UPDATE (BBC): Hero’s Return to Iran: “One pro-government paper said the president had shot the last bullet into the brain of the West. “ So THAT’S what this representative of the ‘religion of peace’ was aiming at? Well blow me down with a ‘you don’t say?’
Key: *AmaNutJob = Ahmadinejad. (Thanks to Arlene, a regular commenter at this site, for this apt alias)
20th April, 2009
Iran’s President Ahmadinejad – Resident *AmaNutJob – provokes UN walkout en masse
The UN Geneva conference on Racism, Diversity & Tolerance, already boycotted by several countries, broke down in chaos today, when the Iranian President Ahmadinejad upped the stakes. Not only did he lambast Israel as racist, but WE Europeans too!
See BBC report – British ambassador Peter Gooderham, also among those who left, said “such inflammatory rhetoric has no place whatsoever in a United Nations conference addressing the whole issue of racism and how to address it.” Speaking to the BBC Radio 4′s PM programme, he said of the Iranian leader’s accusation of Israeli racism: “It was bad. Such inflammatory rhetoric has no place at such a conference. That is a charge we unreservedly condemn and reject and so we had no hesitation at that point in leaving the conference hall. We are strong multi-nationalists in participating in the UN, but decided to leave when Ahmadinajad began to speak in this way.”
The US, Israel, Canada, Australia, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and New Zealand had all boycotted the conference being held in Geneva, in protest at Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s appearance, and Israel recalled its ambassador to Switzerland. Still, the UN’s Ban ki-Moon was regretful at this boycott.
From the YouTube site:
“The UN security council has stabilised this occupation regime and supported it in the last 60 years giving them a free hand to continue their crimes,” he told delegates at the Durban Review Conference hall in Geneva.
Dozens of diplomats from countries including Britain and France left the hall in protest as he made the remarks.
Ahmadinejad also asked the conference: “What were the root causes of the US attacks against Iraq or invasion of Afghanistan?
“The Iraqi people have suffered enormous losses … wasn’t the military action against Iraq planned by the Zionists … in the US administration, in complicity with the arms manufacturing companies?”.
Many delegates who remained in the hall applauded Ahmadinejad’s comments.
At least three demonstrators, dressed as clowns and shouting “racist, racist,” were expelled as Ahmadinejad began to speak.
Alan Fisher, Al Jazeera’s correspondent at the conference, said Ahmadinejad had reiterated his views on Israel, especially over its 22-day war on Gaza.
He said: “At the time [of the offensive] he said what was going on in Gaza was a genocide … this was an opportunity for him to say that at a world forum.
“There are people in the hall who believe that what Ahmadinejad was saying is correct – that is why there is such a split here.”
Alireza Ronaghi, Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Tehran, said: “Ahmadinejad’s words are being criticised in Iran, not just among the youth, but among the different political factions.
“This is the exact attitude he has been criticised for some time.”
“Even among the conservatives they have said such remarks are totally uncalled for.”
Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, condemned Ahmadinejad’s “speech of hate” and called for a “firm and united” reaction from the European Union.
Jonas Gahr Store, Norway’s foreign minister, said the Iranian leader’s comments had “run counter to the very spirit of dignity of the conference … he made Iran the odd man out”.
The speech by Ahmadinejad, who is a frequent critic of Israel and has cast doubt on the extent of the killing of Jews during the Second World War, coincided with Holocaust Remembrance Day in Israel, which begins at sundown on Monday.
The United States, Canada, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Poland and the Netherlands, had earlier said they would not attend the conference amid fears Ahmadinejad would use the summit to propagate anti-Semitic views.
Washington also said it believed a draft text to be discussed was overly critical of Israel and its treatment of the Palestinians.
Opening the five-day summit earlier, Ban Ki-Moon, the United Nation’s secretary general, said he was “profoundly disappointed” that some western countries were not attending, but also condemned those who sought to deny or minimise the extent of the Holocaust.
He said: “Some nations who by rights should be helping us to forge a path to a better future are not here … I deeply regret that some have chosen to stand aside.”
Israel had withdrawn its ambassador to Switzerland in protest over a meeting between Ahmadinejad and Hans-Rudolf Merz, his Swiss counterpart.
The UN organised the summit to help heal the wounds left by its last racism conference in Durban, South Africa, in 2001, when the US and Israel walked out after Arab states sought to define Zionism as being racist.
Barack Obama, the US president, announcing his administration’s decision not to attend the conference, said Washington wanted a “clean slate” before tackling race and discrimination issues at the UN.
Several Muslim nations at the summit called for moves to prevent perceived insults to Islam, which they say have proliferated since the attacks on the US on September 11, 2001.
Tags: 40 delegates walk out UN, Ahmadinejad provokes 40 delegate walkout, amanutjob, European racism, Iran's President, Israel racist, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, walkout at UN
April 20, 2009 at 5:59 pm |
Love the new name. Why anyone thinks this Jew hating, America bashing insane person with delusions of grandeur could possibly have anything worthwhile to say is beyond me. I have always believed that it is important to pay attention to what your enemies say so you will know just which direction the next attack may come. But this fellow has a shotgun approach. If he shoots at enough targets with his rhetoric he’s bound to hit something. How the people of Iran can put up with him is incomprehensible. For that matter, why the world puts up with him is incomprehensible.
April 20, 2009 at 6:28 pm |
Couldn’t have put it better myself, Grundoon. The man’s a loon!
I believe there are elections in Iran in June. He probably thinks this walkout will help him in his batle against the ‘wicked west’. I’m not so sure. Many Iranians have had enough – too much – of this guy.
Bodes well for the attempt to put it to the whole UN that attacking Islam is against “human” rights, though. SOME of them are finding some guts, at last!
April 20, 2009 at 9:44 pm |
KTBFPM,
I really don’t believe the attendendees expected anything other than what Ahmadinejad said. I think they had already planned to appear and then, march out in protest. Ahmadinejad will never stop in his quest to wipe Israel off the map. This is the type of man that our president means to “talk” to. I see no productive reasoning for it myself. Amanutjob is hurrying the appeal for the American woman imprisoned for spying. Wonder what his motive is for that? Does he hope to persuade our president that Zionism is racist? The Arab countries are the ones to blame for Gaza. They should be ashamed of themselves for not welcoming these refugees home. Those poor people are being used as political pawns by those Arab nations who want Israel to be destroyed or are afraid to speak up about peace with Israel and to condemn Iran’s actions and rhetoric.
I believe it will be an insult to Israel if our president meets with Amanutjob. One thing is certain, Ahmadinejad is NOT going to change.
The man is a promoter of hatred, racism and inevitably, war. We can only hope the elections will be fair and Iran will change for its own good, the good of the entire Middle East and the rest of the world.
April 20, 2009 at 10:25 pm |
Yes, Arlene,
The British diplomat who walked out today said that western leaders HAD discussed a walkout prior to the meeting if ImAMadMan had spoken in this way.
Right now the BBC is arguing that we should not have walked out on AmaNutJob. The usual BBC stuff.
Professor Alan Durchivitch (spelling?) of Harvard University, is on the 10 o’clock news right now. Criticised in the usual way by the BBC interviewer for boycotting the Geneva meeting, he says that it is the difference between Churchill and Chamberlain.
Chamberlain wanted to talk and Churchill said, “I know evil when I see evil”.
My recent post on “We are ALL Born Muslims” really got me going! How many cheeks do we have to turn to pacify these people?
How dare these people tell me what I am born!?
And some of us gullible westerners defend the Quran and say that WE are misrepresenting it!
April 21, 2009 at 8:48 pm |
I think it was completely inappropriate for Ahmadenejad to be giving this speech. All the UN has is its reputation, and this reputation has been severely damaged with this spectacle. Maybe it is a lot of fun to see israel be whipped by A., but too many people depend for their survival on the UN, too many are affected by racism (not in the least those in Iran) to let this clown do his one and only trick and jeoapardize the whole conference. A. is guilty of the same self-centerness as Israel and the US. By not participating, or by giving such an inflammatory speech (we are lucky they made him take out the holocaust denial) they completely disregard the needs of the people this conference was made for.
I completely disagree with Israel’s actions. But that doesn’t make me a fan of Ahmadinejad. He actually did an enormous disservice to the palestinian cause. Israeli hard liners couldn’t have wished for a better display and a better reason to aggravate the conflict. I am starting to think A. is zionist’s biggest supporter.
Ban ki moon should be made to resign over letting this happen. It was not good for anything, except for those that want more conflict, war and bloodshed.
http://owlminerva.wordpress.com/2009/04/20/walkout-at-un-conference-after-iran-president-calls-israel-racist/
April 21, 2009 at 10:02 pm |
Hi owlminerva,
You DO have to wonder exactly who Amhadinajad thought he was impressing with this speech. The already converted? That’s all he could have hoped for.
On the one hand, he pretends that he is open-handed (clench-fisted?) towards America’s “black” president, and on the other he continues the “plus ca change” policy towards the ‘evil’ west.
Of course some think poor Mahmoud was hard done by. Conspirators United, as usual.
http://www.notmytribe.com/2009/us-directed-walkout-of-conference-threatens-iran-with-extension-of-regional-us-planned-war-87496.html
I have looked at your site, btw, and part-quote here:
I don’t accept that Israel (or America/Britain/the west is) using “fear”. Perhaps they are not using fear enough!And I’d argue that most of them DID allow this man a hearing, putting aside those who didn’t come because they knew what he’d say.
As for “fight” – in which ways? By speaking after he did againsts him? Some did that anyway. But the UN should not be a place for hijacking for the purposes of anti-tolerance, especially when the meeting was ABOUT tolerance.
I’m sorry but it really is time we stopped blaming the west for their reaction (or lack of) against such fools as this NutJob.
As with terrorism, it’s those who commit the crime or misdemeanour that are responsible, not those who respond to it. And yes, I know that the argument can be used from both sides. But only the leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran spoke in this hate-filled way.
I think the British representative led the others out. Makes me almost proud again!
Ahmadinejad had his chance at free speech and he blew it.
He spoke … we heard.
April 22, 2009 at 8:26 am |
You people are as bad as holocaust deniers. The state of Israel should not exist. They are conducting genocide against Palestine with the full backing of those Nations that refused to attend and those that walked out.
This was an anti racist forum and Ahmadinejad had every right to say what he said in denouncing the racisim of the powers that be.
I disagree with him on the God angle but the rest of it was bang on. The Nations that did not attend and those that walked out proved that he spoke the truth. If he did not speak the truth they would have stayed to refute it. They did not, because they could not, because they have nothing to refute the truth with.
April 22, 2009 at 9:53 am |
Damned by your own words, Mark.
We are “as bad as the holocaust deniers”!
You mean as bad as Ahmadinejad?
We in the west who have inclusive societies which bend over backwards to welcome all into our societies, where they can if they so wish abuse our hospitality by threatening and complaining about every facet of it which does not pander to their perversions?WE are the problem?
So let me get this straight, Mark -
Ahmadinejad, the man of almost perfect judgement, was right? The man who denies the holocaust happened? The man who has called for the destruction of Israel? The man whose country hangs people for disagreeing with the “government” or their “holy books”, as well as for other dreadful things like adultery, homosesuality or allowing oneself to be raped!
The supreme racist, Ahmadinejad.
The man who is presently, IMHO, using and abusing the present American elected “black” leader, even though his “racist” argument has been shown for what it is by Obama’s very election… LIES.
The day that a fundamentalist Muslim country elects a caucasion leader – or half-caucasian, like Obama – is the day I will accept that the fundamentalists are not racist.
Unitl then, and until the day that they allow women their rightful place in society.
These anti-democratic and anti-humanity atttitudes, again, unlike in western societies, are symptomatic of their medieval mindset.
Their religious beliefs should NOT be their guiding force. Sadly it is. Or they pretend it is. They also PRETEND it’s the west’s ‘racism’ that drives them. As with terrorism, they also pretend it is OUR fault, the west’s, the free inclusive societies into which millions immigrate yearly.
You have been duped. IMHO, by these pretenders.
You’re not alone, of course.
Btw, I suppose you reckon that Ban ki-Moon is also racist for coming to this conclusion:
http://www.unog.ch/80256EDD006B9C2E/(httpNewsByYear_en)/E40565371D8CB259C125759E0054F126?OpenDocument
April 22, 2009 at 12:26 pm |
I thought in his speech he made clear mention of the atrocities commited in WWII. Didn’t sound like denial at all.
His point was that nothing was learned from the atrocities and the creation of the state of Israel through the forced disenfrancising of local people has allowed such atrocities to continue. For proof look at the gross difference of power between Palistine and Israel and the slaughter occuring there. I dont need Ahmadinijad to tell me this, members of the Isralie army have come forward themselves and spoken of the atrocites and murders that they were ordered to commit against civilians by their superior officers. I have seen footage of people being destroyed by tanks for thowing stones at said tanks. Is blowing someone up with a tank an acceptable response to stone throwing ?
I have yet to meet an Iranian as you describe. The ones who come to our culture and then complain about everything we have and do because it is not up to their perverse standards. I think you may be confusing them with the more militant type of Islamists. Completely different part of the spectrum.
As for your question about Ban ki-moon. I don’t think his comments are racist but I think he is foolish to think for one second that you can somehow move forward into a new era of peace without acknowledging the root causes of the strife in the first place.
By his reasoning we might as well just give all the murderers in jail counciling and let them free if they promise to live good lives from now on because we need to look forward and not backwards. The way forward lies in the past because the past is where mistakes were made. If you refuse to look back you cannot learn from your mistakes so you will never move forward. To not mention the past because it might upset the powers that be I.E. US, GB etc is bollix.
I can understand noone likes to be told they were/are wrong but I think the leaders of those nations acted in the wrong. This is not a school yard argument with nothing but pride at stake. It is the future of world peace and the lives of millions at stake. They should have swallowed their pride and be ready to admit error so we CAN all move forward
That is MHO. For too long America et al have been able to dictate to the UN the way things are going to be. More leaders need to grow the political balls to speak their minds instead of diplomatic appeasements
April 22, 2009 at 2:42 pm |
Mark,
You say:
“I thought in his speech he made clear mention of the atrocities commited in WWII. Didn’t sound like denial at all. ”
What is your point on “denial”?
The constant returning to what are viewed as “past injustices” brings no-one any further forward. There are always injustices in all sides in conflicts. If Blair had taken that approach, Northern Ireland would not have moved to any kind of settlement.
It seems to me that all those who support the argument emanating from Ahmadinejad are saying is the same as he said to Obama – ‘Say you’re sorry for everything YOU westerners/Israelis/Americans/Brits/Europeans did wrong (as only YOU are the bad guys), and make sure you admit it’s all YOUR fault, and then we’ll move on”.
Peurile ignorance, IMHO, which will never get us anywhere.
This site
makes an effort to help peopleunderstan the competing strands of thought/certianties in the Middle East conflict.
http://mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm
It makes the valid point that most information is written to back up one side of the argument over another, so most information is biased.
In the end it seems people who think the Isralies/Jews are OBVIOUSLY in the wrong resort to damning capitalism and the ‘great western global quest for supremacy’, while those on the other side (probably me included) resort to saying “when push comes to shove do we really want those of a medieval mindset running the WHOLE region?”
Diplomats and peace-makers try to carve a middle road – and good luck to them.
I know full well that there are many Iranians who do not agree with Ahma’s nonsense. Many of then belong to ‘One Law For All’, set up to ensure that we in Britain STOP Sharia in its tracks. I was referring to the government of Iran, as you surely understood.
It is, to quote you, ‘bollix’ to make out that all Muslims in the ancient Arab world have been done wrong by the west. The west has been instrumental in many ways in bringing civilised living to the East in modern times, as well as to the rest of the world.
I don’t mean to sound colonialist here or racist – honestly, I don’t think I have a racist bone in my body – but have you ever thought about what exactly Islam in its 1600 years has done for the modern world? The world the fundamentalists abuse while using the parts of it that suit them?
Did the Muslim world invent/discover the medical and scientific advances we ALL depend on? Did the Islamic tradition invent the internet, not to mention the radio/TV/printing press/bridge & road construction /trains and raliways/modern shipbuilding/planes? Has Islam given away millions to under-developed countries in Africa? I could go on.
Not sure what your point on atrocities in WW2 was, unless it was that war is a bad thing. Yes, I think it is too, but sometimes better than appeasement of fanaticism. Or would you have refused to fight against Hitler in 1939?
There are countless sources of information, on the web and off, as to whose land Palestine is. And countless arguments.
‘Appeasement’ is an easy accusation, so I’ll make it too, as you have – only directed at the murdering fanatics.
WE in the west need to stop appeasing THEM. The innocent, law-abiding moderates in the Middle East depend on us.
April 23, 2009 at 8:54 pm |
[...] p.p. AmaNutJob [...]