TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Ahmadinejad to speak at the Columbia University
Pages (8): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 »
| quote: |
| Originally posted by CHORE BOY But the krypton fascist is not American. Anti American yes. He hates America. White man baaaaaaaaadddd Progressive gooooooooooddddd. The Krypton fascist hates himself.  So what should we call this hateful fascist? |
I am against unjustified invasions. I am for peace. I want my country to stop this insane foreign policy which is the sole firestarter for recruitment of terrorists.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by CHRles Iran is more then just in the axis of evil - it is the center of it. Again, the Iran defenders and the terrorist supporters on this board try to discredit what I'm saying by ignoring the facts. Bush called Iran part of the axis of evil long after Iran started it hate-affair with America. So don't give me the whole Iran was upset at Bush spiel. And people Iran aren't free to wear what they want, and have to be careful as far as what they say in public. This is especially true for women. Anyone who tells you differently is lying to themselves. Oh yeah, and I know my history very well thank you. As I've already stated in the past, the so-called popularly elect Iranian PM of the past was someone to compare to Hugo Chavez. Just like Chavez this individual constantly flamed Britain and America. This was after World War II and the West back then reacted much quicker then it does now. It eliminated him, and rightfully so. Too bad they take their time these days with keeping people like Ahmedanicrap and Chavez alive. |
Then go on and read all of my posts, terrorist lover.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by CHRles Then go on and read all of my posts, terrorist lover. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJ Shibby PS also: please don't make multiple accounts to post in response to yourself to back yourself up. This might have worked if you were more intelligent and verbally eloquent, but you're not, so just delete your doubles and use one username. |
is this going to be broadcast on cable news?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by CHRles Then go on and read all of my posts, terrorist lover. |
it's on right now
you can catch it live
frankly i can't understand a word he says (even though they're translating him!)
CNN right now.
The president of Columbia pulled a jackass move and pretty much ambusehd the guy from the start.
Ahmedinejad has remained calm, while making some good points, and some expected responses to the usual questions like gays etc.
I hear he's going to the Yankees game tonight.
Meanwhile, Bush had a super duper uber secret meeting with one of our favorite neocon warmongering nutfreaks, Norman Podheretz:
| quote: |
| Podhoretz secretly urged Bush to bomb Iran By: David Paul Kuhn Sep 24, 2007 10:06 AM EST President Bush and Karl Rove sat listening to Norman Podhoretz for roughly 45 minutes at the White House as the patriarch of neoconservatism argued that the United States should bomb Iran�s nuclear facilities. The meeting was not on the president�s public schedule. Rove was silent throughout, though he took notes. The president listened diligently, Podhoretz said as he recounted the conversation months later, but he �didn�t tip his hand.� �I did say to [the president], that people ask: Why are you spending all this time negotiating sanctions? Time is passing. I said, my friend [Robert] Kagan wrote a column which he said you were giving �futility its chance.� And both he and Karl Rove burst out laughing. �It struck me,� Podhoretz added, �that if they really believed that there was a chance for these negotiations and sanctions to work, they would not have laughed. They would have got their backs up and said, �No, no, it�s not futile, there�s a very good chance.� � |
| quote: |
| Podhoretz walked out of the meeting neither deterred nor assured the president would attack the Persian state. Yet prior to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad�s visit to New York for the United Nations� General Assembly, Podhoretz said he believes that �Bush is going to hit� Iran before the end of his presidency. His assumption is based on intellectual instinct. |
| quote: |
| If Podhoretz were merely another old man of the chattering class, his intellectual instincts would hardly be worth pondering. But Podhoretz, after a half-century in argument, remains fiercely relevant. He is a senior foreign policy adviser to Republican front-runner Rudy Giuliani. He participates in weekly conference calls with the campaign and says he is in constant contact via e-mail with the foreign policy team. The meeting with the president was at Podhoretz�s request. No less a figure than Rush Limbaugh said on Wednesday, during his radio show, that Podhoretz�s most recent book is �a no-holds-barred, brilliant explanation of just what we face around the world, not just here in our country.� |
| quote: |
| That book, �World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism,� is not so much a study of the �Islamofascism� he argues Americans must fight, as it is a treatise justifying his own fight. He indicts the foes of neoconservatism (of which there are many), and defends the Bush doctrine of pre-emption (a task few would attempt today). Podhoretz sometimes seems to be the last neoconservative still in the political arena. |
| quote: |
| One of the movement�s formative minds, Francis Fukuyama, has recanted. Paul Wolfowitz ingloriously left the White House and was later pushed off the world stage, quite literally, after his brief stint leading the World Bank. Dick Cheney, their consummate paleoconservative ally, has seen his influence over the president diminish. Then there is Iraq. If an idea is only as good as its implementation, the protracted war in Iraq has left neoconservatives struggling to prove they had a good idea. Undeterred, Podhoretz plods onward. He remains the unabashed hawk. History will redeem him, Iraq and this president, Podhoretz asserts. �When this war�s won � I don�t say if, I say when; I am uncharacteristically optimistic � what will happen is the political configuration of the entire region will be changed,� he insisted. �That will involve a replacement of all the despotisms with regimes that are on the way to becoming free societies.� This was a characteristic neoconservative comment in 2003, at the outset of the war in Iraq. But Podhoretz is still saying it four years later, sitting in his Upper East Side Manhattan apartment between pictures of his grandchildren and the archives of Commentary, where he was the editor for 35 years. |
| quote: |
| The nation�s highest civilian award, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, is framed in his living room. Bush bestowed it in 2004, at the very time that Democrats were attacking him for a war that was not going as advertised. Podhoretz now finds himself defending both the rosy picture he and fellow neoconservatives painted in the run-up to war, as well as the reasons America has been involved in it longer now than World War II. It is world war that dominates Podhoretz�s work today. He argues that World War III was the Cold War and that World War IV is the war on terrorism, a view echoed by the likes of Clinton-era CIA Director James Woolsey. Only when the current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are understood as one larger conflict, Podhoretz argues, can one grasp the gravity of the struggle before the United States. The Bush Doctrine � as he summarizes it, �to make the Middle East safe for America by making it safe for democracy� � puts democratization at the top of the agenda. During the Cold War containment was the priority; democracy was secondary. Neoconservatives, by contrast, argue that democracy is a means to an end. |
| quote: |
| Perhaps ironically, democracy may be one of the great impediments to Podhoretz�s getting his way. A good portion of his book is devoted to arguing why the president should press on despite the domestic unpopularity of the war in Iraq � effectively short-circuiting democracy here in America. He does acknowledge that after Vietnam, Americans became impatient with war, especially when it seems mismanaged and ill-conceived (which he argues Iraq was not). Still, Podhoretz says, �We have to find a way to fight the war with the people we now are.� Podhoretz cannot be dismissed as an ideological outlier. Despite a majority of Americans favoring a withdrawal from Iraq, a substantial minority subscribe to his argument that the war there is part of a larger one. As recently as this summer, according to the Gallup Poll, 44 percent of Americans considered the war in Iraq �to be part of the war on terrorism which began on Sept. 11, 2001.� |
| quote: |
| But when he details his worldview, he severs himself from the bulk of foreign policy wonks, both conservative and liberal. Podhoretz argues the war in Iraq has not empowered Iran. He believes that Iraq had biological and chemical weapons, but they were likely shipped out to Syria. |
| quote: |
| And, says the man with the ear of the current and possibly next president, the war in Iraq is a success. �The seeds of this democratization are planted,� as Podhoretz describes Iraq. �The opposition to this process of democratization turned out to be much more ferocious than anybody anticipated, including me. So it took a while for our people to learn how to deal with it,� he continued. The greatest proof that Podhoretz is right, he insisted, is the very intensity of attacks in Iraq. �If the enemy of that process [of democratization] thought it was a failure, they wouldn�t be blowing themselves up to frustrate it or derail it,� he argued. |
| quote: |
| �They agree that this is not only happening, but that it is a danger to them. They agree with Bush. They agree with me,� Podhoretz chuckled. �That�s why they are fighting so hard.� http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5964.html |
| quote: |
| Q: What kind of international fallout can we expect from such a campaign? PODHORETZ: Well, if we were to bomb the Iranians as I hope and pray we will, we�ll unleash a wave of anti-Americanism all over the world that will make the anti-Americanism we�ve experienced so far look like a lovefest. On the other hand � that�s a worst case scenario, and worst case scenarios don�t always materialize. It�s entirely possible that many countries, particularly in the Middle East � the Sunni countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, who are very worried about Iranian influence and power � would at least secretly applaud us. And I think it�s possible that other countries in Europe, for example, and elsewhere, would be relieved to see the Iranians entirely deprived of the capability to build nuclear weapons, or at least have that ability retarded for five or 10 years or more. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 I think it's about time to remind you of the rules in this forum posted by our Mod, Lira: http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...7&forumid=66&s= Please take note of rule #2. Rest assured Lira and/or Neo will not tolerate this for very much longer. You have an opinion that's shared by others here, and it's worth hearing despite others disagreeing with it. But you need to be careful by continuing to support your assertions as well as avoiding the name calling and branding. |
Iranian leader 'petty, cruel dictator,' school president says
| quote: |
| NEW YORK (CNN) -- Columbia University President Lee Bollinger excoriated Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday, going through a long list of documented actions and remarks by the firebrand Iranian leader and his government. "Mr. President, you exhibit all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator," Bollinger said to applause from many of the 600 people in the room for a speech from the Iranian leader. Bollinger cited the Iranian government's "brutal crackdown" on dissidents, public executions, executions of minors and other actions. And he assailed Ahmadinejad's "denying" of the Holocaust as "ridiculous" and "dangerous propaganda." He called the Iranian leader either brazenly provocative "or astonishingly uneducated." "The truth is that the Holocaust is the most documented event in human history," he said. He said he doubted Ahmadinejad would show the intellectual courage to answer the questions before him. Ahmadinejad responded quickly. "We don't think it's necessary before the speech is given to come in with some series of claims," the Iranian leader said. He said Bollinger's comments included "insults" and false claims, and flew in the face of an environment that's supposed to let people speak their minds. On the Holocaust, Ahmadinejad asked why history can't be questioned and further researched. "If the Holocaust is a reality of our time, a history that occurred, why is there not sufficient research that can approach the topic from different perspectives?" he asked. The Iranian leader has made statements in the past suggesting that Israel be politically "wiped off the map," though he insists that can be accomplished without violence. While he would not respond with a "yes" or "no" when asked Monday if he sought the destruction of Israel, he said the status of Israel should be determined by a free election. "Let the people of Palestine freely choose what they want for their future," he said. Asked about widely documented government abuse of women and homosexuals in his country, Ahmadinejad said, "We don't have homosexuals" in Iran. "I don't know who told you we had it," he said. He also repeatedly said that women have freedoms in Iran and refused to comment on reports that their freedom is severely constrained. Ahmadinejad said Iran questions "the way the world is being run and managed today." But he said Iran would hold talks with the U.S. government "under fair and just circumstances." As he ended his talk at Columbia, he invited faculty and students to visit any university they liked in Iran. Earlier Monday, in a question-and-answer video conference with the National Press Club, Ahmadinejad said the Middle East can govern itself without interference from the United States and other Western nations. Speaking from New York to the luncheon in Washington, Ahmadinejad said Iran wanted to see "an independent powerful Iraq ... which will benefit the entire region." "We are two nations interconnected," he said of Iran and Iraq. "We are brothers and friends." But he said the region didn't need U.S. help. "We oppose the way the U.S. government tries to manage the world. ... We propose more humane methods of establishing peace," he said. He also said all the world's religions have the same common ground, "justice and friendship." The views of all religions must be respected and "we must all move hand in hand," Ahmadinejad said. Earlier in an interview with The Associated Press, Ahmadinejad said he didn't think the United States was preparing for war against Iran. "I believe that some of the talk in this regard arises first of all from anger. Secondly, it serves the electoral purposes domestically in this country. Third, it serves as a cover for policy failures over Iraq," he told the AP. The Iranian president said his country would not attack Israel. "Iran will not attack any country," the AP quoted Ahmadinejad as saying. Despite an outcry against Ahmadinejad that included New York tabloid headlines such as "The Evil Has Landed," John Coatsworth, acting dean of Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs, said it is important for Americans to hear from the Iranian leader. "Iran is going to ... hold the key to peace in the Middle East. We have to deal with and negotiate with leaders like this however much we may disagree with their views," Coatsworth said on CNN's "American Morning." Christine C. Quinn, speaker of the New York City Council, said Columbia should not be giving Ahmadinejad a platform. "All he will do on that stage ... is spew more hatred and more venom out there to the world," Quinn said. Hamid Dabasi, a professor of Iranian studies at Columbia, called the whole forum "misguided." Ahmadinejad also has drawn fire for his insistence that Iran will defy international demands that it halt production of enriched uranium. Iran insists it is producing nuclear fuel for civilian power plants, but Washington accuses Tehran of trying to create a nuclear weapons program. Also, the United States says Iranian explosives and weapons are making their way to Shiite Muslim militias in Iraq's sectarian conflict and have been used against U.S. troops in the 4-year-old war. U.S. commanders say they have captured Iranian agents involved in supplying those weapons to the militias, some of which have longstanding ties to the Islamic republic. In an interview broadcast Sunday on CBS' "60 Minutes," Ahmadinejad denied U.S. accusations that Iranian weapons are being used against American troops in Iraq, saying, "Insecurity in Iraq is detrimental to our interests." He said U.S. officials are blaming his country for problems unleashed by the American-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. "American officials, wherever around the world that they encounter a problem which they fail to resolve, instead of accepting that, they prefer to accuse others," he said. "I'm very sorry that because of the wrong decisions taken by American officials, Iraqi people are being killed and also American soldiers." He added, "If they accuse us 1,000 times, the truth will not change." Ahmadinejad landed in New York on Sunday to attend the U.N. General Assembly session, which opens Monday. He is set to speak Tuesday at the United Nations. Copyright 2007 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report. All AboutMahmoud Ahmadinejad � The Holocaust Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/24/us.iran/index.html |
| quote: |
| Asked about widely documented government abuse of women and homosexuals in his country, Ahmadinejad said, "We don't have homosexuals" in Iran. "I don't know who told you we had it," he said. |
Oh, by the way, I think it's also worth pointing out that Ahmadinejad isn't really the leader of Iran that we should be focusing on:
| quote: |
| Political analysts here say they are surprised at the degree to which the West focuses on their president, saying that it reflects a general misunderstanding of their system. Unlike in the United States, in Iran the president is not the head of state nor the commander in chief. That status is held by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, whose role combines civil and religious authority. At the moment, this president�s power comes from two sources, they say: the unqualified support of the supreme leader, and the international condemnation he manages to generate when he speaks up. �The United States pays too much attention to Ahmadinejad,� said an Iranian political scientist who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. �He is not that consequential.� That is not to say that Mr. Ahmadinejad is insignificant. He controls the mechanics of civil government, much the way a prime minister does in a state like Egypt, where the real power rests with the president. He manages the budget and has put like-minded people in positions around the country, from provincial governors to prosecutors. His base of support is the Basiji militia and elements of the Revolutionary Guards. But Mr. Ahmadinejad has not shown the same political acumen at home as he has in riling the West. Two of his ministers have quit, criticizing his stewardship of the state. The head of the central bank resigned. The chief judge criticized him for his management of the government. His promise to root out corruption and redistribute oil wealth has run up against entrenched interests. Even a small bloc of members of Parliament that once aligned with Mr. Ahmadinejad has largely given up, officials said. �Maybe it comes as a surprise to you that I voted for him,� said Emad Afrough, a conservative member of Parliament. �I liked the slogans demanding justice.� But he added: �You cannot govern the country on a personal basis. You have to use public knowledge and consultation.� Rather than focusing so much attention on the president, the West needs to learn that in Iran, what matters is ideology � Islamic revolutionary ideology, according to politicians and political analysts here. Nearly 30 years after the shah fell in a popular revolt, Iran�s supreme leader also holds title of guardian of the revolution. Mr. Ahmadinejad�s power stems not from his office per se, but from the refusal of his patron, Ayatollah Khamenei, and some hard-line leaders, to move beyond Iran�s revolutionary identity, which makes full relations with the West impossible. There are plenty of conservatives and hard-liners who take a more pragmatic view, wanting to retain �revolutionary values� while integrating Iran with the world, at least economically. But they are not driving the agenda these days, and while that could change, it will not be the president who makes that call. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/w...gin&oref=slogin |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Kate Manus CNN right now. The president of Columbia pulled a jackass move and pretty much ambusehd the guy from the start. Ahmedinejad has remained calm, while making some good points, and some expected responses to the usual questions like gays etc. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MisterOpus1 INVADE!!!!!!!!!!!!! And you're next, Hugo. Watch your back, bitch. |
LOL, I love how the Iranian president so confidently said that were no gays in Iran. Liar liar pants on fire 
I guess all of the people that were waiting to hear this pig are all disappointed.... he was like a deer in head lights...
and by all accounts looked to be "out of his league."
I am sure like some already stated that he was "ambushed" ha ha ha
yeah like the gays, women and anyone that does not follow the teachings of a pedo
come on fellas, can't find any upstanding anti-americans to fall behind??
Yeah, kinda disappointing performance by this idiot.
Still, I don't understand why it was necessary to discuss women's rights and homosexuality. These are largely cultural issues which America is perfectly eager to overlook in its 'friend' Saudi Arabia for instance. By the way, on the issue of gays and execution of minors, the US is no shining beacon either, some states do allow execution of under-18s.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by HardTranceProd By the way, on the issue of gays and execution of minors, the US is no shining beacon either, some states do allow execution of under-18s. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by LazFX I just do not get this reasoning........ When was the last time gays were hung in the US by the gov??? Do you have high speed internet?? I know its trivial, but Iran has made high speed internet illegal. You sitting here on the internet on a public forum, posting about your dissatisfaction with our government is more than a pipe dream for the average Iranian.... so why this reasoning?? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by HardTranceProd Yes, I have high-speed internet, and here's what I've found: http://www.hrw.org/reports/1995/Us.htm http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/10/06/c...nile/index.html (a little more recent, '04) Do you honestly smell not a whiff of hypocrisy here? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by HardTranceProd Now don't get me wrong, America is a great democratic country, but to emphasize THESE things as the reason you loathe Iran (as opposed to nuclear programs, terrorism, Holocaust denial, etc.) is a little disingenious. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by LazFX I had an aunt killed by 2 15years olds for her car in Houston..... are you telling me that my country is wrong for seeking the death penalty?? have you ever lost anyone?? the death penalty is only sought in crimes for murder.....and yes, the US justice system is focked... but again...... |
| quote: |
I do not loathe Iran. I loathe the government and the religious pedo followers that run it. Iran was once a beacon for tolerance..... not any more since the pedo crusaders took over.... much like our current admin here in the states, today's speech just showed how similar the leaders of the US and Iran are.... CLUELESS!!!! |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.