Ahmadinejad Visit to UN Sparks Protests, Walkouts

On a day where several hundred demonstrators rallied and chanted outside UN headquarters against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s visit to New York, European Union and American diplomats inside the world body staged their own protest, walking out half way through the Iranian President’s address to the General Assembly.

In his half hour speech, Ahmadinejad’s listed off a long line of rhetorical questions condemning American and European foreign policy as far back as the 17th century.

“Who imposed colonialism for over four centuries upon this world?…Who triggered the first and second world wars? Who created the wars in the Korean peninsula and Vietnam? Who imposed, through deceit and hypocrisy, the zionist and all their 60 years of war, homelessness, terror and mass murder on the Palestinian people and countries of the region?” 

Ahmadinejad also spoke of more recent events,blaming the global economic crisis on the greed of Western governments and corporation, criticizing the Security Council’s bias towards Israel and putting in question NATO’s motives in Libya. 

“ Do these arrogant powers really have the competence and ability to run or govern the world? Or is it acceptable that they call themselves as the sole defender of freedom democracy and human rights, while they militarily attack and occupy other countries? Can the flower of democracy blossom from NATO’s missiles, bombs or guns?”

Last year, diplomats walked out of the Iranian President’s General Assembly address after he said the September 11th attacks could have been orchestrated by the American intelligence community and called for an international investigation into the matter

Ahmadinejad once again brought up 9/11 conspiracy theories, this time questioning American motives behind the operation to kill Osama Bin Laden.

“Instead of assigning a fact finding team, they killed the main perpetrator and threw his body into the sea…why should it not have been allowed to bring him to trial, to help recognize those who launch terrorist groups and brought wars and other miseries into the region?Is there any classified information that must be kept secret?”

The US mission to the UN issued a short response to the Iranian President’s address. 

“Mr. Ahmadinejad had a chance to address his own people’s aspirations for freedom and dignity, but instead he again turned to abhorrent anti-Semitic slurs and despicable conspiracy theories.” said the statement.

Columbia Students May Dine With A Dictator

Four years ago, on September 24, 2007, Columbia University invited Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to address the campus.

Alumni threatened to remove their funding from the University and students and concerned citizens protested in uproar over the university’s decision to provide a public forum for a man who many say embodies cruelty, tyranny, aggression and intolerance.

Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of Israel, denied the Holocaust and promoted the preposterous theory that the United States planned the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to launch wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. He is prosecuting homosexuals, blatantly violating human rights in Iran and is widely believed to be actively pursuing nuclear weapons and sponsoring al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. He rejects all forms of democracy and expels brazen, discriminatory dialect.

But Columbia University President Lee Bollinger defended his invitation to Ahmadinejad, arguing that providing Columbia as a forum for Ahmadinejad “is the right thing to do” because “it is required by the existing norms of free speech, of Columbia University, and of academic institutions.”

After a cold introduction from Bollinger, in which he referred to Ahmadinejad as “ridiculous” and a “petty and cruel dictator,” Ahmadinejad maintained his infamous reputation and made rash, hatred-filled comments about the state of Israel, questioned the extent of the Holocaust and denied the existence of homosexuals in the Islamic Republic.

“In Iran we don’t have homosexuals like in your country,” Ahmadinejad said during that 2007 speech to Columbia students. “In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don’t know who’s told you that we have this.”

Ahmadinejad then defended Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons by stating that the United States has developed nuclear capabilities so it’s only fair that Iran can as well.

Unfortunately, it seems that Columbia University has not learned from its mistakes.

Rumors have been circulating that the University’s President Lee Bollinger and 15 members of the Columbia International Relations Council and Association (CIRCA) may be attending a private dinner with Ahmadinejad on September 21 in Midtown Manhattan while he is in New York for the United Nations General Assembly. 

According to Bollinger’s office, however, it is just a rumor.

“At no time has there been any University event planned or considered involving the president of Iran and President Bollinger, nor has there ever been any plan for a dinner involving the Iranian president on campus,” Bollinger’s office told TRNS. “Media reports to the contrary have no basis in fact and we hope they will be corrected.”

CIRCA’s involvement, however, was confirmed by the Columbia Spectator.

CIRCA vice president of academics Tim Chan told the Spectato that group members are “enthusiastic” about their potential dinner with Ahmadinejad and are “thrilled to have this opportunity.”

Chan, however, stressed that the meeting is still tentative.

In an op-ed published in the Spectator on Wednesday entitled, “Say No to Ahmadinedinner,” Columbia Junior David Fine argued that “the moral burden of our Columbia education and human dignity requires us to examine whether it is right for us to sit down to dinner with a man who facilitates, even encourages, such executions.”

“What will this dinner accomplish? Nothing, except a sating of the human urge to be in the presence of greatness, no matter how unbridled or pernicious,” Fine wrote. “Since no public report can be made, nor Ahmadinejad’s opinions changed, this intimate dinner is, at best, the moral equivalent of sitting down with Jeffrey Dahmer or Charles Manson just for the “thrill.” At worst, it is a small, but useful, affirmation for Ahmadinejad that his thoughts deserve to be heard by the best and brightest that American universities can offer.”

CIRCA did not respond to TRNS’s request for comment.

Latest WikiLeaks Dump Shows United Front Against Iran, Says Mideast Affairs Expert

By A.J. Swartwood

While the recent release of a cache of State Department cables “goes against the business of politics in the Gulf,” it did not disable or seriously jeopardize American diplomatic relations with Gulf States or alter positions toward Iran, but in fact clarified them, Kuwaiti Gulf Affairs and Nuclear Proliferation Expert Dr. Sami Alfaraj said Tuesday.

Alfaraj said that he was not “overwhelmed” with the release of the confidential documents and that there were in fact some positives that came out of the leaks. One of the benefits, he added, is that it clearly showed that many Gulf countries’ positions towards Iran and its nuclear proliferation were aligned.

“One element that really caught my attention was how different countries of the GCC as well as the region, whether in Jordan and Israel, were thinking the same way about how to best stop the Iranian nuclear program in its tracks,” said Alfaraj. As tensions with Iran continue to rise, many of those nations are wondering whether or not to continue pursuing diplomatic negotiations or “if war was to be contemplated.”

On the other side of the conflict, Alfaraj added, the release might well have a positive impact on Iran.
“The WikiLeaks have…influence on the Iranian strategic mind. It shows them the degree of animosity between Iran and its neighbors, that it is against what Mr. Ahmadinejad’s administration has been alluding to, that it is enjoying great status and is welcome everywhere.”

Alfaraj hopes that this increased transparency about the Middle Eastern world’s united opposition to Iran and its nuclear program will lead the more “reasonable” members of Iran’s ruling party to alter their increasingly standoffish behavior before military action is necessary.

Ahmadinejad's World

New Yorkers aren’t mad at Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Trust him, he knows New York. “The people of New York are friendly people” he said during a press conference at the Warwick Hotel today when asked if he owed the city an apology for insinuating that the World Trade Center attack had been carried out by the American government.

But was the Iranian President trying to provoke Americans with his statement ? And for what purpose?
Not at all says Ahmadinejad, he was actually trying to help the American people, so their children aren’t sent off to die in a foreign country and their tax dollars aren’t spent on killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And while he expected the comment to upset American officials, Ahmadinejad also believes the majority of Americans, almost 80% according to his polls, already suspect the deadliest attack on American soil was in some way or form carried out by their own government. And what polls would those be you may ask? Well, most of them, if not all of them, says the Iranian leader.

 What effect  does he think his 9/11 comments  will have on American policy towards Iran? ” I think it helps them too. I’ve opened the gates, the path for them to leave respectfully Iraq and Afghanistan. Is that a bad offer?I think its a great offer. Its a humanitarian gesture, to help the people of Afghanistan and Iraq, its to help American troops and NATO troops who are being killed there. Its helping the US taxpayers who spend their taxes on killing people . This is assistance. This is what I call assistance “

Ahmadinejad ended the press conference by addressing one of his trademark causes: freedom of expression.
“At the end of the day can we have freedom of speech and believe that it exists in the United States? Can we believe in it? I hope we can?I ask those who are in charge to stop pressuring reporters and the media so much, stop imposing on them” said Ahmadinejad “then it will be very interesting what kind of lively debates will come out.”

Experts Support Obama’s Response to Contested Iranian Election

By Mariko Lamb- Talk Radio News Service

Nick Burns, former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, countered critics who have described Obama’s response to the allegedly fraudulent election in Iran as overly passive. Instead, Burns said that Obama was “sensible” and “handled it superbly.”

Mounting evidence has suggested that the results of the recent Presidential election in Iran, which resulted in the apparent re-election of former President Ahmadinejad, suffered from fraud. The newly surfaced evidence includes: millions of extra ballots that were printed but unaccounted for, a refusal to use mandated see-through ballot boxes, a refusal to monitor ballots, and voting stations running out of ballots early despite being given an overabundance of blank ballots.

“I don’t have any doubt that it was a stolen election,” said speaker Abbas Milani, Director of Iranian Studies at Stanford University, in a discussion on the United States’ response to the Iranian elections Tuesday.

Karim Sadjadpour, former Chief Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group, said the elections were fixed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini because “a Mousavi Presidency and an Obama Presidency at the same time would make it very clear to everyone that Ayatollah Khomeini is the impediment that is standing in the way of U.S.-Iran relations.”

Burns said, “[Obama] has been very thoughtful, measured--you’ve seen that his statements have become progressively stronger in line with events.” He continued to praise Obama for not “playing politics with the issue at home” and maintaining his focus on hopes of diplomacy between the U.S. and Iran instead of succumbing to domestic criticism.