Ahmadinejad unwavering @ Columbia -- "We don't have homosexuals"

DriftingByTheStorm

Write up of the man at Columbia: CNN Article: "Iranian leader 'petty, cruel dictator,' school president says"

Dean of Columbia Introduces Ahmadinejad -- I Mean, Derides Him

Ahmadinejad Speaks - First Part

Part II

Part III

Part IV

Part V

Well?
What does everyone think?
I haven't seen the footage yet.
Just got home.
But the CNN write up indicates that he
a. had some typicaly Iranian outdated ideology to pedal
b. also had some very valid criticisms of US action and such

I'm still unclear of his actual position on the Holocaust ...
most documented text seems to indicate he actually is questioning the "use" of the Holocaust as an excuse for "building a myth" ... when you read, it seems to indicate he dissapproves of how the world has built a myth of the Jew around the holocaust which shelters them from criticism ...

... but then sometimes it really does seem he is questioning the death counts in the holocaust?

Also,
the article again pushes the "wipe off the face of the map" lie.

:(

Discuss.

Tom K

Bollinger's opening remarks are disgusting.

Dirtie_Frank

No. Ahmadinejad is disgusting

darthvedder81

I really can't grasp why so many liberals are willing to give this guy a free pass. He's anti-women, anti-semitic, anti-gay (in a real and tangible way not a Pat Robertson way), supporting of terrorist thugs—in short a walking human rights nightmare. On top of that his country has implemented a nuclear weapons program and he's pledged to wipe Israel of the face of the map.

Yet we are still somehow supposed to "negotiate and communicate" and not be lead into another war. I may not be in favor of a full-fledged attack on Iran but I can't say I'd lose any sleep if a special-ops team were to take this bastard out.

g under p

Turning Ahmadinejad into public enemy No. 1

By Juan Cole

Demonizing the Iranian president and making his visit to New York seem controversial are all part of the neoconservative push for yet another war.
Turning Ahmadinejad into public enemy No. 1

In Bollinger's remarks he should mention we have a rising dictator also who imprisons those who are just suspected of wrong doing. Imprisoned for years on end hoping that they'll be forgotten.

Peace

macgyver06

darthvedder81 wrote:

I really can't grasp why so many liberals are willing to give this guy a free pass. He's anti-women, anti-semitic, anti-gay (in a real and tangible way not a Pat Robertson way), supporting of terrorist thugs—in short a walking human rights nightmare. On top of that his country has implemented a nuclear weapons program and he's pledged to wipe Israel of the face of the map.

Yet we are still somehow supposed to "negotiate and communicate" and not be lead into another war. I may not be in favor of a full-fledged attack on Iran but I can't say I'd lose any sleep if a special-ops team were to take this bastard out.

its not a free pass...you are missing the point...can you not realize he is in fact the leader of iran.. and last time i checked...he came here.... and words and speeches have never hurt me...have they hurt you... just cause you dont attack someone doesnt mean you arent against his ways... can you grasp this concept of tolerance in circumstance. or should we just go around and have every leader hanged who is much different than the u.s.?

sorry..this is a waste of time...i didnt read that last statement.. thank god youre a nobody and not actually in power in this country...

jlew24asu

macgyver06 wrote:

its not a free pass...you are missing the point...can you not realize he is in fact the leader of iran.. and last time i checked...he came here.... and words and speeches have never hurt me...have they hurt you... just cause you dont attack someone doesnt mean you arent against his ways... can you grasp this concept of tolerance in circumstance. or should we just go around and have every leader hanged who is much different than the u.s.?

sorry..this is a waste of time...i didnt read that last statement.. thank god youre a nobody and not actually in power in this country...

he never suggested the man should be hung.

concept of tolerance in circumstance huh? look what that has done for the country of North Korea. a few million people locked inside a land mass. no way in, no way out. all under the tight control of 1 person. the world tolerates it and all those people suffer. same in Darfur.

Dirtie_Frank

No matter what I am just glad they did not let this person visit ground zero

jeffbr

jlew24asu wrote:

he never suggested the man should be hung.

concept of tolerance in circumstance huh? look what that has done for the country of North Korea. a few million people locked inside a land mass. no way in, no way out. all under the tight control of 1 person. the world tolerates it and all those people suffer. same in Darfur.

Yes. But what I've learned from the people on this board is that the US should stay out of other people's business. We simply can do nothing right. I am much more of an isolationist at this point. Since we're damned if we do and damned if we don't, I choose to be damned for taking the less expensive (in dollars and lives) way out of an issue. North Korea and Darfur? They're on their own. We are not welcome or wanted. We are not the world's police. Live and let die.

jlew24asu

jeffbr wrote:

Yes. But what I've learned from the people on this board is that the US should stay out of other people's business. We simply can do nothing right. I am much more of an isolationist at this point. Since we're damned if we do and damned if we don't, I choose to be damned for taking the less expensive (in dollars and lives) way out of an issue. North Korea and Darfur? They're on their own. We are not welcome or wanted. We are not the world's police. Live and let die.

I cant argue with this. definitely less expensive for us in dollars and lives. but not so much for the people in those countries.

kenny olav

wow, i guess they have a very serious "don't ask, don't tell" policy over there.

i just finished watching Ahmadinejad's 60 Minutes interview re-broadcast on C-Span 2. on the matter of nuclear weapons Ahmadinejad spoke very well about his opposition to these weapons and yet the 60 Minutes reporter kept pressing him for an answer simply because the answer wasn't as simplistic as he wanted it. he expressed his reasons for why they don't ever want nuclear weapons and legitimate outrage at our government for producing new generations of nuclear wepaons.

i have no doubt that there are a lot of fucked up social policies enforced by the Iranian government, or by local governments within the very large country of Iran. however, there is no reason to suggest that a war is necessary - they pose no threat to us - they want sovereignty and peace! Iran is in fact being victimized by Bush and his co-horts with all this war talk.


and let's get the facts straight

- Ahmadinejad never said Israel should be "wiped off the map"

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/jonathan_steele/2006/06/post_155.html

- Ahmadinejad has never denied the reality of the holocaust

do we need to paint a picture of it???

let's just get to the truth and move on from there

there are legitimate questions about the nature of the holocaust...
51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis (sorry, i know that opens a big can of worms, but it seemed necessary)

spiral out

Kenny Olav wrote:

and let's get the facts straight

- Ahmadinejad never said Israel should be "wiped off the map"

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/jonathan_steele/2006/06/post_155.html

- Ahmadinejad has never denied the reality of the holocaust

do we need to paint a picture of it???

let's just get to the truth and move on from there

I couldn't agree more with you, as far as i can see he has said nothing wrong, but then some of us have actually taken the time to read his entire speech and not just belived the twisted media propaganda.

Gary Carter

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

No matter what I am just glad they did not let this person visit ground zero

i agree. i say let him speak here all he wants, then can he look as dumb as bush.there both alike in so many ways.ya know whats really sad that people in america dont realize that people in iran HATE this guy.i wish the people iran would rise up and overthrow him.

Heineken Helen

jeffbr wrote:

Yes. But what I've learned from the people on this board is that the US should stay out of other people's business. We simply can do nothing right. I am much more of an isolationist at this point. Since we're damned if we do and damned if we don't, I choose to be damned for taking the less expensive (in dollars and lives) way out of an issue. North Korea and Darfur? They're on their own. We are not welcome or wanted. We are not the world's police. Live and let die.

if you feel your country is such a victim :rolleyes: would you not support an initiative to make the UN stronger rather than try and minimise its power every chance you get? This way you're helping the world police itself.

Heineken Helen

metsfan531941 wrote:

ya know whats really sad that people in america dont realize that people in iran HATE this guy.i wish the people iran would rise up and overthrow him.

Change each use of 'Iran' to 'America' and 'America' to 'Iran' and that would actually make sense to me... other than that, how many Iranians do you know? You must know quite a lot of them if you want Americans to know how much Iranians hate this guy.

even flow?

Even after watching the whining from outside the university did anybody think that the dean was going to kiss the guy's ass. As much as I think the dean took a couple of free shots to get the ball rolling, the Prez took it as a man and countered with some interesting comments.

Not allowing a guy like that to speak because you have been bred to hate a country you know fuck all about dosen't make it any better for you being enlightened a tad more to what goes on in this world. I read the comments from people I can't stand on this board, but it dosen't mean I have to buy into what they say.

Then again most of the protesters come from a country where they are proud to show off and use US made weapons. But heaven forbid somebody arm the other side of the coin and just be doing what your great nation is doing. Oh my!

know1

I fully supported Columbia's right to have him speak there, but I thought the very un-diplomatic baiting of the guy by Columbia's president was wrong.

Heineken Helen

know1 wrote:

I fully supported Columbia's right to have him speak there, but I thought the very un-diplomatic baiting of the guy by Columbia's president was wrong.

you should hear the shit we give OUR Taoiseach (prime minister) here . It's only right to be able to ask difficult questions of our world leaders. That's why they're in that position... they should have an answer and explanation for everything they do on 'our' behalf.

know1

Heineken Helen wrote:

you should hear the shit we give OUR Taoiseach (prime minister) here . It's only right to be able to ask difficult questions of our world leaders. That's why they're in that position... they should have an answer and explanation for everything they do on 'our' behalf.

I would agree, but since we do not treat any other world leaders that way, it looks bad to single him out.

Heineken Helen

know1 wrote:

I would agree, but since we do not treat any other world leaders that way, it looks bad to single him out.

Possibly... I think it's different in the states.

I remember when Bush came here and was interviewed by Carol coleman... most of us were rueing the fact that Miriam O'Callaghan (EXCELLENT interviewer... no skirting issues) was on maternity leave and were thinking Coleman went easy on him and typical Irish pandering to Bush :rolleyes:

Bush was FURIOUS with her, the whitehouse called for her resignation, RTE gave her a promotion to Washington correspondent... and Bush hasn't been back in Ireland since all in all quite a happy outcome.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Heineken Helen wrote:

Possibly... I think it's different in the states.

I remember when Bush came here and was interviewed by Carol coleman... most of us were rueing the fact that Miriam O'Callaghan (EXCELLENT interviewer... no skirting issues) was on maternity leave and were thinking Coleman went easy on him and typical Irish pandering to Bush :rolleyes:

Bush was FURIOUS with her, the whitehouse called for her resignation, RTE gave her a promotion to Washington correspondent... and Bush hasn't been back in Ireland since all in all quite a happy outcome.

im sure Mr. Bush isnt shedding any tears about not being back to Ireland ...........

Heineken Helen

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

im sure Mr. Bush isnt shedding any tears about not being back to Ireland ...........

doubtful... since he's been a prick to us since the beginning. We don't want him here either. The only other time he was here... the media got pictures of him in his vest they tried to shut the media up too... didn't happen

Ireland hasn't been a good country for him

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Heineken Helen wrote:

doubtful... since he's been a prick to us since the beginning. We don't want him here either. The only other time he was here... the media got pictures of him in his vest they tried to shut the media up too... didn't happen

Ireland hasn't been a good country for him

in his vest???

i dont get it.....

Open

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

im sure Mr. Bush isnt shedding any tears about not being back to Ireland ...........

"Mr. Bush" hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaha

Heineken Helen

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

in his vest???

i dont get it.....

His vest... on the balcony in the castle he was staying in :rolleyes:

basically his underwear he didn't like it. Nobody else liked it either but oh how we all laughed

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Heineken Helen wrote:

His vest... on the balcony in the castle he was staying in :rolleyes:

basically his underwear he didn't like it. Nobody else liked it either but oh how we all laughed

like i said....

im sure he wasnt too impressed with ireland.............

Heineken Helen

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

like i said....

im sure he wasnt too impressed with ireland.............

well why would he be? He wasn't supposed to be... we weren't giving him an opportunity to try and get Irish american votes. We certainly didn't extend our traditional welcome to the prick

http://www.spinwatch.org/content/view/3185/8/

g under p

It amazes me that the Iranian President is demonized by the American media and the President of Columbia University. It seems so easy to do with it fits a particular agenda, a precursor to war. Ahmadinejad is just a figure head in Iran, he has no political power unlike Mr. Bush and all his Executive privileges and wanting more just short of dictatorship. It's like the Queen in England, she has no political power, just someone with their picture on the pound.

We don't after the real power brokers in Iran because Ahmadinejad is such an easy target to demonize sort of like how we did with Saddam. Makes it more convienient to go in and Bomb a few more million people and he's awarded the title of the "little dictator" if that's the case we certainly have "Big/huge dictator" right here in this country.

Peace

darthvedder81

g under p wrote:

It amazes me that the Iranian President is demonized by the American media and the President of Columbia University. It seems so easy to do with it fits a particular agenda, a precursor to war. Ahmadinejad is just a figure head in Iran, he has no political power unlike Mr. Bush and all his Executive privileges and wanting more just short of dictatorship. It's like the Queen in England, she has no political power, just someone with their picture on the pound.

We don't after the real power brokers in Iran because Ahmadinejad is such an easy target to demonize sort of like how we did with Saddam. Makes it more convienient to go in and Bomb a few more million people and he's awarded the title of the "little dictator" if that's the case we certainly have "Big/huge dictator" right here in this country.

Peace

Oh please. How is our President a dictator? Has he sent people into your home? Or given you orders and ultimatums that are punishable with death if not obeyed? Give me some tangible examples, not frothing leftist hyperbole.

Incredible how the left will follow anything or anybody right off the cliff in the name of "tolerance". It's their only virtue even in the face of evil bastards like Ahmadinejad.

g under p

darthvedder81 wrote:

Oh please. How is our President a dictator? Has he sent people into your home? Or given you orders and ultimatums that are punishable with death if not obeyed? Give me some tangible examples, not frothing leftist hyperbole.

Incredible how the left will follow anything or anybody right off the cliff in the name of "tolerance". It's their only virtue even in the face of evil bastards like Ahmadinejad.

He's done basically the same thing just in a more subtle way. If he was just as obvious as Ahmadinejad the American people would or should rise up against him. However as it is we softly sit by and let him rule as more amd more of our rights fall by the wayside just in the this war on terror.

Rights we'll never see coming back anytime soon no matter who's the next President.

Peace

RainDog

darthvedder81 wrote:

Oh please. How is our President a dictator? Has he sent people into your home?

Does it have to be his home, or will any homes do?

darthvedder81 wrote:

Or given you orders and ultimatums that are punishable with death if not obeyed?

Well, he does support capital punishment. Sure, it's not as extreme as Iran's capital punishment, but it's still State Ordered Death (albeit it's slightly more "liberal" in the U.S. - slightly more "left wing").

darthvedder81 wrote:

Incredible how the left will follow anything or anybody right off the cliff in the name of "tolerance". It's their only virtue even in the face of evil bastards like Ahmadinejad.

Not wanting to invade a country because their puppet leader thinks we're all evil or something does not necessarily translate into undying - cliff jumping support for said puppet leader. It simply means that we see no reason to invade their country.