp going to the inept United Nations. Bush instead of talking about Iran and Syria, the two greatest threats in the world talks about Burma huh? And then he talks about how the Palestinian people had Democratic elections. Does he forget they elected Hamas, a terrorist organization? In Bush’s zeal to spread Democracy throughout the world, it seems to matter not who is elected. An Islamic Democracy is an oxymoron. It doesn’t exist in Islamic tradition.

A few hours later, it was Ahmadinejad’s turn to speak. His discourse once again included the invocation of Mahdi’s return, and he accused the west of hindering his progress with his nuclear ambitions, of course for peaceful purposes. And we all know Ahmadinejad only wants peace.

Until we learn who our enemy really is, we will all be in danger.

The past couple of days has produced only one good thing I can see – I no longer had to watch anymore of OJ Simpson. Ahmadinejad seems to have taken precedence.

Note: Just because I am down on Bush in this piece in no way makes me lean towards the Democratic isle – The Democrats are worse. The Republicans don't get it, and the Democrats get it even less. There is one party dumber than the Republican party – the Democratic party. When are we going to get someone in the Reagan tradition who works for the good of the country instead of what is politically expedient or politically correct. (it's not Hillary.)