Left I on the News  

In a recent post, I quoted extensively from Iranian President Ahmadinejad's interview with Larry King. I'd like to quote one more section, because the point Ahmadinejad makes here is a point that could be repeated over and over, from Iran to Cuba to North Korea to Venezuela, i.e., with respect to any country in the sights of the U.S.:

KING: One of the big fears the United States has -- the world has about Iran -- is nuclear weapons.

AHMADINEJAD: You say that the world is afraid of Iran and concerned about it.

I ask you, which part of the world are we speaking of?

Is it the case that the U.S. government is the equivalent of the entire world and makes the case for that world?

Is it the case that the U.S. government and a few of its allies can be considered as the whole world?

No.

Let me tell you -- well, you see, if you're talking about the Western states, I have to say, their concerns about us are not new. They've always been concerned. They were the ones who inspired Saddam to attack Iran and to get us involved in an eight-year war. The terrorist groups that killed our president, prime minister, our officials, are now freely active in the Western countries.

But let me tell you, 118 member states of the NAM, the Non- Aligned Movement, have actually supported our peaceful nuclear pursuits. Fifty-seven member states of the Organization of Islamic States have also given their support to us in this regard. And there are many other organizations -- multilateral organizations that have supported our endeavor and efforts.

So it's not the world exactly that's concerned about us.

Any time you hear anyone in U.S. public life - Administration, Congress, media, etc., talk about "world opinion," ask yourself, "what 'world' are they talking about?" For bonus points, ask yourself why they are happy to invoke "world opinion" when it suits them, but when real world opinion, as expressed by literally millions of people in the streets of every major country in the world prior to the invasion of Iraq, is opposed to the actions (or, in that case, the impending actions) of the U.S., they're perfectly happy to ignore it. [By the way, just to clarify the "we" in the title of the post refers (hopefully obviously) to the United States. It most definitely does not refer to the readers of this blog!]

Of course, it isn't just the words "world opinion" that get thrown around lightly; "dictator" is another. In "Sarah Palin's" undelivered speech at the U.N. ("Sarah Palin" in quotes since there is little to no chance she wrote a word of it), she would have said:

"We gather here today to highlight the Iranian dictator's intentions and to call for action to thwart him."

But as an article at Press TV today points out,

Plagued by fevered imaginations, upper echelons in Washington have been laughed out of their own court in recent years but have never been so entertaining.

Perhaps by 'dictator', she thinks Iran is still under US rule? After all, an oil-seeking Washington did restore monarchy to Iran after their 1953 overthrow of the democratically-elected Iranian prime minister of the time, Mohammed Mosaddeq, who sought to nationalize the country's oil industry.

President Ahmadinejad may be under fire at home over high inflation, but he has been democratically elected and enjoys immense popularity in Iran and among Muslims around the world.