CERTIFIABLY INSANE

Kenneth R. Timmerman paints a frightening picture in "Iranian President Sees End of World Order."

Of course, we know that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the definition of an extremist. His inexcusable statements regarding Israel, his brashness, his defiance, and his refusal to negotiate in good faith with world leaders about Iran's nuclear programs cause one to arrive at the singular conclusion that the man is a serious threat to our safety and security.

Timmerman reveals that Ahmadinejad is even crazier than his recent statements indicate.

Read Timmerman's article.

(Excerpt)

On Dec. 16, gunmen opened fire on the motorcade of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as he toured the southeastern province of Sistan, along Iran's border with Pakistan.

According to news reports, Ahmadinejad's personal bodyguard and driver were killed in the ambush, although the president was unhurt. The government-controlled media in Tehran attributed the attack to "bandits," a term used to denote a wide range of armed groups, from drug dealers to opposition guerrillas.

How did Ahmadinejad manage to escape injury or death due to the bandits' attack?

Fate can be so cruel.
But in this case, the attack may have been part of a plot to remove the Iranian president by a faction within the ruling clergy. At least, so believes a Western source who has just returned from talks with top officials in Tehran.

The faction seeking to remove Ahmadinejad does not object to the substance of the Iranian president's repeated vows to "wipe Israel from the map" and destroy America. Nor do they believe Iran should abandon its secret nuclear weapons program, top Iranian government officials said, according to the source.

What radical Iranian in good standing would object to Ahmadinejad's promise to wipe Israel off the map, destroy the U.S., and amass a nuclear arsenal?
Rather, they object to the fact that he has made such comments openly and without ambiguity. They believe that his frankness dangerously exposes them to attack from the United States, Israel or both.

Don't ask. Don't tell.
"This guy is not a politician," the source quoted one top Iranian official as saying. "He is certifiably insane. And he is obsessed with the Imam Zaman," the legendary 12th imam, or Imam Mahdi, whom many Shiite Muslims believe will return in the "end times" after a period of horrific battles, famine and pestilence.

It's not good when the country's president is considered "certifiably insane" by a top official. Then again, maybe being insane is a quality that many Iranians look for in a good leader. They do tend to affix themselves to nutjobs.

Seeking insane leaders is not a pattern evident only in Iran or the Middle East. God knows we have plenty of elected officials in Washington, and the U.S. in general, that I would categorize as certifiable.

Extremism is a global plague.
Americans may find it curious that government officials in Tehran, who have actively supported the Islamic republic for years, object to Ahmadinejad's religious zealotry. After all, this comes in a regime whose constitution declares that the supreme leader is God's representative on earth whose edicts can not be challenged by elected representatives.

But for more than two decades, Iranian leaders such as former President Hashemi Rafsanjani have walked a fine line between openly defying the United States and conducting covert aggression through terrorists and sophisticated intelligence operations. Under Ahmadinejad, these officials believe, that fine line has been crossed.

The fine line hasn't just been crossed. It's been erased altogether.

Former CIA operations officer Reuel Marc Gerecht believes, "The only way Iran is going to get better is for it to get a lot worse -- and Ahmadinejad may just possibly be the man to galvanize a broad-based opposition to the regime."

Yes, if one is looking for an insane leader to rally more moderate Iranians against the current regime, Ahmadinejad is definitely the guy.

It scares me to think of Iran sinking any further, and conditions becoming worse than they are right now.

That aside, I think a regime change is definitely in order. Ahmadinejad presents a grave danger to world stability, even as unstable as that stability currently is.

Remember when John Kerry was calling for regime change in Iraq and the U.S.?

On April 2, 2003, Kerry said in a speech to New Hampshire Democrats at the Peterborough, N.H., Town Library, "What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States."

We know John Kerry is still calling for Bush to be ousted; but I wonder if he thinks Ahmadinejad should go, too.

Does he consider the "certifiably insane" Iranian president as great a threat to America as President Bush?
Who knows? It's hard to say with these libs, especially Kerry. My guess is he'd say yes and no.