Lowest Common Denominatrix™ Kate McMillan gleefully reproduces the propaganda that all the cool neo-con kids are pumping out these days:
"It is naïve to ignore the uses to which Ahmadinejad will put his invitation. Over the past years, Ahmadinejad’s confrontational rhetoric and policies have resulted in diplomatic isolation and economic hardship for Iran. These developments are unpopular among Iranians. It is beneficial to Ahmadinejad and his regime, then, if he can claim to the Iranian people that his leadership is not hurting their country. If he can demonstrate that he is treated abroad as a respected leader, he will be better able to counter his critics at home. Columbia’s invitation thus gives political assistance to Ahmadinejad.
OK, let's see here ... "Confrontational rhetoric and policies?" Check. "Diplomatic isolation?" Check. Causing domestic economic hardship? Check. Being unpopular at home? Big-time check there. And being treated abroad with respect by butt-kissing suck-ups and toadying sycophants to better counter his critics at home? Super-duper checkaroonie.
Are we done here? Yeah, I think we're done here.
OH, MY ... The hyper-ventilating, shrieking, pants-wetting terror mixed with fake bravado over in the comments section at that article at Kate's place is something to behold, if you can stomach the infantile whining.
7 comments:
I could pretend to be a rightwinger and spew very predictable talking points and guaranteed KKKate would reproduce them on her blog.
...it's tempting, I'll tell you to make a fool out of that stupid racist redneck.
Particularly silly since all the 'negative consequences' were in place prior to Ahmadinejad's arrival on the Iranian political scene and will probably remain after he leaves. His predecessor as President was a soft-spoken political reformer and responding to his diplomatic overtures might have gone a long way towards reconciling Iran with the world community.
Instead he was dismissed as a puppet - any story about the various political and diplomatic reforms he sought bracketed with an 'of course the Presidency is a completely symbolic position in Iran, he has no real power and the Imans run everything.' Marginalized by the international community the nascent reform movement in Iran that could have been coaxed into a real transformative change was mostly stillborn - though still present.
Then Ahmadinejad won, he fit the narrative nicely and suddenly his every statement and action is hung on breathlessly - or mistranslated - by the neo-cons and bomb Iran crowd, but nothing has actually changed.
The Presidency in Iran has no more or less power than when a diplomatic hopeful promoter of democracy and modernization held it, but now someone who fits the narrative better has it and suddenly he has vast - even cosmic power. This despite the fact that he's deeply unpopular in Iran and the very urbane and secular Iranian people - among the most modern and pro-western of the Muslim world - are deeply embarrassed by his nuttier pronouncements.
Iranians see that whether they have a fire-breathing radical or a soft spoken technocrat and modernizer in power they get treated the same, so really what incentive do they have to change? In a very real way change and reform in Iran has been actively discouraged by the international community. It's like the more cliquish and unpleasant elements of high school - the guy everyone dismisses as a spotty nerd could come back from summer vacation with a tan, contact lenses three inches taller and with a new wardrobe, but the cool kids table will still treat him the way he always has been. He was slotted into the pocket protector, floodwater pants role in their heads and any attempt to leave that role behind will be treated with scorn and even violence.
And as to the right wing talking point that the west is at war with Iran and has been since the revolution - well as Glenn Greenwald recently pointed out, that would mean the folks in the Reagan administration who sold them weapons - people who are active members of and/or cheerleaders for the current Bush administration - are guilty not just of treason but high treason. Same with the board of Halliburton for doing big business with Iran until very very recently - now who does that include...?
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
Brilliantly stated!
Indeed. And it seems it has to be re-stated every 3 months or so.
I really have a hard time believing rightwingers think going to war with Iran would be great idea. It would be a disaster.
We're still getting blowback from the 1953 overthrow of Mossadegh, for God's sakes.
Once again, I must attempt to reeducate you on the issue of freedom of speech, which you lefties seem to value so highly.
Freedom of speech isn't anything about speech; it's about listening. The offense Columbia is committing is that it is letting — indeed making — people listen to a bad man. After all, Mr. A is Evil. If it were only Kate & her Couageous Crew of Commentaters who listened, it wouldn't be so bad, for they are vessels of righteousness. They will not be misled by his propaganda. But you lefties are going to listen as well, and you may well be suborned by Mr. A's Eviltude.
What's more, the speech is sponsored by a club of graduate students — in foreign relations and diplomacy — a club which no doubt has been infiltrated by foreign students, including numberous Canadians (which, as Ti-Guy reminds us supra, 15 out of 19 of the 9/11 terrorists came from Canada.) These graduate students are obviusly Unamurican Islamofascists.
You know, it's really like the gay marriage thing, which isn't even about marriage. It's about legitimacy. That's what those lefties at Columbia did. They presumed to permit Mr. A to shoulder the mantle of ligitimacy, and that is Unamurican.
But you lefties are going to listen as well, and you may well be suborned by Mr. A's Eviltude.
Not me, Seer. I'm a Catholic. I carry a vial of holy water with me for just those occasions.
How will the wingnuts deal with the cognitive dissonance of their hero Chimpy describing Ahmadinejad being invited to speak at Columbia as a victory for free speech? Is it possible that their heads might explode like a Star Trek computer at the sheer internal contradiction?
We can but hope.
Post a Comment