PDA

View Full Version : Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at Columbia *ON NOW*




Starks
09-24-2007, 11:48 AM
Let's see what happens... Should be interesting.

allyinoh
09-24-2007, 11:50 AM
Something I was wondering...

In an article he said that the US officials are stating that they want nuclear weapons to attack us and that they don't want to attack us, etc.

In other articles he is portrayed as some terrorist who wants to destroy us, but how do we know if what we are being told is correct? (and how do we know it's wrong?)

I always wonder this because when the media reports it is different than what he says and I don' tknow what he says is because I don' tknow the language.

I don't exactly know what I am trying to say.. lol.. Does anyone else understand what I am TRYING to say? =)

Basically how do we know whether to trust what he himself says or what the government tells us what he says?

How do you go about finding who to believe?

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 11:52 AM
He seems like a cool guy.

Starks
09-24-2007, 11:54 AM
I hate how Bollinger is priming the audience with negative sentiments.

Starks
09-24-2007, 11:56 AM
this Is Not How You Treat Or Introduce A Guest!

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 11:58 AM
>? what

Dustancostine
09-24-2007, 11:58 AM
Any links?

Original_Intent
09-24-2007, 11:59 AM
Something I was wondering...

In an article he said that the US officials are stating that they want nuclear weapons to attack us and that they don't want to attack us, etc.

In other articles he is portrayed as some terrorist who wants to destroy us, but how do we know if what we are being told is correct? (and how do we know it's wrong?)

I always wonder this because when the media reports it is different than what he says and I don' tknow what he says is because I don' tknow the language.

I don't exactly know what I am trying to say.. lol.. Does anyone else understand what I am TRYING to say? =)

Basically how do we know whether to trust what he himself says or what the government tells us what he says?

How do you go about finding who to believe?

A good question, one that I have pondered myself. If we are being propagandized to, how do we recognize truth from propaganda?

If you believe in God, you can turn to Him for guidance.

If you don't believe in God then I would say believe nothing at face value, all you can do is research and make your best effort to get as close to the truth as possible.

Starks
09-24-2007, 11:59 AM
I am in awe in how much haterade this Bollinger guy is spewing... I know its free speech, but show some damn courtesy!

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 12:00 PM
ha.. Bollinger is trying to protect his ass

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:00 PM
Bollinger just dug his own grave and shattered his credibility...

HE JUST CITED THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS!

UtahApocalypse
09-24-2007, 12:01 PM
Something I was wondering...

In an article he said that the US officials are stating that they want nuclear weapons to attack us and that they don't want to attack us, etc.

In other articles he is portrayed as some terrorist who wants to destroy us, but how do we know if what we are being told is correct? (and how do we know it's wrong?)

I always wonder this because when the media reports it is different than what he says and I don' tknow what he says is because I don' tknow the language.

I don't exactly know what I am trying to say.. lol.. Does anyone else understand what I am TRYING to say? =)

Basically how do we know whether to trust what he himself says or what the government tells us what he says?

How do you go about finding who to believe?

We were down this road not so many years ago..... WMD's remember. Saddamn out right denied having anything, our government told us they did. Which turned out to be true? Now you draw your own conclusions on who is lying this time.

allyinoh
09-24-2007, 12:01 PM
Do not say he is a nice guy.. You are a traitor if you say that..

J/k.. =)

silverhandorder
09-24-2007, 12:01 PM
Wow this is going to be intresting, president of a country being questioned. I mean how many discussions like these have we had.

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:02 PM
This is how foreign policy (albeit with less hostility) should be done... Open forums and discussion.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 12:02 PM
Bollinger just dug his own grave and shattered his credibility...

HE JUST CITED THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS!

he sounds just like a neo con lol I thought this was a liberal university? wow

silverhandorder
09-24-2007, 12:03 PM
This is how foreign policy (albeit with less hostility) should be done... Open forums and discussion.

Yes this is exactly what we need.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 12:04 PM
Yes this is exactly what we need.

Though, I think this bollinger guy is a moron.

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:04 PM
I hope Mahmoud lays the smack down on this guy.

silverhandorder
09-24-2007, 12:05 PM
Though, I think this bollinger guy is a moron.

Yes way too biased.

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:05 PM
God, this translation system sucks ass.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 12:06 PM
Yes, he was plain BIASED. Why not just take the middle ground?

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:07 PM
Wow. Mahmoud got an applause for calling out Bollinger on his bullshit.

ToxicFrog
09-24-2007, 12:08 PM
Is there a link to watch this online??

Dustancostine
09-24-2007, 12:08 PM
Yes, he was plain BIASED. Why not just take the middle ground?

I always learned that if you had nothing good to say to a guest you said nothing at all.

How hard would it have been to say: "Now speaking the President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad"

--Dustan

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:09 PM
I always learned that if you had nothing good to say to a guest you said nothing at all.

How hard would it have been to say: "Now speaking the President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad"

--Dustan

It's hard when FOX News is paying the president of columbia university for soundbites.

rg123
09-24-2007, 12:09 PM
Bollinger tipped his hand CFR puppet

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:10 PM
Neocon university presidents are a rare breed.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 12:10 PM
How is the audience understanding?

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:10 PM
How is the audience understanding?

A translatator... Duh.


They fixed the technical difficulties and he is quite understandable now.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:10 PM
I have read several sources on the state (condition) of Iran:

1) that they are also facing shortages of oil and want to develop nuclear power for energy use. This would make sense as they have long been associated with Euro countries, all of whom use nukes for power, so they don't necessarily have to associate with Russia for nuclear power technology.

2) that it is a large leap to go from nuclear power to nuclear arms; not being a nuclear engineer, I'm going to have to take that on faith although from the explanation I read, it made a lot of sense. Having a nuclear power plant is nowhere near the same as nor a direct path to having a nuclear warhead .

3) Ahmadinajad did NOT say they wanted Isreal blown off the map as is constantly reported in the msm.

4) Iran tried to comply with UN requests for inspections but was denied...for some reason, the US put the kibosh on the inspections for nukes.

Ahmadinajad may be a crazy mofo, but this administration and the complicit msm have zero credibility as far as the middle east goes so I would tend to believe that Iran isn't lying about their nuclear intentions.

silverhandorder
09-24-2007, 12:11 PM
He is preaching at the moment.

Mordechai Vanunu
09-24-2007, 12:12 PM
I'll wait for an impartial online upload. I don't trust the MSM to give me an accurate translation.

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:13 PM
Let him preach... I wouldn't say that it is the best way for him to start off, but let him do his thing.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:13 PM
he sounds just like a neo con lol I thought this was a liberal university? wow

The CFR has been INSTRUMENTAL in implementing collectivism in universities. It's one of their main tools of indoctrination.

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:13 PM
I'll wait for an impartial online upload. I don't trust the MSM to give me an accurate translation.

It's an independent 3rd party translator.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:14 PM
This is how foreign policy (albeit with less hostility) should be done... Open forums and discussion.

It's the way it used to be done. Don't know why that system was replaced with the current iron fist technique.

Mordechai Vanunu
09-24-2007, 12:15 PM
It's an independent 3rd party translator.

They would say that.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:15 PM
Neocon university presidents are a rare breed.

You find those by the boatload in religious colleges/universities.

rg123
09-24-2007, 12:17 PM
all cable just went out

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 12:18 PM
all cable just went out

lol uh

nullvalu
09-24-2007, 12:18 PM
how/where do i watch this?

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 12:18 PM
how/where do i watch this?

hmm FNC, CNN, MSNBC...etc

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:19 PM
how/where do i watch this?

Cable news. Online at cable news sites.

nullvalu
09-24-2007, 12:19 PM
ah thx i guess i should turn on the tv then

silverhandorder
09-24-2007, 12:19 PM
Holy Shit I agree with him... About insecurities being used against us.

angelatc
09-24-2007, 12:20 PM
It's live, online, at http://www.foxnews.com/ .

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:21 PM
I like how he is framing his argument...

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:22 PM
Holy Shit I agree with him... About insecurities being used against us.

So it's not just us that thinks that, then....

mwkaufman
09-24-2007, 12:22 PM
Holy Shit I agree with him... About insecurities being used against us.

qft

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:23 PM
I hope for Mahmoud's sake that he is speaking sincerely because he is making a lot of good points.

Tis a shame that O'Reilly and Hannity are going to tear your speech apart.

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:25 PM
Mahmoud is an active PhD? Wow.

angelatc
09-24-2007, 12:28 PM
He always makes good points. He's not insane. He just doesn't kiss GW Bush's ass.

Don't get me wrong - he's not a guy I would vote for, but he is a democratically elected leader.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:30 PM
Wow. Somehow, he just doesn't sound that crazy. He is asking valid questions and making very valid points.

angelatc
09-24-2007, 12:31 PM
He's a blogger! http://www.ahmadinejad.ir/

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:34 PM
Hah. He does know a little English.

nullvalu
09-24-2007, 12:34 PM
I'll give him credit, he's got a lot of balls to be there, and he has a nice suit.

Just take what he says criticially, don't celebrate him as some kind of hero because he's been typcasted in our media -- that's true, but that doesn't make him a good guy.

constituent
09-24-2007, 12:34 PM
yea i don't know.. but i've been digging what he's had to say for awhile now.

anyone remember when ol' mike wallace was pulling the total asshole bit on him during that 60 minutes interview?

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:35 PM
I reiterate: I hope he is being sincere.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:36 PM
This is explosive.
How in the world is the Bush machine going to spin this?

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:37 PM
I reiterate: I hope he is being sincere.

Everything he says as far as facts go can be researched....and I do know for a fact that the US has reneged on many agreements and contracts over the years not just with Iran but with Jordan, Egypt...

rg123
09-24-2007, 12:37 PM
He keeps making the point 60 yrs our country started all this shit with the overthrow

LibertyEagle
09-24-2007, 12:38 PM
I can't remember where I saw it, but I recently saw a news report that said just what he said, that under international agreement Iran is allowed to have nuclear power. Anyone know where that is?

LibertyEagle
09-24-2007, 12:39 PM
I have the link to an article where IAEA said he WAS complying with their requests and warned against escalating something with them. He's telling the truth.

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:43 PM
As much as I disagree with him about the Holocaust, he's making a very rational point. Research shouldn't stop.

Dustancostine
09-24-2007, 12:43 PM
He is a very smart man. I feel that he is sincere.

LibertyEagle
09-24-2007, 12:43 PM
I have to agree with him about researching the holocaust. Why is it so forbidden to research it further? I always distrust those who try to shut off people from looking further into ANY incident. It makes me wonder why they want to do that.

UtahApocalypse
09-24-2007, 12:43 PM
This is explosive.
How in the world is the Bush machine going to spin this?

I'm sure the laundromat is all set up for a major spic cycle.

angelatc
09-24-2007, 12:45 PM
The big thing is that he wants Israel gone. That's a sore spot with the western world. And denying that the holocaust happened is just silly unless I've been severly duped.

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:48 PM
"You have capital punishment too..."

ZING!

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:49 PM
He keeps making the point 60 yrs our country started all this shit with the overthrow

One of the first points Ron Paul makes when he begins to explain his foreign policy stance. But of course, none of the other candidates has any idea wtf he's talking about and Bill O'Reilly doesn't need the history lesson.

nullvalu
09-24-2007, 12:49 PM
i think he's burrying himself right here tho, comparing gays to drug trafficers.. And he basically just said they don't have gay people in Iran.. the crowd boo'd and laughed.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:51 PM
The big thing is that he wants Israel gone. That's a sore spot with the western world. And denying that the holocaust happened is just silly unless I've been severly duped.

He didn't say he's denying the holocaust...just that there might be more to the story than the official story. Sounds distasteful to me too but he has a point.

Isreal...well, he is right about the Palestinians being punished when they had nothing to do with WW2...I've always thought that the Isreal thing has no solution.

Mitt Romneys sideburns
09-24-2007, 12:51 PM
"There are no homosexuals in Iran. We dont have this phenomenon"

Im not surprised. I have heard this argument many times before by some Pakistanis and Iranians.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:52 PM
i think he's burrying himself right here tho, comparing gays to drug trafficers.. And he basically just said they don't have gay people in Iran.. the crowd boo'd and laughed.

And we don't have intolerant religious whack jobs?

angelatc
09-24-2007, 12:52 PM
The Iranian gay and lesbian human rights group Homan says that since 1980, more than 4,000 Homosexual men and women have been executed by the Iranian government,

http://www.well.com/user/*****jhd/sxislamictreatment.htm

These people are Muslims. They're not big on tolerence.

nullvalu
09-24-2007, 12:53 PM
And we don't have intolerant religious whack jobs?

No, but our government does not put gays to death. What the hell are you talking about?

Blowback
09-24-2007, 12:53 PM
And we don't have intolerant religious whack jobs?

never mind - didn't realize you were being sarcastic - argh

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:55 PM
Do you guys think he is being honest about his nuclear program? I've never been certain enough to take a side on the issue.

Dustancostine
09-24-2007, 12:56 PM
This is what is next to this on FOX NEWS:


It's Word War III

On third visit to New York, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad questions Holocaust, calls Israel racist, defends attempt to visit Ground Zero, claims Iran is misunderstood | SPEAKOUT!



That is really fair and balanced.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 12:56 PM
No, but our government does not put gays to death. What the hell are you talking about?

I'm talking about Ahmadinejad denying they have gays, alluding that it's some kind of abberation like our home grown religious wackos do. I didn't say anything about killing them.

Why should we interfere with what another country does to its people? If we really meant what we said about protecting human rights, we would have nothing to do with China, the biggest slave plantation and human slaughterhouse on the planet.

Starks
09-24-2007, 12:58 PM
From what I hear, homosexuality is looked down upon almost universally in Islamic nations.

Mitt Romneys sideburns
09-24-2007, 01:00 PM
From what I hear, homosexuality is looked down upon almost universally in Islamic nations.

I have heard his argument before. I have heard some Pakistanis and Iranians claim that there are no homosexuals in their country.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 01:00 PM
Do you guys think he is being honest about his nuclear program? I've never been certain enough to take a side on the issue.

Yes.

Dustancostine
09-24-2007, 01:01 PM
After listening to Ahmadinejad and having to listen to Bush many many times, who do you believe?

nullvalu
09-24-2007, 01:01 PM
I have heard his argument before. I have heard some Pakistanis and Iranians claim that there are no homosexuals in their country.

Yeah, because they're either underground or are put to death when they are discovered.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 01:01 PM
After listening to Ahmadinejad and having to listen to Bush many many times, who do you believe?

...scratching head....:confused:

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:01 PM
Yes.

Opinion or fact?

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:02 PM
Bush administration: DON'T GO TO IRAN!

Syren123
09-24-2007, 01:02 PM
Opinion or fact?

Opinion based on what I've read over time.

What I do know about Persian Iranians from history and from knowing zillions of them personally, they are a cultured, educated, aristocratic ethnic group of people more European than Middle Eastern. They're not religious zealots or hateful wackjobs. I do believe that they have been hosed since the US and France/England began interfering with their sovereignty in the 50s. The rise of the Ayatollah in the 70s was a result of the mess we made by overthrowing Mossedeh (sp) and replacing him with the Shah. The rest is history.

LibertyEagle
09-24-2007, 01:05 PM
Do you guys think he is being honest about his nuclear program? I've never been certain enough to take a side on the issue.

Well, the IAEA seems to think he is, so I guess we have to consider whether the IAEA is an honest organization.

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:06 PM
Hahahaha. Bolton and Shep are spinning the entire thing on FOX.

angelatc
09-24-2007, 01:06 PM
American politicians do not directly answer most of the questions they're asked either...

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:07 PM
Bolton: "No American will get to speak at a forum like this in Iran..."

silverhandorder
09-24-2007, 01:07 PM
Is Bolton slow?

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:07 PM
FOX News isn't even playing clips. They are just spinning.

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:09 PM
Bolton has less credibility than Mahmoud.

Bolton fears free speech.

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:10 PM
Bolton, You ****ing Moron! It's Not About Conferring Legitimacy, It's About Freedom Of Speech!

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 01:12 PM
he has an @yahoo.com email address LOL

Johnnybags
09-24-2007, 01:12 PM
Hahahaha. Bolton and Shep are spinning the entire thing on FOX.

Imagine Bush over in Iran at Tehran U? That would be worth 50.00 pay per view. He just invited them to go anywhere over there and talk so I have no idea what Bolton is blabbing about. Bolton sounds like an idiot at times.

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:13 PM
Student: "Bolinger did an amazing job of undermining his speech before it even started..."

Syren123
09-24-2007, 01:13 PM
Did you read the comments on the FOX news website? OMG talk about rigid dogmatic sheep...like they didn't hear a word the man said. All the gnashing of teeth and shaking of fists and outrage and offense taken...get over yourselves, folks.

But I guess if a person is a FOX news watcher, then sure...Ahmadinejad is nothing more than a pure monster.

This saving our country thing is really going to be an uphill battle.

spacebetween
09-24-2007, 01:16 PM
This girl on Fox News is answering Shep very well.

If it were up to Fox, we would just nuke Iran tomorrow.

Johnnybags
09-24-2007, 01:16 PM
to think the same way, I mean all. Obviously the channel is a CIA propaganda network and they all play parts. A moron would have to think, gee how come all of them spew the exact same stuff?

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:17 PM
Girl's IQ >>>>>>>>>>> Shep's IQ

Dustancostine
09-24-2007, 01:18 PM
This saving our country thing is really going to be an uphill battle.

More like up an cliff battle.

scipio337
09-24-2007, 01:18 PM
Did you read the comments on the FOX news website? OMG talk about rigid dogmatic sheep...like they didn't hear a word the man said. All the gnashing of teeth and shaking of fists and outrage and offense taken...get over yourselves, folks.

But I guess if a person is a FOX news watcher, then sure...Ahmadinejad is nothing more than a pure monster.

This saving our country thing is really going to be an uphill battle.What exactly did he say? All I learned is that the West has no monopoly on politicians who can dodge a question.

Dustancostine
09-24-2007, 01:19 PM
He just invited them to go anywhere over there and talk so I have no idea what Bolton is blabbing about. Bolton sounds like an idiot at times.

Neocon's don't acknowledge facts, they create them.

silverhandorder
09-24-2007, 01:20 PM
More like up an cliff battle.

Yes but when you fighting weak and corrupt traitors, this uphill battle has a possibility of victory!

axiomata
09-24-2007, 01:21 PM
After listening to Ahmadinejad and having to listen to Bush many many times, who do you believe?
Ron Paul!

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:22 PM
Faux Noise website headline about Mahmoud...

"IT'S WORLD WAR III!"

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 01:22 PM
I think this helps Ron Paul.

Starks
09-24-2007, 01:27 PM
Bolinger was completely out of line to slam Mahmoud before he even spoke.

mconder
09-24-2007, 01:28 PM
but how do we know if what we are being told is correct?

Short of taking a trip to Iran and speaking with people on both sides of the fence and trying to piece together his actions as their president, I don't think we can know the truth.

Santana28
09-24-2007, 01:28 PM
For anyone interested... i encourage you to look into the plight of David Irving, a WWII military historian who was imprisoned in 2005 and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment in Austria for the "speech crime of trivialising the Holocaust." I didn't say read his books - just read what happenned to him.

That Bollinger guy was an absolute embarrasment. You do NOT invite the President of a Sovereign nation to speak at your esteemed university and then spend the first 10 minutes basically calling him names and making fun of him. What an embarrasement for Columbia. These CFR animals are showing their true colors more and more each day.

And as far as what Ahmedinajiad said about capital punishment in Iran - Iran is still a sovereign nation last time i checked. They don't have to have the same values as we do. They dont have to have the same laws as we do. And if they don't like it, they are free to change it themselves. My God, has this world gone mad??

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 01:31 PM
For anyone interested... i encourage you to look into the plight of David Irving, a WWII military historian who was imprisoned in 2005 and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment in Austria for the "speech crime of trivialising the Holocaust." I didn't say read his books - just read what happenned to him.

That Bollinger guy was an absolute embarrasment. You do NOT invite the President of a Sovereign nation to speak at your esteemed university and then spend the first 10 minutes basically calling him names and making fun of him. What an embarrasement for Columbia. These CFR animals are showing their true colors more and more each day.

And as far as what Ahmedinajiad said about capital punishment in Iran - Iran is still a sovereign nation last time i checked. They don't have to have the same values as we do. They dont have to have the same laws as we do. And if they don't like it, they are free to change it themselves. My God, has this world gone mad??

Yup, Bollinger was WAY out of line. I disagree with Iran's position on capital punishment, and I'm sure there's homosexuals in Iran lol, but I think he's just representing Iranian culture.

axiomata
09-24-2007, 01:31 PM
I think this helps Ron Paul.
They key for Ron Paul is not that everyone starts liking Ahmadinejad per se, they can still think of him as our enemy, as an oppressor of his people etc., so long as they realize that he is not irrational.

It is undeniable that he is a rational being. MAD works with rational beings. There is no need for a preemptive war. This is all Ron Paul has been saying.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 01:33 PM
Why doesn't he meet with Ron Paul?

silverhandorder
09-24-2007, 01:33 PM
Why doesn't he meet with Ron Paul?

Political suicide...

edit: wait untill RP is president.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 01:34 PM
Political suicide...

edit: wait untill RP is president.

You think so?

mconder
09-24-2007, 01:34 PM
What I learned is our two cultures are worlds apart. American culture, is almost entirely secular while almost everything Iranians think comes from a religious perspective. Notice the response of the crowd when he said they don't have homosexuals in Iran. I thought they were going to lynch him for that one. He was completely oblivious to the laughing and boos in the audience. This goes to show us that the cultural divide is huge and will not be solved by taking out this one man.

Ron Paul Fan
09-24-2007, 01:35 PM
Bolinger was completely out of line to slam Mahmoud before he even spoke.

Completely agree. Ahmadejindad had a nice response to that slam and got applause for it. You invite him there and then before he's even allowed to speak you call him a cruel dictator. Completely uncalled for.

silverhandorder
09-24-2007, 01:37 PM
You think so?

Trying to point our irrational politics gets him attacked. When he meets the devil and listens to him he will be demonized by fox.

constituent
09-24-2007, 01:40 PM
fox = totalsynthesis(mkultra) + elderlyanduninformed

Syren123
09-24-2007, 01:42 PM
What exactly did he say? All I learned is that the West has no monopoly on politicians who can dodge a question.

I am listening at work and couldn't hear everything really clearly so I didn't hear any of the actual questions. If you say he didn't answer them, I believe you but what he DID say was substantive and had merit.

He did say that they complied with inspections for nukes. He said that under international law, Iran is allowed to have nuclear power so what's up with that. He did say that Jews live in Iran, are not persecuted (true), and that Jews and Palestinians coexisted in Palestine in peace. Also true.

He said that Iran is peaceloving and if you take into account that all the attacks we have faced from Iran were post 1960, all on middle eastern soil, and Persia hasn't attacked anyone since Xerxes had his ass handed to him by the Greeks, that is true. In fact, they've been attacked and overrun by just about everyone since then. That's how they became primarily muslim.

Of all the middle eastern countries with the exception of Lebanon, Iran was/is the most cultured. The fact that they are now our enemy is 100% the result of American and French/British interference and pushy dominance. To say anything otherwise is pure blind ignorance.

I'm not saying Ahmadinejad is the greatest thing going. But he obviously ISN'T an insane lunatic. He should have had this much time in diplomatic discussions with real US diplomats - not military brass and neo-con pawns - and none of this mess would be happening right now.

spacebetween
09-24-2007, 01:45 PM
What I learned is our two cultures are worlds apart. American culture, is almost entirely secular while almost everything Iranians think comes from a religious perspective. Notice the response of the crowd when he said they don't have homosexuals in Iran. I thought they were going to lynch him for that one. He was completely oblivious to the laughing and boos in the audience. This goes to show us that the cultural divide is huge and will not be solved by taking out this one man.

EXACTLY right. I agree.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 01:45 PM
What I learned is our two cultures are worlds apart. American culture, is almost entirely secular while almost everything Iranians think comes from a religious perspective. Notice the response of the crowd when he said they don't have homosexuals in Iran. I thought they were going to lynch him for that one. He was completely oblivious to the laughing and boos in the audience. This goes to show us that the cultural divide is huge and will not be solved by taking out this one man.

I disagree that US culture is secular. There is a HUGE HUGE sector of the culture that is every bit as religious as anything they've got going in Iran. The whole neo-con war agenda is based on they are bad/we are good and God is on our side. They think God is on THEIR side. It's exactly the same thing only their leader isn't a hypocrite about it.

Nefertiti
09-24-2007, 01:54 PM
I think it all depends on how you define "gay." If you are talking about men having sex with men then yes of course they must have them. If you are talking about the gay culture we have in the US then absolutely there probably are very few if any gays. However, if it is anything like Egypt, the vast majority of men having sex with men would never consider themselves gay. What I don't think Americans realize is how much being gay is a cultural thing in this country. I knew someone in college who was gay and had grown up in Switzerland. Here he was in the San Francisco Bay Area and gay and he was complaining about it because he didn't like the culture. He said in Switzerland you are either gay or not, it isn't a process. He thought the whole idea of "coming out of the closet" and declaring your homosexuality to the world was silly melodrama.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 01:56 PM
I think Iran is WRONG on executing drug dealers. It doesn't solve the problem, to solve it is to legalize it.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 01:57 PM
I think it all depends on how you define "gay." If you are talking about men having sex with men then yes of course they must have them. If you are talking about the gay culture we have in the US then absolutely there probably are very few if any gays. However, if it is anything like Egypt, the vast majority of men having sex with men would never consider themselves gay. What I don't think Americans realize is how much being gay is a cultural thing in this country. I knew someone in college who was gay and had grown up in Switzerland. Here he was in the San Francisco Bay Area and gay and he was complaining about it because he didn't like the culture. He said in Switzerland you are either gay or not, it isn't a process. He thought the whole idea of "coming out of the closet" and declaring your homosexuality to the world was silly melodrama.

That's awesome! I love that guy. What a mature, libertarian attitude.

Hook
09-24-2007, 02:07 PM
The neocons will be frothing at the mouth with this. You have to demonize someone to get the majority of the population to go along with killing them. If Ahmadinejad comes across as a rational guy, it blows the neocons phsychological operation out of the water.
That is the real reason they are so pissed off about the meeting.

spacebetween
09-24-2007, 02:11 PM
I think it all depends on how you define "gay." If you are talking about men having sex with men then yes of course they must have them. If you are talking about the gay culture we have in the US then absolutely there probably are very few if any gays. However, if it is anything like Egypt, the vast majority of men having sex with men would never consider themselves gay. What I don't think Americans realize is how much being gay is a cultural thing in this country. I knew someone in college who was gay and had grown up in Switzerland. Here he was in the San Francisco Bay Area and gay and he was complaining about it because he didn't like the culture. He said in Switzerland you are either gay or not, it isn't a process. He thought the whole idea of "coming out of the closet" and declaring your homosexuality to the world was silly melodrama.

And that's exactly why the only thing you can take away from Ahmadinejad's speech is that we have a different culture. Really, you can't seriously discuss what he was saying without discussing Iranian culture.

You prove this point wonderfully with gay culture in America.

TheEvilDetector
09-24-2007, 02:11 PM
Iranian president is a far braver and a far more intellectual man than BUSH will ever be.

Bush would not dare be such a loud mouth if he was not backed by the most powerful military in the world.

Having said that I do not believe everything Iranian leader says, but my impressions remain the same.

I also think that if BUSH attacks Iran, it will lead to a crushing defeat of US military, not at the hands of Iran by itself, but due to Russia's and China's inevitable response.

Russia and China will not simply keep taking a back seat, while US spreads war throughout the entire region.

Let's hope cooler heads prevail.

constituent
09-24-2007, 02:17 PM
Iranian president is a far braver and a far more intellectual man than BUSH will ever be.

Bush would not dare be such a loud mouth if he was not backed by the most powerful military in the world.

Having said that I do not believe everything Iranian leader says, but my impressions remain the same.

I also think that if BUSH attacks Iran, it will lead to a crushing defeat of US military, not at the hands of Iran by itself, but due to Russia's and China's inevitable response.

Russia and China will not simply keep taking a back seat, while US spreads war throughout the entire region.

Let's hope cooler heads prevail.

call me crazy... 'cuz i am... but i really believe that if we invade Iran it will be for China, not inspite of it. i'm not as up to date as i'd like to be w/ the story in russia at the present, but as far as China... if we invade Iran it will be at their behest.

TheEvilDetector
09-24-2007, 02:19 PM
From: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/?last_story=/opinion/greenwald/2007/09/24/ahmadinejad/


"Glenn Greenwald
Monday September 24, 2007 11:05 EST
Columbia to be punished for hosting the new Hitler enemy

All of the hysteria over Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speaking at Columbia University is so tiresome for so many reasons, beginning with the fact that it is all rather transparently motivated by exactly what Juan Cole says: "The real reason his visit is controversial is that the American right has decided the United States needs to go to war against Iran. Ahmadinejad is therefore being configured as an enemy head of state."

In their minds, we are at war with Iran -- even though, in reality, i.e., according to our Constitution, we are not -- and all of the ensuing hysteria is rooted in the fantasy world they occupy in which Iran is our Enemy at War. By their nature, such fantasies cannot be reasoned with.

This desire to prevent people from speaking when they express views that one finds offensive is just always baffling. That is true in general, and includes even pettier though still inane suppression efforts such as this one, which recently resulted in the recission of an invitation to Larry Summers to speak at an event for the University of California regents. Other than converting the individual into a martyr and dramatically elevating their importance, what do people think is accomplished when a person with a certain viewpoint is denied a forum?

In any event, there is not much new worth saying about the "debate" over whether Columbia should have invited Ahmadinejad to speak. People either believe in the value of having academic institutions be a venue for airing all viewpoints or they do not.

Exactly as is true for the First Amendment, it is so often the case that those who claim to believe in this principle when it comes to ideas they like suddenly find all sorts of reasons why the "principle" does not apply when it comes to ideas they hate most. And -- as is true for Osama bin Laden -- nobody has done more to inflate the importance and power of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (who, just by the way, is not even the leader of Iran, let alone the WorldWide Evil Axis of Hitlerian Dictators) than those who have focused on him obsessively.

But what is new, and what most certainly is worth commenting upon, is this extremely disturbing report from The New York Sun regarding the threats made by Democratic State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver to use state power to punish Columbia for inviting a speaker whom Silver dislikes. Silver -- who, among other things, has long been a leader in efforts to free convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard from prison -- did not even bother to disguise the threats he was making:

As the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, prepares to address Columbia University today amid a storm of student protest, state and city lawmakers say they are considering withholding public funds from the school to protest its decision to invite the leader to campus.

In an interview with The New York Sun, the speaker of the Assembly, Sheldon Silver, said lawmakers, outraged over Columbia's insistence on allowing the Iranian president to speak at its World Leaders Forum, would consider reducing capital aid and other financial assistance to the school.

Lawmakers warned about other consequences for Columbia and its president, Lee Bollinger, who has resisted campus and public pressure to cancel Mr. Ahmadinejad's appearance today, arguing that Columbia's commitment to scholarship requires the school to directly confront offensive ideas.

"There are issues that Columbia may have before us that obviously this cavalier attitude would be something that people would recall," Mr. Silver said. "Obviously, there's some degree of capital support that has been provided to Columbia in the past. These are things people might take a different view of . . . knowing that this is that kind of an institution" . . .

"It's not going to go away just because this episode ends. Columbia University has to know . . . that they will be penalized," an assemblyman of Brooklyn, Dov Hikind, who also attended the rally, said. The lawmaker said Mr. Ahmadinejad should be arrested when he sets foot on campus.

Silver sounds like two-bit hooligan making not-so-veiled threats to Columbia ("Obviously, there's some degree of capital support that has been provided to Columbia in the past. These are things people might take a different view of") for committing the crime of inviting a speaker whom Silver finds offensive. Is there anyone who fails to see how dangerous and improper this is -- not to mention unconstitutional -- that government officials threaten and punish universities for hosting speakers whom the officials dislike? Do we want our universities to be able to provide speaking venues only to individuals who are approved by the likes of Sheldon Silver and Dov Hikind?

What this really illustrates more than anything else is the true danger to our national character and basic liberties from being in a permanent state of war fighting. When we become a society that just leaps from one New Ultimate Hitler Enemy Who Must Be Destroyed to the next, we ensure that all of our political values and institutions become infected by this bloodthirsty mentality. When we have one Enemy after the next to annihilate, who really cares about dreary luxuries like due process or restraints on government power or the First Amendment? Saddam/binLaden/Ahemdinijad/Assad is Evil, a Hitler, and all power must be vested without limits in our Leaders so they can destroy him/them.

Along those same lines, this "interview" of Ahmadinejad by Scott Pelley of "60 Minutes" has to be read to be believed. As Ezra Klein says: "Pelley declined to interview Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and instead popped off aggressive statements as if he were a White House press release with a cardiovascular system."

It would be perfectly appropriate for Pelley to pose aggressive and challenging questions to Ahmadinejad. That is actually what reporters in general are supposed to do when questioning any government officials, not merely the Foreign Muslim Enemy du Jour. Fathom how elevated our political discourse would be if "reporters" like Pelley were even a fraction as adversarial and challenging when interviewing Bush officials as Pelley was when yelling at Ahmadinejad.

But Pelley did not question him so much as make a series of highly dubious war-fueling statements as fact. And far more revealing than Pelley's tone were the premises of his "questions" -- ones which blindly assumed every accusation of the Bush administration towards Iran to be true -- such as these:

PELLEY: Sir, what were you thinking? The World Trade Center site is the most sensitive place in the American heart, and you must have known that visiting there would be insulting to many, many Americans.

AHMADINEJAD: Why should it be insulting?

PELLEY: Well, sir, you're the head of government of an Islamist state that the United States government says is a major exporter of terrorism around the world. . . .

PELLEY: But the American people, sir, believe that your country is a terrorist nation, exporting terrorism in the world. You must have known that visiting the World Trade Center site would infuriate many Americans, as if to be mocking the American people.

AHMADINEJAD: Well, I'm amazed. How can you speak for the whole of the American nation?

PELLEY: Well, the American nation . . .

PELLEY: Mr. President, you say that the two nations are very close to one another, but it is an established fact now that Iranian bombs and Iranian know-how are killing Americans in Iraq. You have American blood on your hands. Why?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, this is what the American officials are saying. . . .

PELLEY: Mr. President, American men and women are being killed by your weapons in Iraq. You know this.

AHMADINEJAD: No, no, no.

PELLEY: Why are those weapons there?

AHMADINEJAD: Who's saying that?

PELLEY: The American Army has captured Iranian missiles in Iraq. The critical elements of the explosively formed penetrator bombs that are killing so many people are coming from Iran. There's no doubt about that anymore. The denials are no longer credible, sir. . . .

AHMADINEJAD: Very good. If I may. Are you an American politician? Am I to look at you as an American politician or a reporter? . . . .

PELLEY: Mr. President, you must have rejoiced more than anyone when Saddam Hussein fell. You owe President Bush. This is one of the best things that's ever happened to your country.

Scott Pelley wants Ahmadinejad to know that -- like all of us -- he "owes President Bush." Almost every word out of Pelley's mouth was a faithful recitation of the accusations made by the Bush White House. Ahmadinejad obviously does not watch much American news because he seemed genuinely surprised that someone he thought was a reporter was doing nothing other than reciting the script of the government.

Apparently, among the American press now, it is unchallengably true that the Iranian Government has the Blood of American Soliders on its hands and is a "terrorist state." I guess our "journalists" have decided that "only a fool -- or possibly a Frenchman -- could conclude otherwise." After all, even the left-wing Michael Gordon and the NYT admit this, and they couldn't be wrong about such matters.

And besides, our Top Military Commanders in Iraq are making these accusations, and we all just learned last week from Our Senate that we must never question "the honor and integrity . . . of members of the United States Armed Forces." Our media, of course, has been diligently following that Rule for many, many years.

Skepticism of government officials? Media objectivity? First Amendment freedoms? Due Process and Habeas Corpus and diplomacy? Ahmadinejad is Hitler, Our Enemy, and We are at War -- with him and forever. That's all we really need to know."

TheEvilDetector
09-24-2007, 02:20 PM
call me crazy... 'cuz i am... but i really believe that if we invade Iran it will be for China, not inspite of it. i'm not as up to date as i'd like to be w/ the story in russia at the present, but as far as China... if we invade Iran it will be at their behest.

Believe me, if US bombs Iran, TSWHTF, China and Russia will respond with military force.
WW3, bye bye world.

There is no way Russia and China can allow the last independent energy rich middle east nation to fall under US influence.
That is suicide for them.

If chinese do not attack, they might dump all their dollars and kill US economy.

TheEvilDetector
09-24-2007, 02:25 PM
Dont know if this is true or not, but i saw this comment at :
http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/09/24/ahmadinejad/permalink/fe3bb9d9450da3bf102f6bca673b3b1b.html

"Wayne Madsen Report - "Lost" Nukes were on the way to Iran

"Lost" B-52 nuke cruise missiles were on way to Middle East for attack on Iran; Air Force refused to fly weapons to Middle East theater.

WMR has learned from U.S. and foreign intelligence sources that the B-52 transporting six stealth AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles, each armed with a W-80-1 nuclear warhead, on August 30, were destined for the Middle East via Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana.

However, elements of the Air Force, supported by U.S. intelligence agency personnel, successfully revealed the ultimate destination of the nuclear weapons and the mission was aborted due to internal opposition within the Air Force and U.S. Intelligence Community.

Yesterday, the Washington Post attempted to explain away the fact that America's nuclear command and control system broke down in an unprecedented manner by reporting that it was the result of "security failures at multiple levels." It is now apparent that the command and control breakdown, reported as a BENT SPEAR incident to the Secretary of Defense and White House, was not the result of a command and control chain-of-command "failures" but the result of a revolt and push back by various echelons within the Air Force and intelligence agencies against a planned U.S. attack on Iran using nuclear and conventional weapons.

More (pay site) at: http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/"

Nefertiti
09-24-2007, 02:31 PM
You also have to understand that Islam instructs its followers to cover up their sins, including those of other Muslims. So why should he admit to homosexuality in his country? It would be wrong of him to do so.

A perfect example of this are the official suicide rates for Egypt, which are something like 30 a year. When the Egypt Air flight crashed in 1999 Egyptians were all upset that the American investigators suggested the pilot was depressed and crashed the plane, because they believed no Egyptian could kill himself. While my husband was doing his medical residency in Cairo, he was seeing several attempted suicide cases a week. That one hospital got more suicide cases than the official stats for the entire country. I totally started to believe in the possibility of the pilot trying to kill himself at that point. But since suicide is a major sin of course no one wants to admit it happens.

jaybone
09-24-2007, 02:45 PM
Believe me, if US bombs Iran, TSWHTF, China and Russia will respond with military force.
WW3, bye bye world.

There is no way Russia and China can allow the last independent energy rich middle east nation to fall under US influence.
That is suicide for them.

If chinese do not attack, they might dump all their dollars and kill US economy.

I agree, if the chimp attacks Iran, it is game over for US.
Not by military force, but economic warfare.
China will dump a trillion$, and Russia will turn off the heat throughout Europe.
It is amazing to me that nobody in the US realized just how acutely vulnerable we are right now. The sheeple are soo afraid of this "Evil" man, speaking at Columbia, it makes me sick.

I have seen absolutely NO evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon, have YOU!?!?! I remember first hearing about this whole thing a couple years ago and I was like, oh well they have a right to nuclear power same as anybody else.
Then a couple months later the coverage just made a jump to charachterizing their nuclear program as aggressive pursuit of weapons. With NO evidence at all! The MSM just decided that it was the case, because of course if you have nuclear power you must want to make a bomb.
It is nothing but propaganda! and if I'm wrong then PROVE IT.

And even if they do want nukes, can you really blame them? How can we ethically say it is OK for the US and Israel, but nobody else? It is placing the well being of one HUMAN over the well being of another HUMAN, based solely on culture.
Our misplaced quest for 'safety' cannot come at the expense of innocent others any longer. This U.S. aggression cannot come to pass or generations of Americans will pay the price, and a steep price it will be.

TheEvilDetector
09-24-2007, 02:57 PM
good point with the russian economic option, i didnt consider that

FreedomLover
09-24-2007, 03:00 PM
wow @ the ahmadinejad love-fest in this thread

Starks
09-24-2007, 03:07 PM
wow @ the ahmadinejad love-fest in this thread

It's not love. It's indifference and pointing out the finer points of his speech.

nullvalu
09-24-2007, 03:08 PM
wow @ the ahmadinejad love-fest in this thread

I know, it's making me a little uncomfortable. Yes, our "leaders" are liars. Yes, we (US foreign policy) probably caused a lot of problems there. But this man is not our friend.

We can't assume everyone who says something similair to us is our friend. Yeah, Dennis Kucinich says a lot of similair things to Dr. Paul, but I don't think most of us would want him running our country since he's a socialist..

BenIsForRon
09-24-2007, 03:32 PM
I wouldn't say this is a love fest. He made some very good points that you're not hearing much from any politicians or media here. He also said some crazy things, like the homosexual comment. He supports freedom and democracy up to the point where it interferes with his interpretation of the Qu'ran.

The best part that came out of this is the invitation for American students to go and speak to an Iranian university. As long as Bollinger doesn't select the students, it should be a very constructive exchange. I actually see this as a huge step for democracy. Let representatives come from opposing countries to exchange ideas freely. There are many progressive people in Iran, and I know they will be very receptive to messages from our academic community. Just imagine if Ron Paul got to speak to Iranians unrestricted.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 03:34 PM
So he's not our friend - so what.

Somehow, Vicente Fox was supposedly 'our friend' and he was facilitating an illegal invasion of our country and robbing of our resources, kinda like what we do in the Middle East, yet I saw no bombing or killing of his people. In fact if anyone even criticized Fox - a corrupt oligarch, we were admonished and called intolerant racists.

It's just the outrageous hypocracy and lying.

And the fact that Ahmadinejad is amazed that the journalists are not doing any investigating - just spouting the political line. People might want to take that into consideration.

constituent
09-24-2007, 03:35 PM
The best part that came out of this is the invitation for American students to go and speak to an Iranian university. As long as Bollinger doesn't select the students, it should be a very constructive exchange. I actually see this as a huge step for democracy. Let representatives come from opposing countries to exchange ideas freely. There are many progressive people in Iran, and I know they will be very receptive to messages from our academic community. Just imagine if Ron Paul got to speak to Iranians unrestricted.


i'm sorry, but for some reason this post reminded me of that movie USED CARS after they blow-up the car across the road... "that's too f*n high! booom!"

...cut to cop taking notes and the guy says... "i dont know i think they were abunch of Iranian college students running around with things on their head shouting 'ayatollah ayatollah' or something like that."

Original_Intent
09-24-2007, 03:36 PM
He's not our friend, but he is less of a threat to our freedom and our lives than our own leaders.

Syren123
09-24-2007, 03:36 PM
He's not our friend, but he is less of a threat to our freedom and our lives than our own leaders.

True that.

Give me liberty
09-24-2007, 03:37 PM
Didnt fox news already compare saddam to hitler?
and now they are doing it again? >.>


Fox is not our friend, they dont speak for us and they dont speak for the whole country.

even thorugh i dont agree with most what Ahmadinejad said, but i do on some issues.

JosephTheLibertarian
09-24-2007, 04:07 PM
Didnt fox news already compare saddam to hitler?
and now they are doing it again? >.>


Fox is not our friend, they dont speak for us and they dont speak for the whole country.

even thorugh i dont agree with most what Ahmadinejad said, but i do on some issues.

yup... and they're trying to pass through sanctions. Didn't the ones on Iraq kill around 500,000 children? Here we go again.........

drpiotrowski
09-24-2007, 04:45 PM
Is there a recorded version of this online anywhere?

I'd hate to only get the Hannitized version of it.

rg123
09-24-2007, 05:18 PM
Dont know if this is true or not, but i saw this comment at :
http://letters.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/09/24/ahmadinejad/permalink/fe3bb9d9450da3bf102f6bca673b3b1b.html

"Wayne Madsen Report - "Lost" Nukes were on the way to Iran

"Lost" B-52 nuke cruise missiles were on way to Middle East for attack on Iran; Air Force refused to fly weapons to Middle East theater.

WMR has learned from U.S. and foreign intelligence sources that the B-52 transporting six stealth AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missiles, each armed with a W-80-1 nuclear warhead, on August 30, were destined for the Middle East via Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana.

However, elements of the Air Force, supported by U.S. intelligence agency personnel, successfully revealed the ultimate destination of the nuclear weapons and the mission was aborted due to internal opposition within the Air Force and U.S. Intelligence Community.

Yesterday, the Washington Post attempted to explain away the fact that America's nuclear command and control system broke down in an unprecedented manner by reporting that it was the result of "security failures at multiple levels." It is now apparent that the command and control breakdown, reported as a BENT SPEAR incident to the Secretary of Defense and White House, was not the result of a command and control chain-of-command "failures" but the result of a revolt and push back by various echelons within the Air Force and intelligence agencies against a planned U.S. attack on Iran using nuclear and conventional weapons.

More (pay site) at: http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/"

I miss the Madison Report he reports all the great inside stuff all of the identity theft going on by the black ops and cia. Just all the stuff no one else has the balls to report and he went to a paid site now too bad I really miss his info

Geronimo
09-24-2007, 06:17 PM
All of this as nothing more than propaganda. They wouldn't have had this speech at Columbia if they weren't intentionally looking to underline the unsubstantiated demonization of this guy, all in an attempt to gain support to go to war with them. Conveniently (for them) they have an excuse to further separate the left and the right in this country. Just as they've been trying to separate the rich from the poor. The neocons are trying their best to stir up the bees nest, and the hard right is labeling anyone that doesn't go along with their agenda as being 'traitors', 'extremists', or 'kooks'. Listen to Hannity or Rush, or just about any talk radio host. They run the airwaves, and they all busy as bees demonizing anything slightly to the left.

It's obvious that the government/media don't like dissent when it's not in favor of their agenda. They don't cover war protests (or Ron Paul) on the news for a reason. Because there's a lot of people who might hear the truth and catch on to the big lie that the media actually is. The reason we're in Iraq is because of a lie, but people forget that there were no WMD's. Jessica Lynch was a lie, but people forget that too. It's actually the media/government that gives the term 'conspiracy theorists' a bad name. Most of these theories are based on a lot of truth, and in an effort to stifle the truth they use every effort trying to discredit the theory, or person who poses a threat. Did you ever notice how any sign of real dissent gets stifled, while Moveon.org is litterally promoted by the MSM? You'd think that if they didn't want people to know about the site they wouldn't mention it so often. It's the old 'divide and conquer' tactic. I've never been in one before but, to me, all of this looks like the beginning of a civil war.

Anyway, pardon the rant. My point of posting was to bring your attention to a thread that I started last night regarding the Iranian president's interview on 60 Minutes. Here's the link to the transcripts, and video. (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=19760)

Sir VotesALot
09-24-2007, 06:35 PM
And denying that the holocaust happened is just silly unless I've been severly duped.

You have.

But to what extent you have been duped is for you to explore. Check out this film when you have some extra time:

onethirdoftheholocaust.com

Also here's a short clip of historian David Irving giving a speech (before he was imprisoned):

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9196410793507611506&q=david+irving&total=196&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=8


David Irving is not a "discredited" historian, by the way. His works were required reading at West Point until the ADL had them removed. (Read Walt and Mearsheimer's latest book The Israel Lobby if you want to know more about the intense power of Jewish organizations in this country.) More importantly, know that the "Holocaust Denier" label is very misleading. None of these historians and chemists being arrested are denying the Holocaust, just asking questions or pointing out inaccuracies.

Revisionists basically contend 3 things (on average, not all of them agree with each other obviously):

1) The 6 million number is a grossly exaggerated figure.

The real figure is somewhere around 700,000-1.5 million

2) There was no systematic plan by the Nazis to exterminate the Jews.

Most died from typhus and starvation and yes, many were even murdered by German officers (with bullets not gas).

3) There were no gas chambers used to execute Jews.

Zyklon B was used to disinfect lice, but not to murder anyone.

I know this all may sound a bit extreme at first, but I encourage everyone to do their own research. PLEASE, read the revisionists' point of view.

I too used to believe in the official Holocaust story until about a few months when I saw Hannity & Colmes conduct the most BRUTAL interview I have ever seen on television (even from Fox News), with IHR director Mark Weber on Ahmedinejad's Tehran Conference in 2006. (you can watch that interview here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbRHrduTvBM).) After watching this interview I became curious and began to do my own research. I was absolutely devastated and SHOCKED at what I found.

Here's another good place to start: ihr.org

sky21448
09-24-2007, 08:02 PM
i believe the president of iran is smart enough not to mess with the US since we are one of the strongest country in the world. Why the hell would he bomb us lmao. If nuclear bomb or missile really hitted the US soil, the first thing in my mind would be is it a inside job????(again)?

Geronimo
09-24-2007, 08:05 PM
Are you drunk, or just a troll?

constituent
09-24-2007, 09:03 PM
Are you drunk, or just a troll?

now that's a silly question...

here, try it this way...

are you a drunken troll or just a drunk?:)

TheEvilDetector
09-24-2007, 09:50 PM
http://wcbstv.com/video/?id=103767@wcbs.dayport.com

this is a video of the event

Electric Church
09-24-2007, 11:25 PM
http://wcbstv.com/video/?id=103767@wcbs.dayport.com

this is a video of the event

thanks

libertarianguy
09-25-2007, 01:23 AM
test

Electric Church
09-25-2007, 01:49 AM
Anyway, pardon the rant.

It was a good rant.

The Dane
09-25-2007, 01:56 AM
In the video of the conference:

http://wcbstv.com/video/?id=103767@wcbs.dayport.com

I noted how many jews were in the conference hall.

On offence, but why were there so many jews, and why did they wear their caps??

TheEvilDetector
09-25-2007, 02:01 AM
raving religious fanatic, useless and ignorant theorist, thinks he can construct a truth by positing series of impotent arguments. We respect individual rights of women because women have been elected to hold state office? Right...

both cbs and columbia did a lousy job of exposing him: their questions were braindead, accusatory, offensive. Both parties lumped too many questions and answers together and details were never scrutinized. Worst of all was colombia's policy of attacking him when he could not respond at the end after he had finished speaking, as well as the audience's audacity to 'clap' or remain silent as it pleased

Iran is a sovereign nation. USA is a sovereign nation.

Trade, talk, travel.

Interfere not.

Simple really.

derdy
09-25-2007, 02:01 AM
Neocons Insult Ahmadinejad at Columbia (http://adereview.com/blog/?p=55)

libertarianguy
09-25-2007, 02:40 AM
test

TheEvilDetector
09-25-2007, 03:01 AM
or even better, talk well



who's interfering?

USA has dismantled previous government of Iraq and the country is now in the midst of an insurgency with the various factions killing each other and the soldiers.

The result is about 1 million dead and millions of others affected.

That's interference.

USA plans to invade Iran, where similar events are likely to take place.

That's also interference.

USA has invaded Afghanistan, and thousands of innocent civilians died.

The taliban was not defeated. Al-Qaeda was not defeated.

Probably both have been made stronger, by validating everything everyone suspected all along.

USA wants to be an empire.

That's also interference.

USA has been in over 100 conflicts around the world in the last 100 or so years.

That's also interference, wouldn't you say?

The fact of the matter is, USA needs an enemy, any enemy, to justify the continued existence and
health of the overbloated military industrial complex and to confirm the paranoia in the intelligence circles
that someone is out to get them all the time.

The bankers are only too happy to oblige, since more debt, means more profits to them.

The banking, military and intelligence systems need to be fundamentally reformed.

That's my view of the matter.

J4ck
09-25-2007, 03:01 AM
..That protests were embarrassing, after delivering scuds, intelligence and other weaponry to Saddam, who killed with these hundreds of thousands Iranians - these protesters are holding up there little Ahmadinejad=Hitler/mass murderer signs. Totally embarrassing for the american and israeli people.
I could hardly watch this bull on tv.
How must an Iranian feel who took part in the candle marches on 9/11 ?
Or the Iranian intelligence officers/soldiers who helped america fighting against the taliban?
..man with these neocon bastards in charge, america shows it's darkest side.

libertarianguy
09-25-2007, 03:12 AM
test

TheEvilDetector
09-25-2007, 03:17 AM
Neocons Insult Ahmadinejad at Columbia (http://adereview.com/blog/?p=55)

That's an excellent summary, I will post it here:

"
It doesn’t take much to read through the corporate media bombast on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s “showdown” at Columbia University, as the Associated Press characterized what in essence was an ambush and a heaping dose of disrespect by the Iranian leader’s surly hosts. In the very first sentence of the report, we learn that “Ahmadinejad defended Holocaust deniers and raised questions about who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks,” both entirely legitimate topics of discussion, that is outside the purview of Bushzarro world.

“Thousands of people jammed two blocks of 47th Street across from the United Nations to protest Ahmadinejad’s visit to New York for the opening of the U.N. General Assembly session. Organizers claimed a turnout of tens of thousands. Police did not immediately have a crowd estimate,” the Associated Press reports. “The speakers, most of them politicians and officials from Jewish organizations, proclaimed their support for Israel and criticized the Iranian leader for his remarks questioning the Holocaust.”

In other words, thousands of people are outraged by something Ahmadinejad never said, a lie fabricated by MEMRI, a Mossad front designated to provide propaganda to convince Americans they are obliged to squander their hard-earned money and precious lives for the sake of Israel’s territorial ambitions, although of course this is rarely mentioned. Instead we are warned ad nauseam the Arabs and Muslims “hate us for our freedom”—to shop until we drop and run up the credit cards—and are keen to slaughter our grade schoolers, thus we have to fight them over there before they swarm over us like “Islamofascist” vermin here with a sword in one hand and a Koran in the other.

If you sincerely believe you are free, attempt to question the Holocaust and see how far you get. For that matter, attempt to discuss the plight of the Palestinians, as Ahmadinejad did, and see how far you get. Simply insisting the Palestinians are human and are grossly and habitually victimized by the Israeli state is a dangerous pursuit, on occasion leading to not only ad hominem attacks but threats of violence, lost careers, as the American political scientist Norman Finkelstein recently discovered, and even prison time, as questioners in Europe and Canada have learned.

“Asked why he had asked to visit the World Trade Center site—a request denied by New York authorities—Ahmadinejad said he wanted to express sympathy for the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks,” the Associated Press continues. “Then he appeared to question whether al-Qaida was responsible, saying more research was needed.”

Indeed, more research is needed, but we will not get it, as the neocons will not be challenged on their preposterous claim that a gaggle of cave dwelling Arabs were responsible and a hand-picked whitewash commission, leaving out enough contrary evidence to fill a large hole at the Fresh Kills landfill site on Staten Island, have put aside all question, at least all questions the corporate media and our Congress critters refuse to ask, preferring instead the absurd claim Arabs defied physical science and magically, as if through a voodoo trance, made Norad stand down on September 11, 2001.

“If the root causes of 9/11 are examined properly—why it happened, what caused it, what were the conditions that led to it, who truly was involved, who was really involved—and put it all together to understand how to prevent the crisis in Iraq, fix the problem in Afghanistan and Iraq combined,” Ahmadinejad said.

Not exactly, although Ahmadinejad will be excoriated severely for the crime of offering a critique. As we know—or a small number of us know—the attacks served as a much anticipated and meticulously plotted “Pearl Harbor event,” not designed to prevent “crisis in Iraq,” and soon enough Ahmadinejad’s Iran, but precisely for the opposite reason—to inflict a series of violent crimes of the sort familiar to the Nazis on the people, culture, and society of the region. Simply reading a few neocon documents makes this perfectly and horrifically obvious, not that we should expect the average American to read anything more or less than the side of his morning cereal box.

Obviously, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad walked into a trap at Columbia University, as he should realize far too many Americans have surrendered to the brutal vision of the neocons and their Jabotinskyite mentors, preferring to insult and harangue foreign visitors and, provided with the appropriate contrived pretext, bomb their nations into Neolithic condition, as the neocons will do soon enough to Iran.

If Ahmadinejad had his wits about him, he would stay as far away from America as possible and prepare the inevitable—cruise missiles and bunker busters with his name attached, a prospect disgusting as children signing artillery shells last summer at Kiryat Shmona, Israel."

TheEvilDetector
09-25-2007, 03:18 AM
sorry, i meant to imply that i, lojpre, was not advocating interference

we had a misunderstanding.. oops
heheheh

TheEvilDetector
09-25-2007, 03:20 AM
In the video of the conference:

http://wcbstv.com/video/?id=103767@wcbs.dayport.com

I noted how many jews were in the conference hall.

On offence, but why were there so many jews, and why did they wear their caps??

Maybe they are interested in hearing what the Iranian president had to say.

There is nothing wrong with them wearing their caps.

Starks
09-25-2007, 03:53 AM
I've said it once and I'll say it again:

Mahmoud may be scum, but it certainly wasn't in our national interests to treat him like shit before he even spoke. He's the head of a sovereign nation for god's sake!

The Dane
09-25-2007, 04:20 AM
Maybe they are interested in hearing what the Iranian president had to say.

There is nothing wrong with them wearing their caps.

Good point.

For people who have a few hours of spare time during the next 4 days, go HELP, they need it :

http://ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=19351