Ahmadinejad Gives US TV Interview

124

Comments

  • NMyTree
    NMyTree Posts: 2,374
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    I apologize for mis-understanding your intent....


    No biggie. :)
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    beemster wrote:
    You gotta understand something, some of these people who post on this board, are from Canada, and for some reason many, many Canadians seem to have a soft spot for dictators and for communist type leaders and the rhetoric they spew. I know he suppose to be democratically elected, still doesn't give him or any other world leader the right to preach hate.


    I believe that comes from our past and present politicians, probably as we debate this, some of our past Prime Ministers are in Cuba holding the hand of Castro praying with the family.

    Hell the protest held in Quebec that displayed hezbollah flags, thier were members of parliament participating.

    However, I as a fellow Canadian have no use for the leaders of countries like Iran, Cuba, NK and other countries like that.

    That Hezbollah flag incident was indeed fucking disgusting. Sorry, but I do not want such a display to happen in this country.
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    beemster wrote:
    You gotta understand something, some of these people who post on this board, are from Canada, and for some reason many, many Canadians seem to have a soft spot for dictators and for communist type leaders and the rhetoric they spew. I know he suppose to be democratically elected, still doesn't give him or any other world leader the right to preach hate.


    I believe that comes from our past and present politicians, probably as we debate this, some of our past Prime Ministers are in Cuba holding the hand of Castro praying with the family.

    Hell the protest held in Quebec that displayed hezbollah flags, thier were members of parliament participating.

    However, I as a fellow Canadian have no use for the leaders of countries like Iran, Cuba, NK and other countries like that.

    Well according to someone at the demonstration there were a handful of people holding Hezbollah flags...hardly constitues the purpose of the demonstarion as disgusting...if you want to use that logic I think it is disgusting people at Pro-Israel rallies supporting current and future military actions.....however lots where there defending the right for the country to defend itslef and were not war-mongereres calling for more action...but I bet there were also a handful looking for increased strike which in my books goes hand in hand with Hezbollah...both morons...Nasralleh and Olmert both fools IMHO.....I will stay in the middle denouncing both sides....and that is what our nation should be doing.....and we are not.....
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    Well according to someone at the demonstration there were a handful of people holding Hezbollah flags...hardly constitues the purpose of the demonstarion as disgusting...if you want to use that logic I think it is disgusting people at Pro-Israel rallies supporting current and future military actions.....however lots where there defending the right for the country to defend itslef and were not war-mongereres calling for more action...but I bet there were also a handful looking for increased strike which in my books goes hand in hand with Hezbollah...both morons...Nasralleh and Olmert both fools IMHO.....I will stay in the middle denouncing both sides....and that is what our nation should be doing.....and we are not.....

    I am OK with the idea of the protest. As usual, there were a few people there giving the thing a bad name.
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    reborncareerist wrote:
    I am OK with the idea of the protest. As usual, there were a few people there giving the thing a bad name.

    Yeah but I fail to see how the National Post will label the demonstration as pro-terrorist but will not share the same gall to call the Pro-Israeli demonstration pro-war.....
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    Yeah but I fail to see how the National Post will label the demonstration as pro-terrorist but will not share the same gall to call the Pro-Israeli demonstration pro-war.....

    Was there anything at the pro-Israeli demonstration that glorified the deaths of Lebanese civilians, or that otherwise suggested that the humanitarian crisis in Lebanon is a good thing? One could argue that the entire demonstration did this, but then again, one can also argue that the entire pro-Lebanon demonstration was also pro-terrorist.
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    reborncareerist wrote:
    Was there anything at the pro-Israeli demonstration that glorified the deaths of Lebanese civilians, or that otherwise suggested that the humanitarian crisis in Lebanon is a good thing? One could argue that the entire demonstration did this, but then again, one can also argue that the entire pro-Lebanon demonstration was also pro-terrorist.

    Exactly I agree...but it is disgusting that a national newspaper because a handful of idiots labelled the entire demonstration has pro-terrorist....its brutal..all it does is sabatoge the goals of the peace movement...once again slandering a good view and objective....Im saying that would never happen at the other rally where there was undoubtly those there that support increased conflict...

    BTW I think a lot of people are believing pro-Lebanon is pro-terrorist...just look at this board anything done that condenms Israel (even when you back-up a statement ripping Hezbollah is terrorist sympathizer, kooky Liberal...I am saying this absurd view by the paper is just creating more thinking along that pattern...more smearing of an actual peace movement...sickening when people for peace get slandered this way...
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    Exactly I agree...but it is disgusting that a national newspaper because a handful of idiots labelled the entire demonstration has pro-terrorist....its brutal..all it does is sabatoge the goals of the peace movement...once again slandering a good view and objective....Im saying that would never happen at the other rally where there was undoubtly those there that support increased conflict...

    BTW I think a lot of people are believing pro-Lebanon is pro-terrorist...just look at this board anything done that condenms Israel (even when you back-up a statement ripping Hezbollah is terrorist sympathizer, kooky Liberal...I am saying this absurd view by the paper is just creating more thinking along that pattern...more smearing of an actual peace movement...sickening when people for peace get slandered this way...

    Yeah, I agree that that label slapped on the entire demonstration was dumb. I am guessing it was a matter of people focusing on the one bad element in an otherwise appropriate demonstration. Questions in my mind include things like: Why would those people be waving those flags in the first place? Why would other protestors permit them to do this? Let's say, hypothetically, that I went to the earlier mentioned pro-Israel demonstration, and while I was there, some idiot started pulling out racist signs and yelling about how all those dirty Lebanese deserve what they get for harboring Hizbollah. Now, I am not sure exactly where this would get me (a fight?), but you can bet I'd tell him to shut up and stop ruining the demonstration for people who don't actually condone civilian deaths. Why would pro-peace people let their fellow demonstrators wave the flag of a terrorist organization, such an action is pretty much antithetical to peace. What's going to ruin the peace movement is its association with extremists. Bad press from the National Post wouldn't happen if people didn't give them ammo.
  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    While I dont know what specific event you are talking about (too lazy to read back several pages) I would say this about it. Peaceful protests are exactly about that. Being peaceful. Now if some yahoos like described crashed the whole thing, I would think they were idiots and give them some pretty ugly looks. Then again, that's freedom of speech for you. You cant stop these people from being there, and saying stuff. But you can ignore them in light of the larger activity around them. So that they weren't beat down by the other protesters, says nothing about the other protesters' sympathies. It might just as well be their good manners. Just saying.

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    reborncareerist wrote:
    Yeah, I agree that that label slapped on the entire demonstration was dumb. I am guessing it was a matter of people focusing on the one bad element in an otherwise appropriate demonstration. Questions in my mind include things like: Why would those people be waving those flags in the first place? Why would other protestors permit them to do this? Let's say, hypothetically, that I went to the earlier mentioned pro-Israel demonstration, and while I was there, some idiot started pulling out racist signs and yelling about how all those dirty Lebanese deserve what they get for harboring Hizbollah. Now, I am not sure exactly where this would get me (a fight?), but you can bet I'd tell him to shut up and stop ruining the demonstration for people who don't actually condone civilian deaths. Why would pro-peace people let their fellow demonstrators wave the flag of a terrorist organization, such an action is pretty much antithetical to peace. What's going to ruin the peace movement is its association with extremists. Bad press from the National Post wouldn't happen if people didn't give them ammo.

    But its their right to attend is it not...you cannot simply to ask them to leave....its their right to be there....that is one big problem...like refer to thankyougrandma he was there.....

    And yes it does go against the movement...I agree with you...but the fact remains that I believe this newspaper went overboard and did not portray the real picture...why could they not single out the idioits instead of making it the headline piece...right there they are sabatoging the movement....that disturbs me cause it leads to more pro-terrorist banter when at that rally less than 0.10% of the people there were idiots.....but the NP makes it as though there were 100% idioits.....that is just not right....
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    But its their right to attend is it not...you cannot simply to ask them to leave....its their right to be there....that is one big problem...like refer to thankyougrandma he was there.....

    And yes it does go against the movement...I agree with you...but the fact remains that I believe this newspaper went overboard and did not portray the real picture...why could they not single out the idioits instead of making it the headline piece...right there they are sabatoging the movement....that disturbs me cause it leads to more pro-terrorist banter when at that rally less than 0.10% of the people there were idiots.....but the NP makes it as though there were 100% idioits.....that is just not right....

    Its their right to attend, true. And their detractors at the National Post also have a right to complain about their behavior. Anyhow, like I said ... I cannot disagree with the basic thrust of your post. It would be nice if the NP had handled their feature in a more respectful manner. Obviously not everyone there was a Hizbollah supporter, and they should have been able to decry the flag wavers without casting the entire protest in a negative light.
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Personally, I think I would have attended this protest had it occured in my neck of the woods. But I'd have left when the Hiz flags started being waved.
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    reborncareerist wrote:
    Its their right to attend, true. And their detractors at the National Post also have a right to complain about their behavior. Anyhow, like I said ... I cannot disagree with the basic thrust of your post. It would be nice if the NP had handled their feature in a more respectful manner. Obviously not everyone there was a Hizbollah supporter, and they should have been able to decry the flag wavers without casting the entire protest in a negative light.

    A little balance would have been nice....portray those dozen people as fools then say that only about another 15,000 were there for peace would have been better....
  • Laz
    Laz Posts: 118
    hailhailkc wrote:
    You'll have to forgive me if I don't take this guy seriously. You know, since he's already called for the destruction of Israel, and things of that nature. That's beside the point though…

    I found it interesting that when I was reading his words, most of what he said seemed to echo the sentiments and rhetoric of some of those on this very message board. I think you could take elements of the quote, attribute a few board member names to it, and no one would ever be the wiser.

    Fair is fair though. I think most of those same board members on here really DO want peace, whereas this jackass is just spewing crap.

    how can you say he's not for these things? allow me to correctly interpret his words:

    today is the era of thoughts (thoughts to kill the Israelites)

    today is the era of dialogue (saying the phrase "wipe Israel off the face of the earth" is a form of dialogue)

    today is the era of cultural exchange (we welcome his people into our culture and his people give us their culture, one of death and fascism)

    see, the dude wasn't joking...
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    Acting On Request Of Iranian Prez., C-SPAN To Air Unedited 60 Minutes Interview

    TVNewser | August 11 2006

    This Monday night, for the first time in six years, C-SPAN will air one of Mike Wallace's 60 Minutes interviews uncut and commercial-free.

    Portions of Wallace's interview with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are set to air on Sunday. CBS has given C-SPAN permission to air the 60 Minutes segment followed by "Wallace's entire 90-minute interview." C-SPAN's press release says: "According to CBS News, the request to air the entire interview on C-SPAN came directly from President Ahmadinejad."

    C-SPAN programming VP Terry Murphy says "we agreed with CBS News that airing this interview in its entirety is very much in the public interest and fits with C-SPAN's style of airing events as they happened and without commercials. This is also a unique opportunity for viewers to see for themselves the editorial process at a major network news organization, and find out which portions of an extended interview actually make it on air."

    C-SPAN aired Wallace's uncut interviews in 1997, 1999, and 2000, as well
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    Acting On Request Of Iranian Prez., C-SPAN To Air Unedited 60 Minutes Interview

    TVNewser | August 11 2006

    This Monday night, for the first time in six years, C-SPAN will air one of Mike Wallace's 60 Minutes interviews uncut and commercial-free.

    Portions of Wallace's interview with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are set to air on Sunday. CBS has given C-SPAN permission to air the 60 Minutes segment followed by "Wallace's entire 90-minute interview." C-SPAN's press release says: "According to CBS News, the request to air the entire interview on C-SPAN came directly from President Ahmadinejad."

    C-SPAN programming VP Terry Murphy says "we agreed with CBS News that airing this interview in its entirety is very much in the public interest and fits with C-SPAN's style of airing events as they happened and without commercials. This is also a unique opportunity for viewers to see for themselves the editorial process at a major network news organization, and find out which portions of an extended interview actually make it on air."

    C-SPAN aired Wallace's uncut interviews in 1997, 1999, and 2000, as well

    Sehr gut!

    I can't watch it though, let me know what is said. ;)
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • binauralsounds
    binauralsounds Posts: 1,357
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Sehr gut!

    I can't watch it though, let me know what is said. ;)

    ROFLMAO! Anyhoo.. on 2nd thought, I might have to watch this side show. Just for kicks and grins. Why not.
  • PaperPlates
    PaperPlates Posts: 1,745
    binauralsounds wrote:
    ROFLMAO! Anyhoo.. on 2nd thought, I might have to watch this side show. Just for kicks and grins. Why not.

    Not me, Im holding out for Truthout.org's interview with Kim Jong-Il.
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad
  • binauralsounds
    binauralsounds Posts: 1,357
    PaperPlates wrote:
    Not me, Im holding out for Truthout.org's interview with Kim Jong-Il.

    almost spit out my coke :D:D
  • PaperPlates
    PaperPlates Posts: 1,745
    binauralsounds wrote:
    almost spit out my coke :D:D


    I knew you'd like that one. ;)
    Why go home

    www.myspace.com/jensvad

Categories