Ahmadinejad has attacked the conference in Annapolis and feels that it was a propagandist excercise by the U.S to placate the Zionists. He also let loose his anger upon the final declaration at the Middle East peace conference and labeled it a “piece of torn paper.”
Ahmadinejad seemed to have been irked by the participation of Saudi Arabia and Syria in the conference, and communicated this to King Abdullah of Saudi.
The ideological divide between Iran’s mullah regime and the Arabs has come to the fore after Annapolis. Arabs simply do not expect to wake-up one fine morning, just for the morning newspapers to break the pleasent news of Israel’s fairy tale vanishing act from the face of the earth - they are more realistic and are ready to parley.
Western diplomats can also bank upon the colossal cultural rift between Iran and the rest of the Arab world. The distance between the two is more than any tool of mensuration might make you believe.
“We have had such conferences in the past as well, but all of them failed - also this time there will be no achievement but another effort to undermine the rights of Palestinians,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad-Ali Hosseini said.[source]
No Comments Send Article
Ahmadinejad has always had a mouthful of rubbish but with every comment of his, he seems to reinvent the wheels of preposterous vocalization, and takes it to a whole new level. His pejorative of the many detractors of Iran’s nuke program within Iran’s political and social circles is well known and he has time and again fired a slew of disparaging remarks at them.
Earlier he likened their brains to that of a goat’s. Now he has disowned those remarks and blamed the media for deceiving the public. He called the critics of the Iranian nuclear program ,and his government’s obstinate and rigid nuclear policy of minimal willingness to parley, traitors. He is trying to convince the Iranian people, who have insulated themselves from the political situation in their country by remaining silent, that the nuclear program is not only in national interest but the acme of national interest, and those against it are against the state, hence traitors.
He is implicitly trying to intimidate the moderates in Iran, although he abstained from naming them and promised to do it when the nuclear issue got resolved. He alleged that they had colluded with the “enemy” and were conspiring against the state.
I am tempted to stick my neck out and forbode that he might, in the future, unleash a policy of prosecution and persecution against these opponents of the nuclear program who have been peaceful in voicing their concerns and dissidence.
If something like that happens then it might open the floodgates for an unbridled reign of terror, injustice and naked show of his obnoxious power. Just as prophets of God are said to declare their real purpose, this man will also resoundingly declare his (absolute rule), and he seems to be no carmen by the virtue of his deeds and their implications. Even now the world is receiveing images of the increasing oppression in Iran. This self-fashioned beast has brought back the primitive practice of public hangings into the 21 century, where many countries have shunned capital punishment, or are mulling such a step.
But these people who have been berated by this dictator as traitors can be expected to continue their dissidence, however, the people outside Iran also need to join in.
“These people are traitors and, based on our pact with the nation, we will not back down,” he said, according to the official news agency, Irna.
“If they do not give up their pressures on [the government] over the atomic issues, we will expose them to the Iranian nation,” he added. [source]
3 Comments Send Article
Many people are slowly but surely updating their threat perception of Iran and Hans Blix, former chief UN weapons inspector, is among them. He has labelled Iran as a more serious threat than Iraq was in 2003. This might seem to be a bold, lofty statement from the man who inspected the Iraqi weapons facilities and scoured them for chemical or nuclear weapons prior to the invasion of that country (some of you might even accuse him being complicit with the U.S. government). However, he has logical reasons to believe that Iran is a real threat.
He singles out Iran’s belligerent intent to strengthen his case and quickly points out that Iraq, on the other hand, was very submissive before being invaded by the U.S and its allies in 2003.
“They have also a large nuclear sector with two nuclear power reactors that are ready to go into operation, research reactors going on, a lot of people and a lot of money.Therefore the suspicions and concerns about Iran and enriched uranium are far more substantial than they were in the case of Iraq.” [source]
3 Comments Send Article
