President Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia University

[December]

President Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia University

:clapper:

Fri, 21 Sep 2007
Officials at Columbia University in New York say that they would not cancel a planned speech by the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The Columbia University's plan to go ahead with President Ahmadinejad's speech comes amid objections from New York City Council speaker, Christine Quinn. She called on the university Thursday to cancel the Iranian President's speech.

President Ahmadinejad is traveling to the US to address the United Nations General Assembly. He is scheduled to appear Monday at a question-and-answer session with Columbia faculty and students as part of the school's World Leaders Forum.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=24048&sectionid=351020101


http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/iran_ahmadinejad_2.jpg


And the neo-cuns are going nuts to stop him...

McCain Suggests Physical Force to Prevent Ahmadinejad From Visiting World Trade Center Site

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should be physically prevented from visiting Ground Zero should he attempt to go to the "sacred" site where the World Trade Center once stood, Arizona Sen. John McCain joked Thursday.

"I think the president of Iran should be physically restrained if necessary," a laughing McCain told radio host Shawn Wasson. "I hope it doesn't come to that but we're not going to have that kind of desecration of what is sacred ground. Obviously, it is a propaganda ploy on his part, and if we allowed him to do it it would just embolden his followers and give him the publicity he seeks."

Ahmadinejad, whose country is on the U.S. list of state sponsors of terror and has called for the elimination of the state of Israel, is arriving in New York on Monday for the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly.

Ahmadinejad told "60 Minutes" on Thursday that he's "amazed" Americans view his request to visit the site as insulting. He said he still has the visit included in his program and will try to go, but if local officials can't swing it, "I won't insist."

"We all know that unfortunately because the United Nations is located in New York City, he can come there just as (Cuban leader Fidel) Castro comes and some other jerks," McCain said. But allowing Ahmadinejad to visit the site "would be an affront not only to America but to the families of our loved ones who perished there in an unprecedented act of terror."

Ahmadinejad has also accepted an invitation to speak at Columbia University. McCain, who acknowledged he didn't have a close relationship with the Minutemen border guards, nonetheless noted that one Minuteman leader was prevented from speaking at the school, but the Iranian president is being welcomed.

"I don't quite get that, my friend. It's a sad commentary," McCain said.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297526,00.html

http://z.about.com/d/civilliberty/1/0/c/0/-/-/mccain.jpg

http://www.ahmadinejad.ir

[preservanation]

Knew you would like this one Dec.
A mushroom is your favorite cloud as well.
So much in common.

[December]

A mushroom is your favorite cloud as well.


The story behind one of the world's worst-kept secrets: the Jewish state's atomic arsenal.

THE BOMB IN THE BASEMENT

How Israel Went Nuclear and What That
Means for the World

By Michael Karpin

In 1958, an American U-2 spy plane flying over Israel spotted an unusual construction site near the small Negev Desert town of Dimona. The facility featured a long perimeter fence, building activity and several roads. Israeli officials initially called the facility a textile plant; they later changed their minds and described it as a "metallurgical research installation." In September 1960, according to Israeli accounts, the United States got a better look at Dimona from a Corona reconnaissance satellite. By December, CIA Director Allen Dulles felt sure enough of what was going on to tell President Eisenhower that Israel was secretly constructing a nuclear reactor that would allow it to build the bomb.

Israel has never admitted that it has nuclear weapons, though it does not deny having them. As the Israeli journalist Michael Karpin suggests in his aptly titled The Bomb in the Basement , the United States has gone along with this charade because acknowledging the existence of Israel's nuclear arsenal would incite futile demands by Arabs and Iranians to get rid of it. Still, this worldly winking rankles at a time when the United States and Israel are leading the charge to make Iran, North Korea and other threatening actors come clean about their own nuclear activities. Many developing countries resist the idea of holding Iran to account for breaking nonproliferation rules when Israel is given a pass. But there's another way to think of the issue. Rather than pretend that Israel's nuclear posture is irrelevant, perhaps it's time to use Israel's muted approach to its atomic arsenal as an example for the United States, Russia and other nuclear powers to follow.

READ MORE -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/16/AR2006021601897.html


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8o4AelGsug

[Stoner]

Columbia University should have its government funding pulled. Absolutely sickening. First they kick out the ROTC from their campus because they don't agree with the "Don't ask don't tell" policy (Columbia U is very pro-gay) but then they turn around and allow an organized event where students can sit down and listen to a modern-day Hitler.

The irony here is they kicked out the ROTC because they don't agree with how the military treats gays but yet they allow this man to come to their school who kills people for being gay.

Not good. Ahmadinejad is listed by the State Department as a terrorist as well as Iran yet Columbia U is opening out its arms for this madman and allowing him to talk to our kids?

Sickening.

[preservanation]

I find this interesting.
Some argue that a nation like Iran can survive a second strike because of it's size while poor little Israel can be totally annihilated with one bomb.
Mahmoood Imanutjob might be willing o sacrifice vast Iranian populations in his genocidal desire to eliminate the Jewish State.
Frightening.

[December]

Columbia University should have its government funding pulled. Absolutely sickening. First they kick out the ROTC from their campus because they don't agree with the "Don't ask don't tell" policy (Columbia U is very pro-gay) but then they turn around and allow an organized event where students can sit down and listen to a modern-day Hitler.

The irony here is they kicked out the ROTC because they don't agree with how the military treats gays but yet they allow this man to come to their school who kills people for being gay.

Not good. Ahmadinejad is listed by the State Department as a terrorist as well as Iran yet Columbia U is opening out its arms for this madman and allowing him to talk to our kids?

Sickening.



Stoner! Forget the funds...
Just arrest them all and ship'em to the America's Gulag - the Guantanamo camp...

You know, you actually sound like typical Soviet Communist. :madlaugh:
Well, thanks to the neo-cons IT'S THE END OF US AS WE KNOW IT.... and America is becoming the neo-USSR...

Why don't you just go ahead and burn the US Constitution with its first amendment, Stoner...

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html

_______________________________

"It is here, in the realm of politics, that much confusion has been sown. Supporters of Zionism for years skillfully attacted their opponents as "anti-Semites", to the extend that many Americans, Jews and gentiles alike and especially the media, are loath to even question the policies of Isreal no matter how odious.
Furthermore, the broad brush of anti-Semitism frequently has been used to besmirch anyone offering a conspiratorial view of history."

Jim Marrs "Rule by Secrecy"
page 61.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060931841/103-5217172-3542217?v=glance&n=283155

[PatrickHenry]

Stoner=Censorship Я Us...LOL!

And preserva thinks Iran's president would sacrifice his nation to kill off the Jews. LOL!

Fascism in America: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html
You won't have a shutdown of news in modern America - it is not possible. But you can have, as Frank Rich and Sidney Blumenthal have pointed out, a steady stream of lies polluting the news well. What you already have is a White House directing a stream of false information that is so relentless that it is increasingly hard to sort out truth from untruth. In a fascist system, it's not the lies that count but the muddying. When citizens can't tell real news from fake, they give up their demands for accountability bit by bit.

[Marley]

[Columbia] kicked out the ROTC because they don't agree with how the military treats gays but yet they allow this man to come to their school who kills people for being gay.

Excellent point Stoner.

Note no one will address your point, only start in attacking YOU and hoping no one will notice the difference.


Pathetic.

Anyone care to address Stoner's point?

[jafar00]

He is scheduled to appear Monday at a question-and-answer session with Columbia faculty and students as part of the school's World Leaders Forum.


Why is everyone against him speaking? It seems like an excellent learning opportunity for the students to have a world leader, especially one considered an enemy by the state to speak at their school and have him answer their questions.


"We all know that unfortunately because the United Nations is located in New York City, he can come there just as (Cuban leader Fidel) Castro comes and some other jerks," McCain said. But allowing Ahmadinejad to visit the site "would be an affront not only to America but to the families of our loved ones who perished there in an unprecedented act of terror."

That's just wrong. Neither he nor his country had anything to do with 9/11. Why all this hatred directed at someone who has nothing to harm anyone in the US?

[NortheastCynic]

This is a stupid move, but Columbia is a private university [I think their funding should be pulled...but then again I don't think any school should receive tax money] and they should be free to invite anyone who they'd like onto their private property. I wouldn't go to the speech and I hope he is received harshly, but I'm not about to say I want my personal view of the man protected by legal force.

-NC

[PatrickHenry]

Anyone care to address Stoner's point?
Letsee. Does Stoner get any credibility for condemning the use of torture in interrogation?

Does he support the execution of minors?

Does he really have any values whatsoever? Or is he a complete wasted mishmash of Coulteresque talking points surrounded by a fog of ganja smoke?

As to Columbia...why worry about a speech followed by a question and answer session where the President of Iran may be put on the spot with pointed questions about his nation's policies? By the Jewish students of NYC?

Who asks Dubya any questions? And if they did, they would likely be tasered and arrested on trumped up charges.

What is so threatening about Ahmadinejad? Just because Dubya has made him the boogyman?

[Truth_and_Power]

I don't understand why you guys think the guy shouldn't be allowed to speak. What, just because many of us disagree with him? Fear of hearing out the opposition sounds more like fear of having some of your own faults aired. And to remove their public funding (if they have any)? That's ridiculous! You guys act like the university is endorsing terrorism. Of course, within 5 minutes I'll have someone on here accusing me of loving mushroom clouds or terrorism. Some people just can't stand for someone they disagree with to have a chance to talk.

[Marley]

What's so threatening about the ROTC?


What is so threatening about Ahmadinejad?

I can only hope your candidate put that ona bumper sticker Pat!

(pssssst GWB is isn't running for reelection!)

Yeah sure Pat, the same guy publicly stating he wants to wipe another nation off the face of the planet and is actively developing the nukes to do so, no threat there, sure, you got it nailed.

[Scorpion]

[Columbia] kicked out the ROTC because they don't agree with how the military treats gays but yet they allow this man to come to their school who kills people for being gay.

Excellent point Stoner.

Note no one will address your point, only start in attacking YOU and hoping no one will notice the difference.


Pathetic.

Anyone care to address Stoner's point?


Sure. Stoner's point is that Columbia University practices discrimination. I tend to agree.

In this case inviting a known terrorist, criminal, anti-semite and advocate for the offensive use of nuclear weapons to speak at Columbia University under the guise of the speaker being the national leader of what is a repressive and fanatical Islamic state sends a clear message that Columbia University is prostituting academic freedom and free speech rights to provide a venue for hatred.

[jafar00]

What's so threatening about the ROTC?


What is so threatening about Ahmadinejad?

I can only hope your candidate put that ona bumper sticker Pat!

(pssssst GWB is isn't running for reelection!)

Yeah sure Pat, the same guy publicly stating he wants to wipe another nation off the face of the planet and is actively developing the nukes to do so, no threat there, sure, you got it nailed.


He didn't threaten to wipe any nation off the face of the planet and is NOT actively developing nukes according to all the evidence presented.
Take away those two points of propaganda and lies and what are you left with?

One is a misquote from a translation made by someone who obviously failed the Persian Language course they took off the back of a cornflakes packet, and the other has absolutely no evidence to back it up.[hr]
In this case inviting a known terrorist, criminal, anti-semite and advocate for the offensive use of nuclear weapons to speak at Columbia University under the guise of the speaker being the national leader of what is a repressive and fanatical Islamic state sends a clear message that Columbia University is prostituting academic freedom and free speech rights to provide a venue for hatred.


Terrorist? When? Where?

Criminal? When, What?

Anti-Semite? Since when is being critical of the Zionist Regime in control of Israel Anti-Semitic?

He is also known for saying the exact opposite about Nuclear Weapons. I'd love to read or hear a quote from him actually advocating the use of nukes.

[December]

Iran's Ahmadinejad on Holocaust

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ykd-syzZ4ZY

God bless this man!

________________________

"It is here, in the realm of politics, that much confusion has been sown. Supporters of Zionism for years skillfully attacted their opponents as "anti-Semites", to the extend that many Americans, Jews and gentiles alike and especially the media, are loath to even question the policies of Isreal no matter how odious.
Furthermore, the broad brush of anti-Semitism frequently has been used to besmirch anyone offering a conspiratorial view of history."

Jim Marrs "Rule by Secrecy" page 61.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060931841/103-5217172-3542217?v=glance&n=283155

[Truth_and_Power]

Personally, with the way the world is headed, I think there could be no more educational experience than to hear hitler give a speech to a small auditorium. I would be unlikely to agree to anything he said, but it would most certainly be educational. As will hearing from Iran's leader. Would you not agree?

[crimzonsol]

I would pay to be able to learn from Hitler and thats saying soemthing since I am the total stereotypical Jew when it comes to money. so yes I agree T&P.

[December]

Personally, with the way the world is headed, I think there could be no more educational experience than to hear hitler give a speech to a small auditorium. I would be unlikely to agree to anything he said, but it would most certainly be educational. As will hearing from Iran's leader. Would you not agree?


Is it just apart of your culture to attack people personally or you simply trying to switch the conversation? :)

Do you realize that in the future there will be two totally isolated countries in the world - the US and Israel?

There is NO WAY the Jews are going to live in peace for as long as they continue to kill people in the neighboring countries and at the same time call them all kind of names.

Russia and China support Iran and noone will allow the crazy pro-Israel neo-cons to destroy an ancient country of Iran....

:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9oIZpFFyIY
________________________

"It is here, in the realm of politics, that much confusion has been sown. Supporters of Zionism for years skillfully attacted their opponents as "anti-Semites", to the extend that many Americans, Jews and gentiles alike and especially the media, are loath to even question the policies of Isreal no matter how odious.
Furthermore, the broad brush of anti-Semitism frequently has been used to besmirch anyone offering a conspiratorial view of history."

Jim Marrs "Rule by Secrecy" page 61.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060931841/103-5217172-3542217?v=glance&n=283155

[crimzonsol]

Russia and China support Iran and noone will allow the crazy pro-Israel neo-cons to destroy an ancient country of Iran....


Not because they care about Iran, they just don't want Israel to gain more power, the Soviet Union understood Israels power and where the first country to recognize Israel, unfortunately because of two factors Israel lost their support. one, they shared a border with Syria. And two Jews are smart thus a threat to Stalins rule.

[Alonzo]

I would pay to be able to learn from Hitler and thats saying soemthing since I am the total stereotypical Jew when it comes to money. so yes I agree T&P.


I'd pay anything realistic (ie. not going to cause significant long term financial hardships) to see a real hitler speech, even more to have a translator.

People have this whole "I don't want to hear bad people" talk thinking, and while I understand it, it just doesn't make sense to me.

If Ahmadinejad was speaking at harvard (or Northeastern) I'd do what I could to go.

[heyjude]

The propaganda machine at Bush Camp is in full swing, grinding up the grist for the next war of choice.

I'd like to quote Margaret Thatcher, who in the 80's made this comment after RR invaded Grenada. "The western democracies use force to preserve our way of life- we do not use it to walk into other peoples countries. If a new law is ordained that the US will intervene wherever there is a regime that it dislikes, then we are going to have really terrible wars in the world." How presceient of her.

[Scorpion]

Terrorist? When? Where?

Criminal? When, What?

Anti-Semite? Since when is being critical of the Zionist Regime in control of Israel Anti-Semitic?

He is also known for saying the exact opposite about Nuclear Weapons. I'd love to read or hear a quote from him actually advocating the use of nukes.


I'm sorry my friend, but you're a bit naive.

Terrorist because he played an active role in restraining US hostages during the 79-80 embassy occupation in Tehran and he supports Al Qaeda by providing safe haven for terrorist and insurgent training camps.

Criminal, because his regime condons abhorrent treatment of undesireables, has a justice system that is a joke and stifles free expression.

Anti-semetic because he has stated his desire to see Israel destroyed and he views the holocaust as a fabrication.

He began Iran's nuclear weapons program and has warned the west not to interfere in Iran's development of nuclear weapons. A link of interest: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/nuke.htm

[heyjude]

Bush is guilty of all the above. We hold people hostage in Gitmo, and condone other countries doing so. We have even arrested the embassaries from other countries in foreign countries. And all of the hostage situations are with prior approval of Bush, and the State Department.

Bush condones abhorrant treatment of undesirables, has turned the Justice system into a joke, and stifles free expression. He won't even allow anyone who doesn't agree with him to hear his speeches.

His pro-Israel stance makes us guilty after the fact when Israel commits crimes against other nations.

He has threatened to nuke countries he doesn't like and to nuke any country he doesn't approve of using nuclear power for even peaceful reasons.

I say we throw the bastard out of the country.

[Scorpion]

Bush is guilty of all the above. We hold people hostage in Gitmo, and condone other countries doing so. We have even arrested the embassaries from other countries in foreign countries. And all of the hostage situations are with prior approval of Bush, and the State Department.

Bush condones abhorrant treatment of undesirables, has turned the Justice system into a joke, and stifles free expression. He won't even allow anyone who doesn't agree with him to hear his speeches.

His pro-Israel stance makes us guilty after the fact when Israel commits crimes against other nations.

He has threatened to nuke countries he doesn't like and to nuke any country he doesn't approve of using nuclear power for even peaceful reasons.

I say we throw the bastard out of the country.


A unique spin on the truth and an adventure in creative factualization. Sorry, but I doubt any reasonable person will buy your fantastic comparison.

[jafar00]

Terrorist? When? Where?

Criminal? When, What?

Anti-Semite? Since when is being critical of the Zionist Regime in control of Israel Anti-Semitic?

He is also known for saying the exact opposite about Nuclear Weapons. I'd love to read or hear a quote from him actually advocating the use of nukes.


I'm sorry my friend, but you're a bit naive.

Terrorist because he played an active role in restraining US hostages during the 79-80 embassy occupation in Tehran and he supports Al Qaeda by providing safe haven for terrorist and insurgent training camps.


It's you who is naive or at least brainwashed and taken in by the propaganda catapulted by the Bush Regime.
The hostage crisis was part of the revolution sparked off by the oppressive regime of the installed western friendly Shah. The US asked for it for their support of a dictator.
Saying Iran is supporting AL Qaeda is the biggest joke of all since part of Al Qaeda's mission is the extermination of Shiites. Any proof? Al Qaeda's wahhabi/salafi views make them the bitterest of enemies.


Criminal, because his regime condons abhorrent treatment of undesireables, has a justice system that is a joke and stifles free expression.


Pot... Kettle... Black...


Anti-semetic because he has stated his desire to see Israel destroyed and he views the holocaust as a fabrication.


Since his views are against the Zionist enitity, and not the Jews, calling him anti-semite is a stretch of the definition.
You do know of course there is a long history of jews living peacefully in Iran right? The Iranian Jews have so far resisted pressure (and bribes) to move to Israel being proud of their Iranian Jewish heritage.


He began Iran's nuclear weapons program and has warned the west not to interfere in Iran's development of nuclear weapons. A link of interest: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/nuke.htm


Propaganda doesn't work for me.
The IAEA inspectors have not found any evidence of a weapons program, and all nuclear materials are accounted for.
Like all the other claims against Iran, this one has no evidence to back it up.

[Scorpion]

Terrorist? When? Where?

Criminal? When, What?

Anti-Semite? Since when is being critical of the Zionist Regime in control of Israel Anti-Semitic?

He is also known for saying the exact opposite about Nuclear Weapons. I'd love to read or hear a quote from him actually advocating the use of nukes.


I'm sorry my friend, but you're a bit naive.

Terrorist because he played an active role in restraining US hostages during the 79-80 embassy occupation in Tehran and he supports Al Qaeda by providing safe haven for terrorist and insurgent training camps.


It's you who is naive or at least brainwashed and taken in by the propaganda catapulted by the Bush Regime.
The hostage crisis was part of the revolution sparked off by the oppressive regime of the installed western friendly Shah. The US asked for it for their support of a dictator.
Saying Iran is supporting AL Qaeda is the biggest joke of all since part of Al Qaeda's mission is the extermination of Shiites. Any proof? Al Qaeda's wahhabi/salafi views make them the bitterest of enemies.


Criminal, because his regime condons abhorrent treatment of undesireables, has a justice system that is a joke and stifles free expression.


Pot... Kettle... Black...


Anti-semetic because he has stated his desire to see Israel destroyed and he views the holocaust as a fabrication.


Since his views are against the Zionist enitity, and not the Jews, calling him anti-semite is a stretch of the definition.
You do know of course there is a long history of jews living peacefully in Iran right? The Iranian Jews have so far resisted pressure (and bribes) to move to Israel being proud of their Iranian Jewish heritage.


He began Iran's nuclear weapons program and has warned the west not to interfere in Iran's development of nuclear weapons. A link of interest: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/nuke.htm


Propaganda doesn't work for me.
The IAEA inspectors have not found any evidence of a weapons program, and all nuclear materials are accounted for.
Like all the other claims against Iran, this one has no evidence to back it up.


You've asked and I've answered your questions, point by point. Describing what I said as propaganda is inaccurate. How you choose to spin what I've offered is your affair. Believe as you choose. Obviously you have an agenda regarding Iran.

[preservanation]

The current nuclear program is headed by the President, the commander of the Iranian Revulutionary Gaurd Corps (IRGC), the head of the Defense Industries Organization, and the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization (IAEO). These leaders continue the pursuit of WMD's and support Chemical, Biological, and Nuclear programs against all pressures from the United States and its allies. IMO if Ahmedinejad acquires nukes as an offensive weapon, he will use them against us and Israel. He has said so. This is one thing he says that I am willing to take at face value.
I don't trust him to have our best interest at heart.
I know some people trust him more than Bush, again, IMO, this is a mistake.

Rule #12. All proper names of political figures should be spelled correctly. Nicknames like Hitlary or Chimpy are unacceptable.

[December]

I was wondering - why are there so many anti-Iran and anti-Muslim posts in this forum... :ponder:
But after reading an article in British Times, now I know:

:grrrr:

Israel backed by army of cyber-soldiers

WHILE Israel fights Hezbollah with tanks and aircraft, its supporters are campaigning on the internet.
Israel’s Government has thrown its weight behind efforts by supporters to counter what it believes to be negative bias and a tide of pro-Arab propaganda. The Foreign Ministry has ordered trainee diplomats to track websites and chatrooms so that networks of US and European groups with hundreds of thousands of Jewish activists can place supportive messages.

In the past week nearly 5,000 members of the World Union of Jewish Students (WUJS) have downloaded special “megaphone” software that alerts them to anti-Israeli chatrooms or internet polls to enable them to post contrary viewpoints. A student team in Jerusalem combs the web in a host of different languages to flag the sites so that those who have signed up can influence an opinion survey or the course of a debate.

READ MORE -

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article693911.ece

:nana:
________________________

"It is here, in the realm of politics, that much confusion has been sown. Supporters of Zionism for years skillfully attacted their opponents as "anti-Semites", to the extend that many Americans, Jews and gentiles alike and especially the media, are loath to even question the policies of Isreal no matter how odious.
Furthermore, the broad brush of anti-Semitism frequently has been used to besmirch anyone offering a conspiratorial view of history."

Jim Marrs "Rule by Secrecy" page 61.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060931841/103-5217172-3542217?v=glance&n=283155

[PatrickHenry]

IMO if [Ahmadinejad] acquires nukes as an offensive weapon, he will use them against us and Israel. He has said so. This is one thing he says that I am willing to take at face value.
I changed your joking reference to the President of Iran. If the above is a fair quote of your meaning, you need to substantiate it.

Otherwise you will be pwned.:lmao:

[Scorpion]

I was wondering - why are there so many anti-Iran and anti-Muslim posts in this forum... :ponder:
But after reading an article in British Times, now I know:

:grrrr:

Israel backed by army of cyber-soldiers

WHILE Israel fights Hezbollah with tanks and aircraft, its supporters are campaigning on the internet.
Israel’s Government has thrown its weight behind efforts by supporters to counter what it believes to be negative bias and a tide of pro-Arab propaganda. The Foreign Ministry has ordered trainee diplomats to track websites and chatrooms so that networks of US and European groups with hundreds of thousands of Jewish activists can place supportive messages.

In the past week nearly 5,000 members of the World Union of Jewish Students (WUJS) have downloaded special “megaphone” software that alerts them to anti-Israeli chatrooms or internet polls to enable them to post contrary viewpoints. A student team in Jerusalem combs the web in a host of different languages to flag the sites so that those who have signed up can influence an opinion survey or the course of a debate.

READ MORE -

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article693911.ece

:nana:
________________________

"It is here, in the realm of politics, that much confusion has been sown. Supporters of Zionism for years skillfully attacted their opponents as "anti-Semites", to the extend that many Americans, Jews and gentiles alike and especially the media, are loath to even question the policies of Isreal no matter how odious.
Furthermore, the broad brush of anti-Semitism frequently has been used to besmirch anyone offering a conspiratorial view of history."

Jim Marrs "Rule by Secrecy" page 61.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060931841/103-5217172-3542217?v=glance&n=283155


I think that you're wrong offering to characterize this forum as largely anti-Iranian and anti-Muslim. I've seen no proof of such behavior earning such an inaccurate generalization. Indeed, I've noticed that you take every opportunity to castigate any position in agreement with Israel. Should one then surmise that you are anti-Israeli?

As regards the Times article which you offered, so what if Israelis choose to offer their opinions on websites propagating an anti-Israeli agenda. People can choose to either accept, reject or ignore those opinions.

[jafar00]

You've asked and I've answered your questions, point by point. Describing what I said as propaganda is inaccurate. How you choose to spin what I've offered is your affair. Believe as you choose. Obviously you have an agenda regarding Iran.


Fair enough, agree to disagree, but you really should get some info about the world based on some kind of evidence, not what the powerful ones want the sheep to believe.[hr]
IMO if Ahmedinejad acquires nukes as an offensive weapon, he will use them against us and Israel. He has said so. This is one thing he says that I am willing to take at face value.
I don't trust him to have our best interest at heart.
I know some people trust him more than Bush, again, IMO, this is a mistake.


The operative word being "if". Iran actually getting nukes, or being discovered with a nuclear weapons program is a likely as me joining you at MacDonalds this evening for a Bacon Double Cheesburger Deluxe with extra Bacon. ;)[hr]
I was wondering - why are there so many anti-Iran and anti-Muslim posts in this forum... :ponder:
But after reading an article in British Times, now I know:

:grrrr:

Israel backed by army of cyber-soldiers

<snip>

This place is about the most friendly political forum for Muslims that I know of. I have a very hard time elsewhere. Some of the people in other places can be downright abusive and threatening. Here, thankfully, I can have an opposing view and it is acceptable to have one.

[Scorpion]

You've asked and I've answered your questions, point by point. Describing what I said as propaganda is inaccurate. How you choose to spin what I've offered is your affair. Believe as you choose. Obviously you have an agenda regarding Iran.


Fair enough, agree to disagree, but you really should get some info about the world based on some kind of evidence, not what the powerful ones want the sheep to believe.


Ah, you had to throw out an insult, infering that I am a sheep. It's a shame that you find it necessary to demonstrate your inability to debate in a civil if not courteous manner and it tends to detract from your credibility.

[HumanBeast]

Does this Persian shah want to preach anti-Semitism at Columbia? Is he a Nazi with a camel?

Why would the U.S.American government even let this man with 200 miles of our soil?

[December]

This place is about the most friendly political forum for Muslims that I know of. I have a very hard time elsewhere. Some of the people in other places can be downright abusive and threatening. Here, thankfully, I can have an opposing view and it is acceptable to have one.

You are quite a diplomat, Jafar. :D

Columbia University Won't Call Off Iran Leader's Speech

2007-09-21

Officials at Ivy League Columbia University in New York City said they would not cancel a planned speech by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, despite objections from a number of residents and a City Council member.

Mr. Ahmadinejad is traveling to the U.S. to address the United Nations. He was scheduled to appear Monday at a question-and-answer session with Columbia faculty and students as part of the school's World Leaders Forum.

City Council speaker Christine Quinn called on the university Thursday to cancel the appearance, saying "the idea of Ahmadinejad as an honored guest anywhere in our city is offensive to all New Yorkers."

She said Ahmadinejad was coming to the city "for one reason — to spread his hate-mongering vitriol on the world stage."

Mr. Ahmadinejad has called the Holocaust an Israel-perpetrated hoax and has called for the Jewish state's destruction.

His government is also responsible for providing weapons to Iraqi insurgents, such as sophisticated roadside bombs, which have been responsible for the deaths of scores of U.S. soldiers.

http://www.newsroomamerica.com/politics/story.php?id=392883


http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/061129/061129_ahmadinejad_vlrg_4a.widec.jpg

God bless this man![hr]
Does this Persian shah want to preach anti-Semitism at Columbia? Is he a Nazi with a camel?

Why would the U.S.American government even let this man with 200 miles of our soil?


Hey, HumanBeast, is this article about you?

Israel backed by army of cyber-soldiers
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article693911.ece

:madlaugh:

[lawless168]

http://www.vandykerifles.com/images/custom-rifle2.jpg

[lily]

preservanation Wrote:
IMO if Ahmedinejad acquires nukes as an offensive weapon, he will use them against us and Israel. He has said so. This is one thing he says that I am willing to take at face value.
I don't trust him to have our best interest at heart.
I know some people trust him more than Bush, again, IMO, this is a mistake.

I have to ask you preserv.........if he had this mythical nuke, how exactly would he get it here to use it? Strap it on the back of all those Al Quida that are going to be swimming over here to get us?

With that said.......the thing that hit me most about these articles, discussions and what I've seen on TV. Ahmadinejad was invited to speak at a prestigious University, in a foreign and hostile country. I sit here and think.........the leader of the free world has never been offered this by another country.........he's greeted with riots in the streets and burning effigies. Are we more tolerant or is he more hated than Ahmadinejad?

[crimzonsol]

[hr]
I was wondering - why are there so many anti-Iran and anti-Muslim posts in this forum... :ponder:
But after reading an article in British Times, now I know:

:grrrr:

Israel backed by army of cyber-soldiers


You are equating Anti-Iran with Anti-Muslim messages, I post some Anti-Iran messages, But I have yet to post Anti-Muslim messages, maybe you should... I'm going to tastfully remove that, but you get the idea.

[micfranklin]

Provided he doesn't start threatening people and such I have no problem with him speaking at CU. Besides some of those students who know nothing of politics and the world might get a chance to learn something from someone from a foreign nation (not including colleagues).

[tony mitra]

Let me think this one through.

Ahmadinejad is coming to New York to address the UN. UN Headquarter is in New York. Since NY is in the US, I presume Ahmadinejad has been issued an US visa on a diplomatic passport.

If the US Govt considers him to be unwelcome, it could refuse a visit visa and ask Iran to send someone else. For reasons best known to it, the US Govt is allowing the visit.

Next, any one can ask for a pass and visit the UN and sit in the stands and watch proceedings, including hearing Ahmadinejad speak. If the US Govt wanted, it could prevent the public from attending the UN session. Again, for reasons better known to the US Govt, it is not considering that.

Finally, Ahmadinejad has been invited to speak and have a question answer session at Columbia University, and has reportedly accepted the invitation. The US Govt could easily block that by restricting Ahmadinejads movements without having to fight against the University. Again, such actions are not on the table.

So then, what is all this whining about?

If Ahmadinejad talks crap, he will be exposed for what he is, and will deserve to be exposed.

Are folks worried that Ahmadinejad might actually speak some hard truths?

We hear bullshit all the time.

Could it be that truth is something to be afraid of?

Cheers.

[Labrocca]

*Stepping into this thread with both eyes closed*

I don't see why we don't let him visit ground zero. Then we assassinate him there and blame some crazy neocon for it. I can't think of a better opportunity to get rid of this guy.

[PatrickHenry]

*Stepping into this thread with both eyes closed*

I don't see why we don't let him visit ground zero. Then we assassinate him there and blame some crazy neocon for it. I can't think of a better opportunity to get rid of this guy.
Exactly why do you want to "get rid of this guy," Labrocca?

[tony mitra]

Here is an interesting blog post from one Mr. Frank Staheli, a computer programmer, and, I think, a supporter of Ron Paul. This is from "Simple Utah Mormon Politics" at http://economicspolitics.blogspot.com/2007/09/nearly-everyone-has-their-own-axis-of.html

I do not know if Mr. Staheli is a Mormon, and from Utah, or not.


Nearly Everyone Has Their Own Axis of Evil

The vitriol that punctuates our political debate is fast becoming an epidemic. It is no cure for our collective malady when President George W. Bush refers to a handful of countries in the world as an Axis of Evil, directly implying that the facts are all in and that diplomacy has no chance of succeeding with such an opponent. Unfortunately, perhaps taking the lead from our governmental leaders, we as individuals more and more often treat those who disagree with us as our own personal Axis of Evil.


Do I think that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should be allowed to speak at Columbia University while in the United States? No--because Iran is supporting the killing of US troops in Iraq. But the problem didn't start in recent Iraq. It started long before, with the US and other Western countries' meddling in Iran and most of the rest of the Middle East. This inflamed nationalistic passions against the United States, which are perfectly rational in the minds of those who hold such passions, and which greatly predate the arrival on the world stage of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (or even the Ayatollah Khomeini). When George W. Bush branded Iran as part of the Axis of Evil --while trying to keep the other side of the story buried--he made things much worse.

Besides the fact that diplomacy (at least at one point in time--I'm not sure about it now) could have reaped enormous peace dividends, the epithet Axis of Evil seems a simplistic attempt to squelch all discussion and debate, and to brand our opponent hopelessly irrational and somehow less human than ourselves. Iran has its own story, but those of shallow minds in America don't want you to know what it is. And here we stand once more on the brink of mutual nuclear annihilation.

Like so many times before, the truth can be found on both sides of the issue, and that truth is aching to be told.

The Enemy is Us

Come to think of it, a lot of us have our own Axis of Evil--that political enemy or enemies with whom we have forsworn all discussion as hopelessly and impossibly counterproductive. Somehow branding our local political enemy as part of our Axis of Evil gives us that sense of self-superiority that we need in order to feel that only our side of the issue has any merit.

That's wrong. It has to stop.

A recent musing by the Salt Lake Tribune's Paul Rolly helped me to think more clearly about my feelings on this issue (Hat Tip: Utah Amicus). Here's the paragraph that particularly got my introspective juices flowing:

"What is the greatest problem facing public service today?" the young Republican governor [Jon Huntsman, recently] asked the old Democrat [Cal Rampton, three-term Democrat governor who recently passed away]. Without a pause, Rampton replied: "The lack of civility. People don't dare cross the political divide. The system has become too darn mean."

My dad was a Democrat (and I'm sure he would still be if he were still alive--I personally am a CRID-Constitutionalist Republican Independent Democrat). He was involved in state Democrat party politics, and he became good friends with then-governor Scott Matheson, so I'm sure he had at least an association with Calvin Rampton. I still respect Cal Rampton and Scott Matheson as two of the greatest governors Utah has ever known. I never remember my dad speaking ill of 'the other party'. He took enough of it from 'the other party' to know that it was painful enough to take, and he was man enough to have no desire to dish it back.

What is it about human nature that we think we are wise when we are merely snide? Why is it that winning a political argument is more important to so many than being friends?

In light of clear history, George W. Bush was wrong to brand Iran, Korea, and Iraq as charter members of the Axis of Evil. In much the same way, we are wrong when we brand our political opponents with the same broad and bristling brush.

Everyone has his or her story. Each of our stories motivate our world views, in nearly every case for clearly rational and good reasons. Everyone's story is worth understanding. Until we have heard their stories, no political opponent should be on our Axis of Evil.

Once we know their story, we'll much more likely than not be very glad we did not put them there.


I found Mr. Staheli's blog to be a very good read.

[jafar00]

You've asked and I've answered your questions, point by point. Describing what I said as propaganda is inaccurate. How you choose to spin what I've offered is your affair. Believe as you choose. Obviously you have an agenda regarding Iran.


Fair enough, agree to disagree, but you really should get some info about the world based on some kind of evidence, not what the powerful ones want the sheep to believe.


Ah, you had to throw out an insult, infering that I am a sheep. It's a shame that you find it necessary to demonstrate your inability to debate in a civil if not courteous manner and it tends to detract from your credibility.


Well, you do tend to parrot exactly what the powers that be are telling everyone despite a complete lack of evidence.[hr]
http://www.vandykerifles.com/images/custom-rifle2.jpg


You are lucky this thread isn't about Bush or Cheney. You'd be halfway to Cuba by now. ;)

[BoogyMan]

preservanation Wrote:
IMO if Ahmedinejad acquires nukes as an offensive weapon, he will use them against us and Israel. He has said so. This is one thing he says that I am willing to take at face value.
I don't trust him to have our best interest at heart.
I know some people trust him more than Bush, again, IMO, this is a mistake.

I have to ask you preserv.........if he had this mythical nuke, how exactly would he get it here to use it? Strap it on the back of all those Al Quida that are going to be swimming over here to get us?

With that said.......the thing that hit me most about these articles, discussions and what I've seen on TV. Ahmadinejad was invited to speak at a prestigious University, in a foreign and hostile country. I sit here and think.........the leader of the free world has never been offered this by another country.........he's greeted with riots in the streets and burning effigies. Are we more tolerant or is he more hated than Ahmadinejad?


http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2002/8563.htm :ponder:

[Scorpion]

You've asked and I've answered your questions, point by point. Describing what I said as propaganda is inaccurate. How you choose to spin what I've offered is your affair. Believe as you choose. Obviously you have an agenda regarding Iran.


Fair enough, agree to disagree, but you really should get some info about the world based on some kind of evidence, not what the powerful ones want the sheep to believe.


Ah, you had to throw out an insult, infering that I am a sheep. It's a shame that you find it necessary to demonstrate your inability to debate in a civil if not courteous manner and it tends to detract from your credibility.


Well, you do tend to parrot exactly what the powers that be are telling everyone despite a complete lack of evidence.


Parrot? I think not. What I do tend to do is voice my opinion no matter its political acceptibility. You have a way with incivility when it suits your agenda. Quite troubling from someone who is trying to convince others that his faith is one of peace and respect.

[Survivor]

Although there is supposed to be freedom of speech in this country, the media is mostly biased one way or another, and the pundits on each side are relentless in the zeal of their efforts to insinuate the only reason President Ahmadinejad wanted to visit gound zero was to honor the terrorists who perished there and prevent him from speaking at a private university. Let us hear his opinions, and then decide. How can we possible be at peace with someone by suppressing him from expressing his opinions? We do not necessarily agree with him, but have we really heard the full story?

[tony mitra]

Actually, Iran's response on the 9/11 attack on USA was overwhelming support and sympathy for the US Government and the victims.

American memory is rather short, and within two years, the press was being flooded with fabricated claims of Iranian connection with 9/11. It was a matter of time, before Iran was to become a target in the eyes of the west, for reasons other than 9/11, but somehow made to look like there is a connection.

Also, the US seems to be nurturing a habit of labeling all nations that oppose US policies on matter of principle, into enemy nations and terrorist states. You oppose USA on anything at all, and you are a terrorist nation, seems to be the recent doctrine. At this rate, the whole world might be a terrorist planet, excepting the US.

Here are a few headlines of Iranian sympathy for USA post 9/11. There is a site which saved the links at: http://iir.internetactivist.org/020.html. I don't know who maintains the site, but found it through google.

“Iranians Honor U.S. with Moment of Silence” (NY Post)
“Khatami Condemns ‘Terrorist’ Attacks on U.S. Targets (People’s Daily, Iran)
“US calls Iran’s response ‘positive’” (Economic Times)
“Terror attacks transform U.S. image in Iran’s media” (Gulf News)
“Powell sees hope in Iran, Syria response to attack” (Reuters)
“'Iran News’ deplores attacks on major US landmarks” (Iran News)
“Iran expresses rare sympathy for U.S. over attacks” (Reuters)
“Iran ayatollah says he is heart-broke over U.S. attack” (Gulf News)
“Iran seals Afghanistan border” (AP)


Cheers.

[lily]

http://www.state.gov/p/eap/rls/rm/2002/8563.htm :ponder:


I stand corrected, thank you Boogy. He was invited to speak at a Chinese University, in Feb. of 2002.....when we still had the respect of the world.

[Pogo]

I'm sorry my friend, but you're a bit naive.

Terrorist because he played an active role in restraining US hostages during the 79-80 embassy occupation in Tehran and he supports Al Qaeda by providing safe haven for terrorist and insurgent training camps.

Criminal, because his regime condons abhorrent treatment of undesireables, has a justice system that is a joke and stifles free expression.

Anti-semetic because he has stated his desire to see Israel destroyed and he views the holocaust as a fabrication.

He began Iran's nuclear weapons program and has warned the west not to interfere in Iran's development of nuclear weapons. A link of interest: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/nuke.htm

Who's naive?

The US has no qualms when it comes to terrorism. Our use of the Contras is a textbook example, one of many to be found in Latin America. School of the Americas graduate Rios Montt is another, one of the most heinous in modern history: the extermination of appr. 450 villages in Guatemala.

Ahmadinejad is a rank amateur in comparison.

[Pogo]

*Stepping into this thread with both eyes closed*

I don't see why we don't let him visit ground zero. Then we assassinate him there and blame some crazy neocon for it. I can't think of a better opportunity to get rid of this guy.

Lawlessness begets lawlessness. Is that really your cup of tea?

[Survivor]

"Freedom of speech means that you shall not do something to people either for the views they have, or the views they express, or the words they speak or write." ~Hugo L. Black, U.S. Supreme Court Justice 1963

[AnnEsthesia]

They are not 'terrorists' if they are helping us. We only care (the general we) if they turn against us.

[Pogo]

They are not 'terrorists' if they are helping us. We only care (the general we) if they turn against us.

Rather an amoral outlook, and bitterly ironic when you consider how the powers that be constantly resort to demonization of state enemies, painting portraits that often bear a striking resemblance to themselves.

[AnnEsthesia]

It is not my outlook, but rather the US government outlook. How many people have we trained, supplied, etc, only to have them later turn on us and be deemed 'terrorists' or 'enemies', even though the only thing that has changed is the direction of their actions? We do not mind when they act out against someone we dislike, but turned back on us, suddenly it all changes.

[Jaaaman]

but turned back on us, suddenly it all changes.


Shouldn't it? Can we say 'common sense' principle here? :ponder:

[Labrocca]

*Stepping into this thread with both eyes closed*

I don't see why we don't let him visit ground zero. Then we assassinate him there and blame some crazy neocon for it. I can't think of a better opportunity to get rid of this guy.

Lawlessness begets lawlessness. Is that really your cup of tea?


I guess we can debate his assissination on the senate floor and then try and vote it in. Wouldn't that light up c-span?

[AnnEsthesia]

but turned back on us, suddenly it all changes.


Shouldn't it? Can we say 'common sense' principle here? :ponder:


A terrorist is a terrorist, no matter who they are targeting. We hardly can complain about being attacked by the terrorists we created and equipped.

[Pogo]

It is not my outlook, but rather the US government outlook. How many people have we trained, supplied, etc, only to have them later turn on us and be deemed 'terrorists' or 'enemies', even though the only thing that has changed is the direction of their actions? We do not mind when they act out against someone we dislike, but turned back on us, suddenly it all changes.

I understand that. I was speaking of the elites who set our policy.[hr]

but turned back on us, suddenly it all changes.


Shouldn't it? Can we say 'common sense' principle here? :ponder:

Does amorality really equate to common sense?
[hr]

Lawlessness begets lawlessness. Is that really your cup of tea?


I guess we can debate his assissination on the senate floor and then try and vote it in. Wouldn't that light up c-span?

I have a better idea: we adopt a uniform nuclear policy for the mideast and apply it evenly to all.

[lily]

I have a better idea: we adopt a uniform nuclear policy for the mideast and apply it evenly to all.



Whoa there.........who says we get to decide?

[nevadamedic]

President Ahmadinejad to speak at Columbia University

:clapper:

Fri, 21 Sep 2007
Officials at Columbia University in New York say that they would not cancel a planned speech by the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The Columbia University's plan to go ahead with President Ahmadinejad's speech comes amid objections from New York City Council speaker, Christine Quinn. She called on the university Thursday to cancel the Iranian President's speech.

President Ahmadinejad is traveling to the US to address the United Nations General Assembly. He is scheduled to appear Monday at a question-and-answer session with Columbia faculty and students as part of the school's World Leaders Forum.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=24048&sectionid=351020101


http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/iran_ahmadinejad_2.jpg


And the neo-cuns are going nuts to stop him...

McCain Suggests Physical Force to Prevent Ahmadinejad From Visiting World Trade Center Site

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should be physically prevented from visiting Ground Zero should he attempt to go to the "sacred" site where the World Trade Center once stood, Arizona Sen. John McCain joked Thursday.

"I think the president of Iran should be physically restrained if necessary," a laughing McCain told radio host Shawn Wasson. "I hope it doesn't come to that but we're not going to have that kind of desecration of what is sacred ground. Obviously, it is a propaganda ploy on his part, and if we allowed him to do it it would just embolden his followers and give him the publicity he seeks."

Ahmadinejad, whose country is on the U.S. list of state sponsors of terror and has called for the elimination of the state of Israel, is arriving in New York on Monday for the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly.

Ahmadinejad told "60 Minutes" on Thursday that he's "amazed" Americans view his request to visit the site as insulting. He said he still has the visit included in his program and will try to go, but if local officials can't swing it, "I won't insist."

"We all know that unfortunately because the United Nations is located in New York City, he can come there just as (Cuban leader Fidel) Castro comes and some other jerks," McCain said. But allowing Ahmadinejad to visit the site "would be an affront not only to America but to the families of our loved ones who perished there in an unprecedented act of terror."

Ahmadinejad has also accepted an invitation to speak at Columbia University. McCain, who acknowledged he didn't have a close relationship with the Minutemen border guards, nonetheless noted that one Minuteman leader was prevented from speaking at the school, but the Iranian president is being welcomed.

"I don't quite get that, my friend. It's a sad commentary," McCain said.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297526,00.html

http://z.about.com/d/civilliberty/1/0/c/0/-/-/mccain.jpg

http://www.ahmadinejad.ir


This is a Golden Oppertunity for the CIA and the NSA to do something right for a change. This guy is on our territory and I say we take him out, perminantly.

[PatrickHenry]

This is a Golden Oppertunity for the CIA and the NSA to do something right for a change. This guy is on our territory and I say we take him out, perminantly.
My, my...aren't you the perfect host...

Doofus speller though...

[Pogo]

I have a better idea: we adopt a uniform nuclear policy for the mideast and apply it evenly to all.



Whoa there.........who says we get to decide?

How many permanent members of the UNSC other than the US would veto such a proposal?

Shouldn't nuclear weapons fall under the rubric of international peace and security as per the UN Charter?

[lily]

I have a better idea: we adopt a uniform nuclear policy for the mideast and apply it evenly to all.



Whoa there.........who says we get to decide?

How many permanent members of the UNSC other than the US would veto such a proposal?

Shouldn't nuclear weapons fall under the rubric of international peace and security as per the UN Charter?


They signed the NPT they should abide by the laws......but then we don't expect Israel to. Your post made it seem that the United States alone should be telling countries in the Middle East what to do....I'm tired of being the world police........there are other countries who can and are putting pressure on Iran....but then I don't think they are any where as near getting a nuke as this administration is trying to promote.

[nevadamedic]

This is a Golden Oppertunity for the CIA and the NSA to do something right for a change. This guy is on our territory and I say we take him out, perminantly.
My, my...aren't you the perfect host...

Doofus speller though...


Perfect host? We don't want that man in our country, Actually maybe we should arrest him and force him to go on TV admitting to crimes that he didn't commit. That is is number one tool and way he tries to get around the Geniva Convention.

[PatrickHenry]

Perfect host? We don't want that man in our country, Actually maybe we should arrest him and force him to go on TV admitting to crimes that he didn't commit. That is is number one tool and way he tries to get around the Geniva Convention.
"We" don't want him in our country? I snicker at the way you speak for all Americans from out there in that furnace you call home.

Ahmadinejad is an invited guest of the United Nations and has full diplomatic priveleges as a head of state with whom the US is not at war...

Your opinions, nevadamedic, are about as reasonable and felicitous as a wad of gum on someone's shoe sole...

[Pogo]

How many permanent members of the UNSC other than the US would veto such a proposal?

Shouldn't nuclear weapons fall under the rubric of international peace and security as per the UN Charter?


They signed the NPT they should abide by the laws......but then we don't expect Israel to. Your post made it seem that the United States alone should be telling countries in the Middle East what to do....I'm tired of being the world police........there are other countries who can and are putting pressure on Iran....but then I don't think they are any where as near getting a nuke as this administration is trying to promote.

And well you should be, as unilateralism only pays dividends for the privileged few. I'm dead tired of Empire America, but damn few know enough to differentiate an empire from a republic, so we're stuck with a declining empire in it's death throes. Hopefully, something nobler will rise up out of the ashes.

[preservanation]

I'm in agreement with those who think there are grounds for his arrest, as well as most of the members of the UN as well.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We should move their embassy to Venezuela or France or wherever, they are a threat and an embarrassment

[micfranklin]

*Stepping into this thread with both eyes closed*

I don't see why we don't let him visit ground zero. Then we assassinate him there and blame some crazy neocon for it. I can't think of a better opportunity to get rid of this guy.


So how do you think the rest of Iran is gonna feel if you kill their president?

[preservanation]

Pretty good.
At least that is what I've been told for THIRTY, wait, FORTY years.
We should work harder to overthrow those Mullahs from within and support the pro-American element in that country.
Ahmedinejad is just another titular head who is unpopular and installed by the theocratic totalitarians in Iran

Please read the forum rules, in particular #12 (http://www.democracyforums.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)

[Elrathin]

I'm in agreement with those who think there are grounds for his arrest, as well as most of the members of the UN as well.



And what CRIME has he commited? Or is speech now a crime?

[PatrickHenry]

Imanutjob is just another titular head who is unpopular and installed by the theocratic totalitarians in Iran

While you, OTOH, have been pwned (http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=8053&pid=95692#pid95692):shock:

[preservanation]

I'm in agreement with those who think there are grounds for his arrest, as well as most of the members of the UN as well.



And what CRIME has he commited? Or is speech now a crime?
Dude he has been killing our troops with weapons he supplies to our enemies. That's more than words.

[Elrathin]

Dude he has been killing our troops with weapons he supplies to our enemies. That's more than words.


Wait a minute, so supplying weapons is a crime for Iran, but when we provide and supply weapons to countries who then use them to kill others, that's ok right?

[preservanation]

Dude he has been killing our troops with weapons he supplies to our enemies. That's more than words.


Wait a minute, so supplying weapons is a crime for Iran, but when we provide and supply weapons to countries who then use them to kill others, that's ok right?
Yes.
BTW, why are ya'll willing to talk to A president of a terrorist state but are still unwilling to let your Dem candidates speak to Brit Hume on an American news channel, FNC?
curious

[Elrathin]

Yes.

Sounds more like hypocrisy to me. Do as we say not as we do. That's a big reason why we are hated around the world.


BTW, why are ya'll willing to talk to A president of a terrorist state but are still unwilling to let your Dem candidates speak to Brit Hume on an American news channel, FNC?
curious


I don't know can you show me where I am unwilling to have dem candidates speak to whomever?

[preservanation]

I feel like you are supporting Iran's president, not just his right to speak.
Am I wrong?
This guy is more than yelling "Fire' in a theater, he is igniting it.[hr]BTW I would much rather be hated than dead.
Fear is a great motivator, ask Hitler and Tojo,
oh wait, you can't they're dead and the world is better off for it.

[Elrathin]

I feel like you are supporting Iran's president, not just his right to speak.
Am I wrong?

Supporting him? No, but at the same time I can't sit there and say what he is doing is a crime while we do the same thing. Personally I think supplying weapons to other countries is both irresponsible and unwise because in many cases it comes back to bite us in the ass.


This guy is more than yelling "Fire' in a theater, he is igniting it.


No more than we do. That's another reason I think we have no business in the Middle East.

[preservanation]

El,
I respect you but I feel you are falling prey to this multicultural moral relativism mumbojumbo of which I find dangerous and intellectually vacant.

[Elrathin]

El,
I respect you but I feel you are falling prey to this multicultural moral relativism mumbojumbo of which I find dangerous and intellectually vacant.


Moral Relativism? Perhaps, but its no more intellectually vacant as someone thinking everything the U.S. does is good IMO when in fact many of the things the U.S. has done in the past has caused the problems we see now.

Do you not see how supplying weapons to other countries has hurt the U.S. in many ways? Either the weapons are used against us or other countries feel like we do about Iran arming countries.

We shouldn't be arming other countries if we ourselves aren't prepared to deal with the consequences of someone else doing the same.

Do I agree with Iran supplying weapons? Nope. Do I think they have committed a crime? Only if we acknowledge that what we have been doing is also criminal. Either both countries are right in arming other countries or both are wrong. Can't have it both ways IMO.

Personally I will always think supplying weapons to other countries is wrong, that's why I don't agree with what Iran is doing. They eventually will also have to be prepared to deal with the consequences of their actions if it is found Ahmedinejad is behind it all with solid evidence.

Please read the forum rules again. Use proper names for political figures

[preservanation]

I see your point.
We have sometimes with the best of intentions made things difficult for us.
I, however have more faith in Bush, Clinton, Reagan whomever the American president might be, over some tin-horn terrorist dictator.

[Elrathin]

I, however have more faith in Bush, Clinton, Reagan whomever the American president might be, over some tin-horn terrorist dictator.


Don't get me wrong, I am no fan of Ahmadinejad, but in the situation of arming countries, I think we are irresponsible in that regards like Iran is. That's not to say in most other cases I don't have faith in our leaders for other actions.

I guess to get back on topic, I don't think he should be arrested for entering this country. I also think that the U.N. should have NO say who comes into our country whether they invite him or not.

[preservanation]

I agree on most of this and we reap what we sow by hosting the UN.
IMO we should rethink the pressence of the embassy.
Ahmaneedstogetanickname,Sweet!

[jafar00]

I'm in agreement with those who think there are grounds for his arrest, as well as most of the members of the UN as well.



And what CRIME has he commited? Or is speech now a crime?
Dude he has been killing our troops with weapons he supplies to our enemies. That's more than words.


Dude, that is baseless accusation and hearsay. Any proof the Iranian government is doing so? No? Case dismissed.

[ttriber]

Excuse me jafar but it is being reported in most western newspapers that Iran is supplieng the terrorist if you want to deny it then do so but you know for a fact that they are being supplied by Iran. As far as Columbia University I will not be going their when I get my AA. Support a President who lets the dictator of Iran talk and not have the guts to let the minutemen talk. Talk about hypcorisy...

[Scorpion]

Perfect host? We don't want that man in our country, Actually maybe we should arrest him and force him to go on TV admitting to crimes that he didn't commit. That is is number one tool and way he tries to get around the Geniva Convention.
"We" don't want him in our country? I snicker at the way you speak for all Americans from out there in that furnace you call home.

Ahmadinejad is an invited guest of the United Nations and has full diplomatic priveleges as a head of state with whom the US is not at war...

Your opinions, nevadamedic, are about as reasonable and felicitous as a wad of gum on someone's shoe sole...


Please, let's not get emotional. All opinions are welcome here. It's what makes this forum so interesting.

[davo]

Ahmadinejad is *not* a dictator. He was elected President of Iran by popular vote, as was his predecessor Mohammad Khatami (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Khatami) The real power in Iran is held by the Ayatollahs.

As for him speaking at Columbia university, I'm not sure who they've allowed previously and who they've denied, so I can't really comment on that. But if they allow Ahmadinejad then they should allow the minutemen and so on. I think they should all be allowed, after all they need to do research on different topics, including the controversial ones.

As far as the weaponry etc in Iraq being sourced from Iran, I've only ever heard that from the same 'Neoconservative' sources who told us about Saddam's uranium from Niger, WMD's in Iraq and Vladimir Putin moving Saddam's weapons to Syria. They told us Iraq would be a cakewalk and they'd greet US troops with sweets. It amazes me why people still actually believe them. It's very unlikely the Iranian leadership has any intent in destabilizing Iraq, especially as they have sizable investments there; its predominately Shia population is sympathetic with Iran's leadership and Iraq's prime minister wants good diplomatic relations.

[Scorpion]

I'm in agreement with those who think there are grounds for his arrest, as well as most of the members of the UN as well.



And what CRIME has he commited? Or is speech now a crime?
Dude he has been killing our troops with weapons he supplies to our enemies. That's more than words.


Dude, that is baseless accusation and hearsay. Any proof the Iranian government is doing so? No? Case dismissed.


In fact, there is proof that Iran has been providing arms and support to Iraqi insurgents and terrorists.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=2688501

[Truth_and_Power]

Personally, with the way the world is headed, I think there could be no more educational experience than to hear hitler give a speech to a small auditorium. I would be unlikely to agree to anything he said, but it would most certainly be educational. As will hearing from Iran's leader. Would you not agree?


Is it just apart of your culture to attack people personally or you simply trying to switch the conversation? :)

Do you realize that in the future there will be two totally isolated countries in the world - the US and Israel?

There is NO WAY the Jews are going to live in peace for as long as they continue to kill people in the neighboring countries and at the same time call them all kind of names.

Russia and China support Iran and noone will allow the crazy pro-Israel neo-cons to destroy an ancient country of Iran....

:)



Who did I attack personally? I was not switching the conversation, I was making the point that you often stand to learn most from listening to people you disagree with.

Also, as to your statements about jews above, you could just switch out jews for arab muslims and the same would be true. But then you have hard-set prejudices against jews, don't you?

[Elrathin]

Ahmadinejad is *not* a dictator. He was elected President of Iran by popular vote, as was his predecessor Mohammad Khatami (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Khatami) The real power in Iran is held by the Ayatollahs.



Not a dictator? Maybe he isn't but the Ayatollahs are. Without their say so he wouldn't be in power, so basically what you have is a puppet president with the Ayatollahs as the dictators.

[December]

Ahmadinejad: Iran Not Walking Toward War
Iranian Leader Tells Scott Pelley His Country Does Not Need Nuclear Weapons

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2006/0609/ahmadinejad0916.jpg

(CBS) The president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, knows how to infuriate the Western world and he did it again last week when he asked to visit ground zero. Ahmadinejad plans to be in New York this week for the U.N. General Assembly meeting. The man who questions the truth behind the Holocaust is expected to demand, once again, the elimination of Israel.

60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley spoke with Ahmadinejad on Thursday in the garden outside his office in Tehran. Pelley spoke to the president about America's angry reaction to his plan to visit the World Trade Center site. The president told 60 Minutes, in light of the objections, he wouldn't press for it.

READ MORE and watch interview -

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/20/60minutes/main3282230.shtml


McCain Suggests Physical Force to Prevent Ahmadinejad From Visiting World Trade Center Site
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297526,00.html

http://www.760kfmb.com/rick_blog/imglib/mccain.jpg

McCain.... :madlaugh:

[Scorpion]

McCain.... :madlaugh:


This would be the same John McCain who was shot down over N Vietnam and spent five years in Hoa Lo prison (Hanoi Hilton) during which time he was tortured and had numerous bones broken including his jaw twice. He then returned to this country and ultimately became a tenured and respected senator. I doubt that he'll make president.

In light of his accomplishments and sacrifices I'd ask that you show some respect for the man. Thanks.

[AnnEsthesia]

Scorpion, I have a lot of respect for him, but since his own party was the one to trash him last go round, I really find it odd you would be surprised some would laugh at him.

[Scorpion]

Scorpion, I have a lot of respect for him, but since his own party was the one to trash him last go round, I really find it odd you would be surprised some would laugh at him.


Thanks Ann. I know that politically he has alienated himself from the party hardliners, but being that he is a Vietnam veteran who was imprisoned, tortured and wounded I would just like the man accorded a proper level of respect and, if someone can't do that, at least save the laugh for someone more deserving.

[December]

McCain.... :madlaugh:


This would be the same John McCain who was shot down over N Vietnam and spent five years in Hoa Lo prison (Hanoi Hilton) during which time he was tortured and had numerous bones broken including his jaw twice. He then returned to this country and ultimately became a tenured and respected senator. I doubt that he'll make president.

In light of his accomplishments and sacrifices I'd ask that you show some respect for the man. Thanks.


So?....
Do you want me to tell you about my military adventures to raise my respect level and make you cry?

:blah: :D

-----------------

VIDEO: Ahmadinejad at Columbia University

http://www.c-span.org/watch/cspan3_wm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS3

This is Iran...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDnfhbAzmRQ

_______________________________

"It is here, in the realm of politics, that much confusion has been sown. Supporters of Zionism for years skillfully attacted their opponents as "anti-Semites", to the extend that many Americans, Jews and gentiles alike and especially the media, are loath to even question the policies of Isreal no matter how odious.
Furthermore, the broad brush of anti-Semitism frequently has been used to besmirch anyone offering a conspiratorial view of history."

Jim Marrs "Rule by Secrecy"
page 61.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060931841/103-5217172-3542217?v=glance&n=283155

[Scorpion]

So?....
Do you want me to tell you about my military adventures to raise my respect level and make you cry?

:blah: :D



No thanks. Your posts give me a pretty accurate idea as to what you're all about.

[heyjude]

Whining and complaining. The Germans offered to take the UN and we refused. Because we would lose the right to bitch.

I agree with the president of Iran that Israel has no right to exist. An apology doesn't cut it. They kicked the people who lived there out and took their land. I can understand that we don't object to them doing that. Are you ready to give this country back to me, and the other descendents of the people you took it from?

Other than that, the Iranians have done nothing to us. General Paetraeus said there is no proof that they are supplying arms to the Iraqis. Now he is a liar, right?

[Marley]

They kicked the people who lived there out and took their land.

Where, anywhere on the planet, is that NOT true?

[Scorpion]

Whining and complaining. The Germans offered to take the UN and we refused. Because we would lose the right to bitch.

I agree with the president of Iran that Israel has no right to exist. An apology doesn't cut it. They kicked the people who lived there out and took their land. I can understand that we don't object to them doing that. Are you ready to give this country back to me, and the other descendents of the people you took it from?

Other than that, the Iranians have done nothing to us. General Paetraeus said there is no proof that they are supplying arms to the Iraqis. Now he is a liar, right?


Since you take the position that Israel has no right to exist as a nation, what would you like to see done with the Israelis? Also, I'd like to see a link to a quote within which Petraeus says that there is no proof that Iran is supplying weapons to Iraqis. Thank you.

[AnnEsthesia]

Of course, we are supplying the insurgents too, what with all the missing weaponry over there.

[jafar00]

I'm in agreement with those who think there are grounds for his arrest, as well as most of the members of the UN as well.



And what CRIME has he commited? Or is speech now a crime?
Dude he has been killing our troops with weapons he supplies to our enemies. That's more than words.


Dude, that is baseless accusation and hearsay. Any proof the Iranian government is doing so? No? Case dismissed.


In fact, there is proof that Iran has been providing arms and support to Iraqi insurgents and terrorists.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=2688501


Oh I remember that lot. Shells with English writing and "2006" stamped on them instead of Persian script and the Hijiri date "1427" as used by Iran. The shells were also not of a type manufactured by Iran.

Nice try, but that was quickly debunked.

[Scorpion]

I'm in agreement with those who think there are grounds for his arrest, as well as most of the members of the UN as well.



And what CRIME has he commited? Or is speech now a crime?
Dude he has been killing our troops with weapons he supplies to our enemies. That's more than words.


Dude, that is baseless accusation and hearsay. Any proof the Iranian government is doing so? No? Case dismissed.


In fact, there is proof that Iran has been providing arms and support to Iraqi insurgents and terrorists.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=2688501


Oh I remember that lot. Shells with English writing and "2006" stamped on them instead of Persian script and the Hijiri date "1427" as used by Iran. The shells were also not of a type manufactured by Iran.

Nice try, but that was quickly debunked.


Jafar, you seem to pick and choose whatever evidence supports your position and flippently dismiss that which does not, regardless of its validity. You fond of making sweeping generalizations against the west and Israel, most of which go unsupported.

You promote that Islam preaches peace and respect yet you regularly take issue with the existence of Israel and you constently castigate the west.

In sum my friend, you are a hippocrite whose credibility is on thin ice.[hr]

Oh I remember that lot. Shells with English writing and "2006" stamped on them instead of Persian script and the Hijiri date "1427" as used by Iran. The shells were also not of a type manufactured by Iran.

Nice try, but that was quickly debunked.


Here's another link with pertinent information: http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6106

[micfranklin]

Pretty good.
At least that is what I've been told for THIRTY, wait, FORTY years.
We should work harder to overthrow those Mullahs from within and support the pro-American element in that country.
Ahmedinejad is just another titular head who is unpopular and installed by the theocratic totalitarians in Iran



Do you still wanna take the chance of what could happen if we were to kill Ahmadinejad? Do we really need to go to war with Iran, now of all times?

[thistle]

Let me think this one through.

Ahmadinejad is coming to New York to address the UN. UN Headquarter is in New York. Since NY is in the US, I presume Ahmadinejad has been issued an US visa on a diplomatic passport.

If the US Govt considers him to be unwelcome, it could refuse a visit visa and ask Iran to send someone else. For reasons best known to it, the US Govt is allowing the visit.

Next, any one can ask for a pass and visit the UN and sit in the stands and watch proceedings, including hearing Ahmadinejad speak. If the US Govt wanted, it could prevent the public from attending the UN session. Again, for reasons better known to the US Govt, it is not considering that.

Finally, Ahmadinejad has been invited to speak and have a question answer session at Columbia University, and has reportedly accepted the invitation. The US Govt could easily block that by restricting Ahmadinejads movements without having to fight against the University. Again, such actions are not on the table.

So then, what is all this whining about?

If Ahmadinejad talks crap, he will be exposed for what he is, and will deserve to be exposed.

Are folks worried that Ahmadinejad might actually speak some hard truths?

We hear bullshit all the time.

Could it be that truth is something to be afraid of?

Cheers.


It is my understanding that the United States is obliged by diplomatic convention and as host of the United Nations to allow representatives of member nations to visit areas within 40 kilometers of the United Nations headquarters in New York. If my understanding is correct, I question whether or not our government could deny Ahmadinejad a visa.

I missed his speech earlier but hopefully it will be on again and I will be listening ever so closely to hear any truths he may have to offer. :rolleyes:

[jafar00]

Jafar, you seem to pick and choose whatever evidence supports your position and flippently dismiss that which does not, regardless of its validity. You fond of making sweeping generalizations against the west and Israel, most of which go unsupported.


I disregard the US regime's so called intelligence based on hearsay, circumstantial "evidence", or outright fabrications. Can you blame me for preferring the hard facts over propaganda?


You promote that Islam preaches peace and respect yet you regularly take issue with the existence of Israel and you constently castigate the west.


In what way?


In sum my friend, you are a hippocrite whose credibility is on thin ice.


In your opinion. Enjoy!

[Scorpion]

Jafar, you seem to pick and choose whatever evidence supports your position and flippently dismiss that which does not, regardless of its validity. You fond of making sweeping generalizations against the west and Israel, most of which go unsupported.


I disregard the US regime's so called intelligence based on hearsay, circumstantial "evidence", or outright fabrications. Can you blame me for preferring the hard facts over propaganda?


You promote that Islam preaches peace and respect yet you regularly take issue with the existence of Israel and you constently castigate the west.


In what way?


In sum my friend, you are a hippocrite whose credibility is on thin ice.


In your opinion. Enjoy!


Thank you Jafar for confirming my point.

[bobbylien]

Ahmedinejad is just another titular head who is unpopular and installed by the theocratic totalitarians in Iran
I laugh at all you fools who aren't smart enough to figure out that he is a democratically elected leader. The Iranian people want him to stop being a PR man and deal with their problems(not that hes a very good PR man for the Iranian people). He will very likely lose his next election. His administration might be oppressive but he is elected and if the people don't like it, they can vote him out just as we will vote the Republicans out in 2008.

I had to laugh at his statement that "There are no homosexuals in Iran." And this fool calls himself an academic?

[Jaaaman]

I had to laugh at his statement that "There are no homosexuals in Iran." And this fool calls himself an academic?


He made a total dufus out of himself onstage at Columbia University. What a nitwit. :shame:



edited to add: Are you going to defend your man here Jafar? :lmao:

[Deadshot]

I'm sure it's linked somewhere on the net already, but you've got to listen to when he says that his country has no homosexuals and then hear the crowd break into laughter.

I also thought it hilarious that his interpreter was a woman.

I think we'll get blasted, with WORDS people - calm down, when he gets back home.

They made him look foolish...which wasn't hard from the looks of it.

[Scorpion]

I had to laugh at his statement that "There are no homosexuals in Iran." And this fool calls himself an academic?


He made a total dufus out of himself onstage at Columbia University. What a nitwit. :shame:



edited to add: Are you going to defend your man here Jafar? :lmao:


I too was amazed that such a well educated man would make such a nonsensical statement about there being no homosexuals in Iran. Then I remembered that this is the same person who denied that the holocaust ever occured and thought that Israel should be annihilated. He truly has intellectual and credibility issues. I must say though, the man is skillfull in directing how he answers questions in order to avoid being caught in an admission that Iran is governed by a repressive regime with expansionist ambitions.

Sorry Jafar, but the guy is a class A looser.

[suedanim]

I agree with a previous poster that the Iranian voters may well be fed up with and embarassed by their President and vote him out of office.

Their feeling could not possibly be as pronounced though as the majority of Americans who are fed up, embarassed by and indeed fearful of our own President AND especially his co-President.

I think we and the Iranians share much in common actually. What a travesty should our own nutjobs in the White House launch war upon those innocent people because their nutjob ruler says dumb shit.

In regards to Iran killing our soldiers, ect ect other accusations against Irans aid to the insurgency in Iraq... :

General Peter Pace... found no support for the claim made by George and DICK that Iranian government supported or supplied any weapons or other support to the Iraqi insurgency. So...he was fired.

"We know that the explosively formed projectiles are manufactured in Iran. What I would not say is that the Iranian government, per se [specifically], knows about this," he said. "It is clear that Iranians are involved, and it's clear that materials from Iran are involved, but I would not say by what I know that the Iranian government clearly knows or is complicit."

LINK (http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2007-02/2007-02-12-voa20.cfm?CFID=194624197&CFTOKEN=61374869)

Pace....another casualty of the Iraq War... was in fact, one of the best people the United States ever has serve this country as Joint Chief of Staff Chairman. He is a Marine and an honorable, honest man, something that just would not do with this WH.

But, he lost popularity with this WH because he would not play their tune, which is the kiss of death with the neocon agenda. With Norman Podhoretz and other PNAC neocons in their ear, running this country behind the scenes, no one who opposes this WH agenda will survive. Only team players like Petraeus survive.

But the reality was more complicated. Behind the scenes, Pace battled Rumsfeld and his more ideological aides. Pace thought Guantánamo ought to be closed; he believed the U.S. should follow the Geneva Conventions even in its treatment of Al Qaeda; he supported efforts to reopen dialogue with China—and he consistently warned of the folly of risking war with Iran. Last fall, it was Pace who cajoled both civilian and Army leaders in the Pentagon to recognize that the time had come for a new strategy in Iraq.

LINK (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19129171/site/newsweek/)


Top general likely to urge troop cut (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pace24aug24,0,43964.story?coll=la-home-center)


Advice by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs poses a potential clash with supporters of the buildup.

By Julian E. Barnes and Peter Spiegel, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
12:23 PM PDT, August 24, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is expected to advise President Bush to reduce the U.S. force in Iraq next year by almost half, potentially creating a rift with top White House officials and other military commanders over the course of the war.

Administration and military officials say Marine Gen. Peter Pace is likely to convey concerns by the Joint Chiefs that keeping well in excess of 100,000 troops in Iraq through 2008 will severely strain the military. This assessment could collide with one being prepared by the U.S. commander in Iraq, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, calling for the U.S. to maintain higher troop levels for 2008 and beyond.

(excerpted)

[lily]

I laugh at all you fools who aren't smart enough to figure out that he is a democratically elected leader. The Iranian people want him to stop being a PR man and deal with their problems(not that hes a very good PR man for the Iranian people). He will very likely lose his next election. His administration might be oppressive but he is elected and if the people don't like it, they can vote him out just as we will vote the Republicans out in 2008.

If I recall correctly he was elected because of two promises that he made. One, Iran's oil money would stay in Iran and the people would share it. Two, he would keep Iran safe from the US. I don't think either promise was kept. We also have to keep in mind that from what we are told the youth of Iran is for Westernization (sp) and some of those youth are now of voting age.

I had to laugh at his statement that "There are no homosexuals in Iran." And this fool calls himself an academic?

I think that is getting more air-play than his actual speech.

[Pogo]

If I recall correctly he was elected because of two promises that he made. One, Iran's oil money would stay in Iran and the people would share it. Two, he would keep Iran safe from the US. I don't think either promise was kept. We also have to keep in mind that from what we are told the youth of Iran is for Westernization (sp) and some of those youth are now of voting age.

If memory serves me, the price paid for westernization the last time around was the Shah. I wonder if that's a price these young people would be comfortable with.

[December]

The transcript of the president Ahmadinejad speech at Columbia University:

http://quranbible.wordpress.com/2007/09/25/ahmadinejad-columbia-university-speech-transcript


___________________

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html


"It is here, in the realm of politics, that much confusion has been sown. Supporters of Zionism for years skillfully attacted their opponents as "anti-Semites", to the extend that many Americans, Jews and gentiles alike and especially the media, are loath to even question the policies of Isreal no matter how odious.
Furthermore, the broad brush of anti-Semitism frequently has been used to besmirch anyone offering a conspiratorial view of history."

Jim Marrs "Rule by Secrecy"
page 61.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060931841/103-5217172-3542217?v=glance&n=283155

Where Berezovsky gets money
http://democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=6428

[tony mitra]

Though I am not an Iran expert, Lily, I think what you say is largely true about Ahmadinejad, except for a few pointers.

First, all Iranian Governments from 1950s till date, wanted the local oil wealth to stay within the country and not go to foreign oil corporations, with the sole exception of the Shah of Iran, who was propped up by the west and was in essence a western stooge.

The second item to remember is that Ahmadinejad, or any elected President, is both an elected head of state and same time a lame duck, because the real power stays with the unelected Muslim clergy. How the power stays in their hands is complicated, but one of the reasons is that Iran has two armies. One is the national army that is supposed to follow orders of the democratically elected Government headed by Ahmadinejad. This army is ill equipped and poorly paid, and possibly a lot less motivated, than the second army.

The second army is the revolutionary guards hand picked and ideologically tutored to follow the religious clergy. I am told by Iranian immigrants that this army is more powerful, a lot better equipped and trained, and one of their duty is to protect the clergy and its rule, even if it means defeating an uprising supported by the standard army.

I am also told that this religious army has its own air force and navy, and is the real stick behind the power of the clergy, while the democratic Govt and its ragtag armed forces, are at the moment more a show than substance. I do not know how much of it is true. Anyhow, it is certain that Ahmadinejad does not control Iran.

Also, it is true that Iranian some of the younger generation likes to be westernised and generally pro-west. But this should not be overly generalised. For one thing, this pro-western slant in only applicable to the educated class, which is a minority. The rural folks are more orthodox, tribal in thinking, and would be suspicious of western values, than the affluent middle class.

Also, whenever the nation is threatened by western belligerance or threat of attack, the entire population would stand behind their nation, and as such would strengthen the hand of the orthodox clergy.

So, it is my opinion that western hostility is not helping the moderate pro-western sentiments to grow.

[lily]

Though I am not an Iran expert, Lily

Nor am I by a long shot!

First, all Iranian Governments from 1950s till date, wanted the local oil wealth to stay within the country and not go to foreign oil corporations, with the sole exception of the Shah of Iran, who was propped up by the west and was in essence a western stooge.

I agree........but when using it as one of your "political platforms" it carries a lot more weight. You also have to keep in mind that up until April or May Haliburton was still working their pipeline and oil fields. I don't want to get in a discussion about Halliburton. I'm using it for my Western argument and the fact that is one of the promises that Ahmadinejad did not fulfil. We can argue until the cows come home on the other point, that he was elected because he promised to keep them safe. I think everyone knows that he's not calling the shots....but he's a good scapegoat.



Anyhow, it is certain that Ahmadinejad does not control Iran.

Yet, most Americans think he does.

Also, it is true that Iranian some of the younger generation likes to be westernised and generally pro-west. But this should not be overly generalised. For one thing, this pro-western slant in only applicable to the educated class, which is a minority. The rural folks are more orthodox, tribal in thinking, and would be suspicious of western values, than the affluent middle class.

I admit I didn't think about the rural population and well, to put it bluntly "backwards" they are. I also wonder how many vote. I disagree with you about the youth of Iran......but right now I'm too lazy to cite.;)

Also, whenever the nation is threatened by western belligerance or threat of attack, the entire population would stand behind their nation, and as such would strengthen the hand of the orthodox clergy.

So, it is my opinion that western hostility is not helping the moderate pro-western sentiments to grow.

Agreed........but do we blame it on the media?

[ViolaLee]

But the reality was more complicated. Behind the scenes, Pace battled Rumsfeld and his more ideological aides. Pace thought Guantánamo ought to be closed; he believed the U.S. should follow the Geneva Conventions even in its treatment of Al Qaeda; he supported efforts to reopen dialogue with China—and he consistently warned of the folly of risking war with Iran. Last fall, it was Pace who cajoled both civilian and Army leaders in the Pentagon to recognize that the time had come for a new strategy in Iraq.

LINK (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19129171/site/newsweek/)

[

General Peter Pace is actually upholding his vow to protect the constitution of the United States of America. He is a great American patriot.