Since 9/11 when PresidentBush and his political cronies came into power, the world has been even more repressing against anything or any country linked to American interest.  I wonder if the Bush administration realizes that there is no worst form of terrorism than denying people of their opinions no matter how different they are from ours. 

Yes, President Ahmadinejad has been called to judgment, sentenced and pronounced guilty at the high court of the American media. Unfortunately for them and fortunately for the Iranian President, this negative publicity has produced exactly the opposite of the intended consequences; undeniably it had made him a hero at least from the world perspective. Who would ever have imagined that the recently concluded United Nations; Head of States meeting in New York, highlighted and covered only this mightier than thou Ahmedinejad. Even our dear President Bush took a back seat in the national and international coverage of the event.

 Ahmadinejad-Ahmadinejad-Bush-Bush who is the fairest of them all?

Definitely unbecoming to Americans, Ahmednejad is the fairest. He claimed it with all boldness and straight faced... The American public tried to create a monster out of him, but ended up creating a saint whom young Muslims world over would come to admire and cherish as a defender of Islam and the Arabs. President Ahmadinejad posses all the qualities of a Saddam Hussein incarnate.  He was the man who went to his grave defending what he perceived as the truth and the true defender of the Iraqi people.

This does not mean to say he is a hero or a villain; no way------, his woes are far from being over. Especially as he stepped into the psychological toes of Jews- Americans and man, this guy is in a very- very -very hot pepper soup. He is fearless and is not coward into submission by any power. If he had any fear of the mighty hand of America supported by the powerful Jews community, he would have thought twice before opening his big mouth. Only the mere mention of Jews has brought down many, including renounced politicians, religious leaders, government officials, movie stars, school teachers the list goes on.. Could you imagine him trying to mention Holocaust as if the mere mention of it was not enough?  He even had the audacity to tell us to ignore stories we were told long ago about the Holocaust, but rather to look at it from all sources not just from one point of view. Oh, boy, Heaven helps you!  

Ahmedinejad is in trouble not because his government has the capacity to build nuclear weapon of mass destruction, he is not in trouble because he was among the students during the Iranian revolution in 1979 that took American diplomats hostage for 444 days. But he is in trouble because he stepped on the Jewish time-bomb, defying the general myth of see no evil, hear no evil, and dare not speak any evil.

This is one of the  many reasons for his recent problem at Columbia University. He is the inheritor of the Iran Revolution and carried with him all the woes that Americans fear about Iran and Imam Khomeini. Those who followed the controversy between the two countries now see the dangers facing Ahmedinejad and his government. Up until recently, many people talked about the coming war between the two countries. The war is being argued over because Iran is feared by both Israelis and the Americans. The Americans are afraid because they think the possession of nuclear power by Iran would lower their prestige and power over the Arab nations. It could also enhance the power of the Shia against the Sunni, who have already remained faithful to Western interest even though occasionally men like Nasser or Saddam Hussein sometimes go the other way. 

Ahmedinejad is an explosive time-bomb in the American and Israeli landscapes because he represents the system-challenger forces against American global hegemony. Opposed to American power and its destructive capacities in the developing world, this President is accused of supporting international terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism. The Hezbollah and Hamas are the two most widely cited groups. American and Israeli media repeat this message over and over again. But is it true?

The recent visit to Columbia University gave us a good idea about the state of affairs. Coming to the annual gatherings of heads of states of the world, many leaders are expected to articulate their points of view about things in the world. Ahmadinejad took it upon himself to tell it like it is. America’s excesses were listed without fear and favor. Going one by one on the American military and political actions around the world , the Iran President told us about Guantanno and the victimization of people without trials, Abu Gharaib in Iraq , the kidnapping and jailing of people in secret places, the ease-dropping on people and the opening of personal mails as well as e-mails around the world. In his opinion, these excesses have made America the source of international and domestic terrorism against many people and top on the list of human rights abuser. In light of this development, it is unacceptable for Iran to take the claims of democratization made by America and the other Western powers. Their claims to be fighting for freedom and justice are nothing but false promises from the hands of a tyrannical order. Not only are they ruling us through private markets but through their military might.

What is striking about President Ahmadinejad visit to Columbia was the fact that he was not remembered as one of the students who seized the American hostages but as a hate-monger raging against Israel and the Holocaust. Apparently President Bollinger of Columbia University was under strong Jewish, Bahai and Homosexual pressures to cave in to their criticism. The Jewish students, faculty and the larger Jewish communities in New York and beyond saw the whole exercise as a danger reminder of a Nazi return to the States. The Bahai on the other hand, hate the Iranian Revolution because it took away many of the privileges accorded to them under the Shah of Iran. Stripped of their past glory and not too sure whether the climate of politics in Iran would change for the better, they seized this opportunity to rail against Ahmadinejad. The homosexual groups in the United States also saw this opportunity as a sounding board for the globalization of their contemporary success in America and in the West. Together these three forces opposed to Iran have made it clear that the negative image of Iran among Americans is too strong for even those who opposed them locally would identify with them internationally. This is beginning to develop an interesting proposition. Ahmadinejad’s case is the most recent and observers of the America situation would be looking for such cases in international relations.

Again, taking a step further on Ahmadinejad’s visit and the international ramifications it has for Iranians, Muslims and the Third World countries, one wonders where this event would lead all of us in the long term. What comes out clearly from the halls of the United Nations are many things to remember. As it was, in Ahmadinejad the world community saw an Iranian leader who eclipsed both the American President and the other leaders of the world. In the very heart of New York where the Jewish opponents of the Iranian leader could have embargoed or sabotaged his coverage they failed miserably to deny him the coverage and the attention. Not only were the American reporters dancing for pictures and sound bites from this Iranian giant, but all their colleagues covering the White House and the United Nations joined in the pursuit. Like the hated and unwanted Caesar charging against the American Eagle, Ahmadinejad came, saw and conquered. This turn of events socked some of the American TV reporters and Glen Beck represented the most frustrated among them. projecting himself as America’s defender of the Faith and warrior, he went after the Iranian leader without any sense of fair play and balance. To his dismay he found out the hard truth of fairer coverage from the BBC webpage responses of students who blamed President Bollinger for his lack of respect for the foreign visitor. He also lamented the fact that the foreign press seemed to have been more generous in their coverage of the man than their American counterparts. Real or imagined, the fact remains that the Iranian President survived the ordeal and went home bragging about Divine intervention on his behalf.

Among several points to remember in this war of show-off between the United States and Iran are:  the lack of respect shown to the Iranian leader would leave a big gap between foreign expectations and American responsibility to their visiting guests. First of all, when you invite a guest, you don’t go about insulting the person. Civility tells us that guests are sacred goats; just like the customer, guests are always right. In putting this matter behind us let us say here and in passing that President Bollinger could have been more polite to his guest without loing face by either extending the mat of welcome or sending a letter withdrawing the original invitation. What amazed most observers were the vituperations that barraged him with insults. This is the first time I had ever seen a host introducing his guest not with sweet words of welcome but with insults.. Well, at this point I don’t think that Bollinger’s hostile and negative attitude towards President Ahmadinejad worked in favor of the University. One, it made the university, its faculty members, and students look stupid and lack any form of a responsible academic civility.  Many world leaders would be reluctant to be drawn into such a political trap.

Yet, the bold and the audacious ones would face the challenges and beat down their foes like Ahmadinejad did. The other point that will be remembered from this incidence is the shaming of the Third World leaders. Apparently since the defiant acts of the revolutionary leaders of the independence era fewer and fewer leaders of the Third World have come to the United Nations singing the songs of nationhood and political defiance of the superpowers. Certainly Ahmadinejad made history. Not only did he command the attention of global media but he said things that many of them felt but were either too scarred or scared to articulate or too slavishly tied to the apron strings of their foreign donors.

President Ahmadinejad bold behavior and performance at the United Nations remainds us of another world leader who manifested this act of defiance and self-affirmation in the personality of President Yahya Jammeh of the Gambia. We all remember  last year when President Jammeh earned the distinction of hosting the African Union (AU) meeting in Banjul, Gambia invited the Presidents of Iran and Venezuela to the African Union, but he also gave a dignified welcome to President Mugabe. These three hated leaders from the Americas, Asia and Africa came and presented their points of view before Jammeh and his colleagues. Though Jammeh himself did not come to this year’s UN session, his Vice President Ms. Isatou Njie affirmed Gambia’s support for the Cuban struggle. The Gambian number two attacked U.S. embargo against Cuba and called for its end. This is understandable because Cuba does provide a great deal of medical and health services to Gambians. 

Looking deep into the psychology of this event, I see the performance of the Iranian leader paralleled to that of Fidel Castro of Cuba when he came to the UN over forty –five years ago beating the drums of what some American journalists then called Cha-Cha communism in Cuba. What made that occasion significant was the youth of the Cuban leader and the dynamism that he showed in his speech, demeanor and diplomacy. Another parallel to the speech of the Iran leader were the speeches and behavior of Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Sekou Toure of Guinea and Gamal Nasser of Egypt. In those days of decolonization the language and power of the rising leaders of the Third World inspired and fired the imaginations of the young peoples of the developing world. Not since then has the words of a speaker at the UN enjoyed the quoting tongues of men as in this particular case.

Eucharia Mbachu

Voiceofwomenandchildren.org

Robot  Villager

# 1 President Ahmadinejad the big man in Terean is the dude the world loves to hate or hates to love, de...Read the full article. Posted by Robot| 05.10.2007 01:16

fxo  Villager

# 2 Madam, please do not describe name calling courage. Because if you do, where do we place people who actually do something ( building a bomb and hiding behind lies of "I am building a power plant" is not courage) to improve the lots of the people of this world. Ahmadinejad does not represent muslims or the people of the 3rd world or even Arabs ( Iranians are not Arabs). If in your world Ahmadinejad is a giant then your world must be really cramped. What is this whole Jews Jews Jews America America West West Why so much hate and anger? Posted by fxo| 05.10.2007 14:19

JAGA-JAGA  Villager

# 3 Ahmadinejad reminds me of another Robert Mugabe who have nothing more to offer their people but is engaged in stirring up external conflicts in order to hide their domestic policy failures. The Iranians priority now is not to build nuclear plant. His domestic economic policies have failed woefully. Let him address his domestic problems first before looking for external conflicts to address, period. Charity, they say begins at home. Posted by JAGA-JAGA| 05.10.2007 17:53