Turning Ahmadinejad into public enemy No. 1

thats true but russia came from the east were no great countries are so the 1/3rd that wasnt killed by the ussr was the important part of the axis. and russia had only their country to lose, they wouldent of helped anyone if the u.s. stayed isolationized.
 
Holy cow, what the fuck are you guys saying. Are you defending this hitler character?

1. He is a "end-times" religous nut job, not some academic. He actually believes that it is his role to bring about the comming of the 12th iman - He is READY and WILLINGING to nuke Isreal to start what he hoinestly believes is the end-times battle against the anti-christ (USA). He openly states this at the beginning of every speech he gives.

2. He STATED at Columbia that killing gays is analogous to preventing "the spread of deadly microbes to the youth". He justifies it and you all appluaded him and laughed. He stated THIS! Yet you defend him, he justified KILLING homosexuals and said it was no different then our justice system at work.

3. He allows women to be STONED TO DEATH for modest infractions of sharia law.

4. Minutes before he took of to fly to our nation he was giving a speech infront of missle batteries that has DEATH TO AMERICA written on them

5. He is pursuing nukes yet you laugh and jeer the US for trying to protect the world

It is the same as 1935 all over again, and you fucktards are so smart as to know better, he is just a good guy huh?

I hope you don't lose any relatives when he launches nukes into Isreal and kills more people in 6-minutes than Hitler did in six years.

 
Of course not, but Germany became a threat to them when they were attacked on that front...

I think hitler was stupid by breaking that alliance... the soviet Union was a powerful force even then...
 
its funny how his approval rating in iran improves when he defies united states requests, but declines when the united states leaves him alone.

 
We never said he was a nice guy. We are saying it'd be fucking stupid and pointless to invade him. Not to mention suicide over what? He says a few things? By the way, he never mentioned to wipe Isreal off the map. Iran has NEVER ONCE attacked another country in offense.
 
ya ive heard so much bad stuff about him but everytime ive read an interveiw or watched him on tv his ideas seem pretty legitamite and down to earth.
 
I agree a military strike would be disaster - they would wipe out the gulf refineries, close down the strgt of homuz and send nearly 1000 missles into isreal -

but if we do nothing - Isreal WILL take em down and the rest of the world will be impacted -

furthermore, it can be argued that Russia is running a proxy war through Iran and they and possibly China would not take an Isreali strike lightly

we really kicked the hornets nest by fucking up the Iraq war

I pray that we make the right choices, if we don't, our nation and our lives could be VERY different then they are today -

Did you know that they also kill students who speak out against their leader?

They also kill you if you convert from Islam to another religon...

President Akcgheemsnddd was also one of the hostage takers
 
No, a military strike on Iran could ignite world war three... with us being the germans in this case, and the LOSERS.

And if we do nothing, which we should do, and Israel DOES attack, then fuck that, we wont be their ally anymore, because thats just bullshit.

And yes, they will kill anyone who speaks out against the leaders in that country, because the leaders are islamic religion leaders. Speaking out against them is like speaking out against allah in their minds. (it would be like speaking against the pope... if italy was still run by the pope)

and yaeh, they will kill if you convert, because it is against islamic religion to convert.
 
Most of Europe, China, and Russia would both be against us... cmon.

I'm pretty sure we would be fucked...

whether it be actual killing people kind of war, or an economical war, we would be fucked I think.

Unless we had a SERIOUSLY legitimate reason to attack Iran (such as a pearl harbour situation... not a gulf of tonkin) I have a feeling that the rest of the world would be VERY upset, and we would in effect be fucked bro.
 
Okay yeah, nobody would be too happy about it. But WWIIII? I dont think so..

I mean the other World Wars were over World domination.

I'm pretty sure thats not what the Bush administration is looking for.

I see your point, but i think your just exaggerating a little bit.
 
1. Bush is also an "end-times" religous nut job, not some academic. I believe he was a C stduent. Perhaps he also actually believes that it is his role to bring about the rapture. He is READY and WILLINGING to nuke Iran to start what he hoinestly believes is the end-times battle.

He (Iran's Prez) openly states this at the beginning of every speech he gives.

-Could you please provide me with a direct qoute from iran's president were he says this, along with the source it came from?

2. He STATED at Columbia that killing gays is analogous to preventing "the spread of deadly microbes to the youth". He justifies it and you all appluaded him and laughed. He stated THIS! Yet you defend him, he justified KILLING homosexuals and said it was no different then our justice system at work.

-Could you please provide me with a direct qoute from iran's president were he says this, along with the source it came from?

President of Iran starts talking at

3. He allows women to be STONED TO DEATH for modest infractions of sharia law.

-Again can I please have a reliable resource that can prove this?

4. Minutes before he took of to fly to our nation he was giving a speech infront of missle batteries that has DEATH TO AMERICA written on them

-Again can I please have a reliable resource that can prove this?

5. He is pursuing nukes yet you laugh and jeer the US for trying to protect the world

-He has repeatedly said his country is not pursuring a nuclear waepon. he simply states that his country is following its lawful legal right to pursue nuclear energy for the people of his country. The IAEA has even stated repeatedly that they have no evidence that iran has been pursuing any sort of nuclear weapons program. THose are the insepctors who are there that iran lets be there legally and they say otherwise.

Iran nothing to hide. Please stop demonizing a country and president who have done nothing wrong. It is complete bullshit that we can demonize another country for not having perfect human rights when our country is occupying another sovergn country as we speak and our occupying army is killing this countries civilians by the hundreds yet its totally ok to ignore that fact and demonize another country whos wrong doings are not on the same level. The united states has a long long history of much more fucked up human rights abuses than Iran. I'm just fed up with all this bullshit. Our country is going to the shitter and people dont even realize it.
 
and BUSH ACTAULLY HAS NUKES wouldn't that lead you to believe he is a much larger threat to the security of the world. The shit some of you people say is so hypocritical it makes my eyes want burst out of my head, There are always 2 sides to an issue and nobody wants to look at them both. Perhaps thats why our country sucks so bad.
 
No, no, no. I was agreeing with you up until that point. No it's not as much as a threat because we created the technology and used it. We know of the power and devastation it can cause so we only use nukes as a deterrent. This is why we, Russia and other nuclear powers have the right to have a say in which countries can have nuclear weapon capability and which cant. Think of it like a parent keeping matches from a kid. A parent could start an uncontrollable fire, but is far less likely to do so than the child because the parent understands the dangers of matches.
 
it isn't so much that nukes are dangerous, which they are. the main reason however is that when a country gets a nuclear weapon they also receive a level of immunity on the world stage. once iran gets a nuclear weapon, they are free to do what they want because if anyone tries to intervene militarily then iran may use the weapon. secondly israel has nukes and if iran ever used a nuke on israel, israel would implement their samson option which would take the middle east out with them. it is a form of MAD that the russians and the americans have, but only for the middle east. nuclear weapons = immunity which = security.
 
we have only used nukes as a detterent since the last time we used them. But due to some changes in the military nukes can now be used as an offensive weapon. thats why we have bunker busting nukes and all that. People in the current administration are actually for using nuclear weapons offensively. Also i believe it is bullshit that some people try to compare Ahmadinejad to hilter purly because of his different view on the holocaust. If anyone could be compared to hitler it would be the leaders of Isreal or the United States who have attacked soveregn nations (lebanon in the case of Israel and Iraq in the case of the US) These types of actions are much more fucked up than having a different view on a horrible incident in human history that happened more than 50 years ago. How long are we going to let the holocaust and 9/11 be reasons for aggression and preversion of the truth? I'm just pissed because our country is morally bankrupt and nobody seems to give a shit. Its a sad state of affairs folks, and a lot of your opinions just reaffirm to me how morally bankrupt this country has become.
 
Does Iran's President wants Israel wiped off the map?

To raze Israel to the ground, to batter down, to destroy, to annihilate, to liquidate, to erase Israel, to wipe it off the map - this is what Iran's President demanded - at least this is what we read about or heard of at the end of October 2005. Spreading the news was very effective. This is a declaration of war they said. Obviously government and media were at one with their indignation. It goes around the world.

But let's take a closer look at what Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said. It is a merit of the 'New York Times' that they placed the complete speech at our disposal. Here's an excerpt from the publication dated 2005-10-30:

"They say it is not possible to have a world without the United States and Zionism. But you know that this is a possible goal and slogan. Let's take a step back. [[[We had a hostile regime in this country which was undemocratic, armed to the teeth and, with SAVAK, its security apparatus of SAVAK [the intelligence bureau of the Shah of Iran's government] watched everyone. An environment of terror existed.]]] When our dear Imam [Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the Iranian revolution] said that the regime must be removed, many of those who claimed to be politically well-informed said it was not possible. All the corrupt governments were in support of the regime when Imam Khomeini started his movement. [[[All the Western and Eastern countries supported the regime even after the massacre of September 7 [1978] ]]] and said the removal of the regime was not possible. But our people resisted and it is 27 years now that we have survived without a regime dependent on the United States. The tyranny of the East and the West over the world should have to end, but weak people who can see only what lies in front of them cannot believe this. Who would believe that one day we could witness the collapse of the Eastern Empire? But we could watch its fall in our lifetime. And it collapsed in a way that we have to refer to libraries because no trace of it is left. Imam [Khomeini] said Saddam must go and he said he would grow weaker than anyone could imagine. Now you see the man who spoke with such arrogance ten years ago that one would have thought he was immortal, is being tried in his own country in handcuffs and shackles [[[by those who he believed supported him and with whose backing he committed his crimes]]]. Our dear Imam said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime [Israel] has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world."

(source: www.nytimes.com, based on a publication of 'Iranian Students News Agency' (ISNA) -- insertions by the New York Times in squared brackets -- passages in triple squared brackets will be left blank in the MEMRI version printed below)

It's becoming clear. The statements of the Iranian President have been reflected by the media in a manipulated way. Iran's President betokens the removal of the regimes, that are in power in Israel and in the USA, to be possible aim for the future. This is correct. But he never demands the elimination or annihilation of Israel. He reveals that changes are potential. The Shah-Regime being supported by the USA in its own country has been vanquished. The eastern governance of the Soviet Union collapsed. Saddam Hussein's dominion drew to a close. Referring to this he voices his aspiration that changes will also be feasible in Israel respectively in Palestine. He adduces Ayatollah Khomeini referring to the Shah-Regime who in this context said that the regime (meaning the Shah-Regime) should be removed.

Certainly, Ahmadinejad translates this quotation about a change of regime into the occupied Palestine. This has to be legitimate. To long for modified political conditions in a country is a world-wide day-to-day business by all means. But to commute a demand for removal of a 'regime' into a demand for removal of a state is serious deception and dangerous demagogy.

This is one chapter of the war against Iran that has already begun with the words of Georg Meggle, professor of philosophy at the university of Leipzig - namely with the probably most important phase, the phase of propaganda.

Marginally we want to mention that it was the former US Vice-Minister of Defence and current President of the World Bank, Paul D. Wolfowitz, who in Sept. 2001 talked about ending states in public and without any kind of awe. And it was the father of George W. Bush who started the discussion about a winnable nuclear war if only the survival of an elite is assured.

Let's pick an example: the German online-news-magazine tagesschau.de writes the following about Iran's president on 2005-10-27: "There is no doubt: the new wave of assaults in Palestine will erase the stigma in countenance of the Islamic world." Instead of using the original word 'wave' they write 'wave of assaults'. This replacement of the original text is what we call disinformation. E.g. it would be correct to say: "The new movement in Palestine will erase the stain of disgrace from the Islamic world." Additionally this statement refers to the occupation regime mentioned in the previous sentence.

As a precaution we will examine a different translation of the speech - a version prepared by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), located in Washington:

"They [ask]: 'Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?' But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved. [[[...]]] "'When the dear Imam [Khomeini] said that [the Shah's] regime must go, and that we demand a world without dependent governments, many people who claimed to have political and other knowledge [asked], 'Is it possible [that the Shah's regime can be toppled]?' That day, when Imam [Khomeini] began his movement, all the powers supported [the Shah's] corrupt regime [[[...]]] and said it was not possible. However, our nation stood firm, and by now we have, for 27 years, been living without a government dependent on America. Imam [Khomeni] said: 'The rule of the East [U.S.S.R.] and of the West [U.S.] should be ended.' But the weak people who saw only the tiny world near them did not believe it. Nobody believed that we would one day witness the collapse of the Eastern Imperialism [i.e. the U.S.S.R], and said it was an iron regime. But in our short lifetime we have witnessed how this regime collapsed in such a way that we must look for it in libraries, and we can find no literature about it. Imam [Khomeini] said that Saddam [Hussein] must go, and that he would be humiliated in a way that was unprecedented. And what do you see today? A man who, 10 years ago, spoke as proudly as if he would live for eternity is today chained by the feet, and is now being tried in his own country [[[...]]] Imam [Khomeini] said: 'This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history.' This sentence is very wise. The issue of Palestine is not an issue on which we can compromise. Is it possible that an [Islamic] front allows another front [i.e. country] to arise in its [own] heart? This means defeat, and he who accepts the existence of this regime [i.e. Israel] in fact signs the defeat of the Islamic world. In his battle against the World of Arrogance, our dear Imam [Khomeini] set the regime occupying Qods [Jerusalem] as the target of his fight. I do not doubt that the new wave which has begun in our dear Palestine and which today we are also witnessing in the Islamic world is a wave of morality which has spread all over the Islamic world. Very soon, this stain of disgrace [i.e. Israel] will vanish from the center of the Islamic world - and this is attainable."

(source: http://memri.org, based on the publication of 'Iranian Students News Agency' (ISNA) -- insertions by MEMRI in squared brackets -- missing passages compared to the 'New York Times' in triple squared brackets)

The term 'map' to which the media refer at length does not even appear. Whereas the 'New York Times' said: "Our dear Imam said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map" the version by MEMRI is: "Imam [Khomeini] said: This regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history."

MEMRI added the following prefixed formulation to their translation as a kind of title: "Very Soon, This Stain of Disgrace [i.e. Israel] Will Be Purged From the Center of the Islamic World - and This is Attainable". Thereby they take it out of context by using the insertion 'i.e. Israel' they distort the meaning on purpose. The temporal tapering 'very soon' does not appear in the NY-Times-translation either. Besides it is striking that MEMRI deleted all passages in their translation which characterize the US-supported Shah-Regime as a regime of terror and at the same time show the true character of US-American policy.

An independent translation of the original (like the version published by ISNA) yields that Ahmadinejad does not use the term 'map'. He quotes Ayatollah Khomeini's assertion that the occupation regime must vanish from this world - literally translated: from the arena of times. Correspondingly: there is no space for an occupation regime in this world respectively in this time. The formulation 'wipe off the map' used by the 'New York Times' is a very free and aggravating interpretation which is equivalent to 'razing something to the ground' or 'annihilating something'. The downwelling translation, first into English ('wipe off the map'), then from English to German - and all literally ('von der Landkarte löschen') - makes us stride away from the original more and more. The perfidious thing about this translation is that the expression 'map' can only be used in one (intentional) way: a state can be removed from a map but not a regime, about which Ahmadinejad is actually speaking.

 
An independent translation of the original (like the version published by ISNA) yields that Ahmadinejad does not use the term 'map'. He quotes Ayatollah Khomeini's assertion that the occupation regime must vanish from this world - literally translated: from the arena of times. Correspondingly: there is no space for an occupation regime in this world respectively in this time. The formulation 'wipe off the map' used by the 'New York Times' is a very free and aggravating interpretation which is equivalent to 'razing something to the ground' or 'annihilating something'. The downwelling translation, first into English ('wipe off the map'), then from English to German - and all literally ('von der Landkarte löschen') - makes us stride away from the original more and more. The perfidious thing about this translation is that the expression 'map' can only be used in one (intentional) way: a state can be removed from a map but not a regime, about which Ahmadinejad is actually speaking.

Again following the independent translation: "I have no doubt that the new movement taking place in our dear Palestine is a spiritual movement which is spanning the entire Islamic world and which will soon remove this stain of disgrace from the Islamic world".

It must be allowed to ask how it is possible that 'spirtual movement' resp. 'wave of morality' (as translated by MEMRI) and 'wave of assaults' can be equated and translated (like e.g tagesschau.de published it).

Does Iran's President deny the Holocaust?

"The German government condemned the repetitive offending anti-Israel statements by Ahmadinejad to be shocking. Such behaviour is not tolerable, Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier stated. [...] Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel proclaimed Ahmadinejad's statements to be 'inconceivable'" (published by tagesschau.de 2005-12-14.

But not only the German Foreign Minister Steinmeier and the Federal Chancellor Merkel allege this, but the Bild-Zeitung, tagesschau.de, parts of the peace movement, US-President George W. Bush, the 'Papers for German and international politics', CNN, the Heinrich-Böll-Foundation, almost the entire world does so, too: Iran's President Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust.

What is this assertion based on? In substance it is based on dispatches of 2 days - 2005-12-14 and 2006-02-11.

"The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stepped up his verbal attacks against Israel and the Western states and has denied the Holocaust. Instead of making Israel's attacks against Palestine a subject of discussion 'the Western states devote their energy to the fairy-tale of the massacre against the Jews', Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday in a speech at Zahedan in the south-east of Iran which was broadcasted directly by the news-channel Khabar. That day he stated that if the Western states really believe in the assassination of six million Jews in W.W. II they should put a piece of land in Europe, in the USA, Canada or Alaska at Israel's disposal." - dispatch of the German press agency DPA, 2005-12-14.

The German TV-station n24 spreads the following on 2006-12-14 using the title 'Iran's President calls the Holocaust a myth': "The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stepped up his verbal attacks against Israel and called the Holocaust a 'myth' used as a pretext by the Europeans to found a Jewish state in the center of the Islamic world . 'In the name of the Holocaust they have created a myth and regard it to be worthier than God, religion and the prophets' the Iranian head of state said."

The Iranian press agency IRNA renders Ahmadinejad on 2005-12-14 as follows: "'If the Europeans are telling the truth in their claim that they have killed six million Jews in the Holocaust during the World War II - which seems they are right in their claim because they insist on it and arrest and imprison those who oppose it, why the Palestinian nation should pay for the crime. Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions.' [...] 'If you have committed the crimes so give a piece of your land somewhere in Europe or America and Canada or Alaska to them to set up their own state there.' [...] Ahmadinejad said some have created a myth on holocaust and hold it even higher than the very belief in religion and prophets [...] The president further said, 'If your civilization consists of aggression, displacing the oppressed nations, suppressing justice-seeking voices and spreading injustice and poverty for the majority of people on the earth, then we say it out loud that we despise your hollow civilization.'"

There again we find the quotation already rendered by n24: "In the name of the Holocaust they created a myth." We can see that this is completely different from what is published by e.g. the DPA - the massacre against the Jews is a fairy-tale. What Ahmadinejad does is not denying the Holocaust. No! It is dealing out criticism against the mendacity of the imperialistic powers who use the Holocaust to muzzle critical voices and to achieve advantages concerning the legitimization of a planned war. This is criticism against the exploitation of the Holocaust.

CNN (2005-12-15) renders as follows: "If you have burned the Jews why don't you give a piece of Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to Israel. Our question is, if you have committed this huge crime, why should the innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime?"

The Washingtonian ''Middle East Media Research Institute' (MEMRI) renders Ahmadinejad's statements from 2005-12-14 as follows: "...we ask you: if you indeed committed this great crime, why should the oppressed people of Palestine be punished for it? * [...] If you committed a crime, you yourselves should pay for it. Our offer was and remains as follows: If you committed a crime, it is only appropriate that you place a piece of your land at their disposal - a piece of Europe, of America, of Canada, or of Alaska - so they can establish their own state. Rest assured that if you do so, the Iranian people will voice no objection."

The MEMRI-rendering uses the relieving translation 'great crime' and misappropriates the following sentence at the * marked passage: "Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions." This sentence has obviously been left out deliberately because it would intimate why the Israeli state could have forfeited the right to establish itself in Palestine - videlicet because of its aggressive expansionist policy against the people of Palestine, ignoring any law of nations and disobeying all UN-resolutions.

In spite of the variability referring to the rendering of the statements of Iran's President we should nevertheless note down: the reproach of denying the Holocaust cannot be sustained if Ahmadinejad speaks of a great and huge crime that has been done to the Jews.

In another IRNA-dispatch (2005-12-14) the Arabian author Ghazi Abu Daqa writes about Ahmadinejad: "The Iranian president has nothing against the followers of Judaism [...] Ahmadinejad is against Zionism as well as its expansionist and occupying policy. That is why he managed to declare to the world with courage that there is no place for the Zionist regime in the world civilized community."

It's no wonder that such opinions do not go down particularly well with the ideas of the centers of power in the Western world. But for this reason they are not wrong right away. Dealing out criticism against the aggressive policy of the Western world, to which Israel belongs as well, is not yet anti-Semitism. We should at least to give audience to this kind of criticism - even if it is a problematic field for us.

2006-02-11 Ahmadinejad said according to IRNA: "[...] the real holocaust should be sought in Palestine, where the blood of the oppressed nation is shed every day and Iraq, where the defenceless Muslim people are killed daily. [...] 'Some western governments, in particular the US, approve of the sacrilege on the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), while denial of the >Myth of Holocaust
 
1.) Bush is not trying to start the end-times that is absolutely false....the fact is that Ahmadinejad is part of a religion that feels it is their duty to exterminate the infidels before the coming of the 12th Iman. Do some research on it....Ahmadinejad extends invitations at the beginning of each of his speechs to convert the "infidels"

As far as a direct quote. At the beginning of each of his speeches he quotes the Basmala, which is a set of suras from the Quran that ask for pity and sympathy for the "infidels" or unbelievers of Islam and to provide pity on the infidels soul because of what must happen.

2.) It has always been a fact in Iran that if you are gay you will be punished by death or torture. There have been several international cases between Iran from 2004-2007 where Iranian men sentenced to death for homosexuality have tried to leave for other countries such as Japan, The Netherlands and even pleaded their case to the UN. But still were sentenced to death. Here is text from the Iranian law:

Sodomy is a crime for which both partners can be punished by death, if the participants are adults, of sound mind and consenting; the method of execution is for the Shari'a judge to decide. A non-adult who engages in consensual sodomy is subject to a punishment of 74 lashes. (Articles 108 to 113) Sodomy is proved either if a person confesses four times to having committed sodomy or by the testimony of four righteous men. Testimony of women alone or together with a man does not prove sodomy. (Articles 114 to 119). "Tafhiz" (the rubbing of the thighs or buttocks) and the like committed by two men is punished by 100 lashes. On the fourth occasion, the punishment is death. (Articles 121 and 122). If two men "stand naked under one cover without any necessity", both are punished with up to 99 lashes; if a man "kisses another with lust" the punishment is 60 lashes. (Articles 123 and 124). If sodomy, or the lesser crimes referred to above, are proved by confession, and the person concerned repents, the Shari'a judge may request that he be pardoned. If a person who has committed the lesser crimes referred to above repents before the giving of testimony by the witnesses, the punishment is quashed

3.) It is also a fact women are treated unequally in Iran....how you can argue that point is pretty remarkable.

Last summer a group of women were arrested and detained for a feminist gathering for equal rights. Yeah soo since they are treated so equal they just have they feminist gatherings for fun....right?

"Police dispersed a group of activists who had gathered at the Haft-e Tir square in Tehran on Monday, reportedly using pepper spray and beating up some of the protestors. The group was staging a demonstration calling for equal treatment for women under the Iranian law and better protection of their rights. The Iranian Justice minister Jamal Karimirad later said that 70 people were detained in connection with the event, of whom 42 were women." (June 13, 2006)

4.) "On the eve of his trip to New York City, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stood before a banner blaring "Death to America," showed off his military might and declared his extremist regime will not bow to Western pressure." that is from http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/23/2007-09-23_irans_ahmadinejad_issues_new_threats_aga.html

In the same going away party speech he also said how his missiles could easily reach American and Israeli functions in the Gulf.

------No one is trying to demonize anyone....but just keep letting Ahmadinejad pull the sheets over your eyes..I have nothing against the Iranian people..but its the crazys and their parliaments and their terrorist friends who can ruin it for the whole lot
 


Hopefully those on this site born in the 90s are aware of the events with Iran in the 80s.

But given how the US military went after Afghanistan and Iraq, Iran probably won't risk anything while Bush is still in office. Maybe they're gearing up for something.

And didn't POWDER mag just go there? I think I saw an Iran article at my parents house recently. Next journalist to go there should be Borat dressed like a Nazi recently come out of hiding in Argentina.
 
ok whatever, see the two long posts above yours. i would love for you to read those and prove to me that Ahmadinejad denied the holocaust or wants israel wiped off the map
 
ps you didnt even address either of these points

5. He is pursuing nukes yet you laugh and jeer the US for trying to protect the world

-He has repeatedly said his country is not pursuring a nuclear waepon. he simply states that his country is following its lawful legal right to pursue nuclear energy for the people of his country. The IAEA has even stated repeatedly that they have no evidence that iran has been pursuing any sort of nuclear weapons program. THose are the insepctors who are there that iran lets be there legally and they say otherwise.

Iran nothing to hide. Please stop demonizing a country and president who have done nothing wrong. It is complete bullshit that we can demonize another country for not having perfect human rights when our country is occupying another sovergn country as we speak and our occupying army is killing this countries civilians by the hundreds yet its totally ok to ignore that fact and demonize another country whos wrong doings are not on the same level. The united states has a long long history of much more fucked up human rights abuses than Iran. I'm just fed up with all this bullshit. Our country is going to the shitter and people dont even realize it.
 
ok whatever, see the two long posts above yours. i would love for you to read those and prove to me that Ahmadinejad denied the holocaust or wants israel wiped off the map
 
fact is....Ahmadinejad can say all he wants about how he is perfect and everything is fine and dandy...but talk is just that...talk
 
exactly and actions speak much louder than words. which is why i wish you could atleast realize or admit that israel and the united states have easily done more fucked up things than Iran.
 
and perhaps if we addressed how fucked up our own country is right now we could stop worrying about other countries that are peaceful and dont like to invade other countries illegally and against international law. DO YOU NOT SEE THE HYPOCRACY
 
Benditto I respect your opinion but unless something monumentous happens, It will be hard to change my views. Simply you have yours I have mine...and its healthy to have "debates". I am not trying to change your view.....its just a forum to express my own...
 
please address these points thats all i'm asking

How long are we going to let the holocaust and 9/11 be reasons for aggression and preversion of the truth? I'm just pissed because our country is morally bankrupt and nobody seems to give a shit. Its a sad state of affairs folks. The united states has a long long history of much more fucked up human rights abuses than Iran. I'm just fed up with all this bullshit. Our country is going to the shitter and people dont even realize it or care.
 
The US has been home to some attrocious acts of human rights...thats true. I wasn't using those facts of execution of gays or unequal treatment of women in Iran to justify the invasion of Iran or whatever. I stated those facts because you downplayed they even existed. Which they most certainly do. As far as Ahmadinejad goes..he is a dangerous person and it is simply the facts that he is ushering in the end-times according to his religion.
 
doesnt it say there in the article that there was no evidence of nuclear weapons programs? they checked the country and the nuclear shit is for energy purposes. 

and to who said their moving to canada, i think i may be right there with you, im gettin sick of this bullshit.
 
Quite honestly, I don't think the neocons actually expect to fight a war in Iran - they know we are already over extended in Iraq (not to mention under extended in Afgahistan). No way we could invade there, and most people understand the difference between the Iranian people, who are more and more rejecting the revolution of 1979 and want to normalize relations with the West, and the leadership, which is a product of and expression of religious extremism. The thing is however, you can't remove the possibility of a military response from negotiations - as diplomatic options become fewer, we have to, at least in theory, be willing to take some military measures or there is no motivation. This is international politics 101. It's highly distasteful (why can't we all get along...kum-ba-ja!) but in the real world you have to be willing to back up your positions.

On nuclear energy, I just keep wondering why a nation with such a huge amount of the world's oil reserves needs a civilian nuke program. Makes no sense. Are we to believe that the Iranians are uber concerned about blobal warming and burning fossil fuels? They have one of the best natural climates for solar energy - why not pursue that instead? I just don't buy that their uranium enrichment program is wholly for peaceful ends. Not when they won't let international inspectors in. Not when they have called for Israel to be wiped off the map. Not when they are sitting on huge oil reserves and could easily pursue solar. Honestly, I think some people are so anti-war that they are willfully blind to these simple realities.

I hope the people of Iran rise up, peacefully if at all possible, and that nation evolves. I hope the proxy war they are fighting against the US and against a stable government in Iraq that if fair to the Kurds and Sunnis is brought to an end. I want our troops home as soon as possible like any one else with a heart. I don't want my son to be drafted to finish the job in the middle east that was begun in haste in such a half assed way by Halliburton and their boy, Mr. Bush. I want international inspectors to be allowed into Iran to prove that their atomic program is peaceful. But I also honestly think that none of these things can happen unless we and the rest of the world are willing to strike militarily if they go the other way and sincere diplomacy is getting no results at all.

 
I have to respond to your utter and complete ignorance. You may think you are an open minded empathetic global thinker, but in reality you are dangerously misguided.

You ask for sources? Ok.

1. On his used of end-times verbage - From UN speech this week

"O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace."

From Columbia address -

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Oh, God, hasten the arrival of Imam al- Mahdi and grant him good health and victory, and make us his followers and those who attest to his (rightfulness ?).

Now explain you hatred for Bush...and JUSTIFY your hatred of our country

2. On Homosexuals and refering them to a dangerous contagion

But as for the executions, I'd like to raise two questions. If someone comes and establishes a network for illicit drug trafficking that affects the (use ?) in Iran, Turkey, Europe, the United States by introducing these illicit drugs and destroys them, would you ever reward them? People who lead the lives -- cause the deterioration of the lives of hundreds of millions of youth around the world, including in Iran, can we have any sympathy to them? Don't you have capital punishment in the United States? You do, too. (Applause.)

In Iran, too, there's capital punishment for illicit drug traffickers, for people who violate the rights of people.

If somebody takes up a gun, goes into a house, kills a group of people there, and then tries to take ransom, how would you confront them in Iran with -- in the United States? Would you reward them? Can a physician allow microbes, symbolically speaking, to spread across a nation? We have laws. People who violate the public rights of the people by using guns, killing people, creating insecurity, sell drugs, distribute drugs at a high level are sentenced to execution in Iran, and some of these punishments -- very few are carried in the public eye, before the public eye. It's a law based on democratic principles. You use injections and microbes to kill these people, and they are executed or they're hung, but the end result is killing.

MR. COATSWORTH: (Off mike) -- and drug smugglers. The question was about sexual preference and women. (Applause.)

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: In Iran, we don't have homosexuals like in your country. (Laughter.) We don't have that in our country. (Booing.) In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have it. (Laughter.)

Source - AP news (as all referenced quotes are)

3. On stoning women to death - From AP news

The Iranian Penal Code is very specific about the manner of execution and types of stones which should be used. Article 102 states that men will be buried up to their waists and women up to their breasts for the purpose of execution by stoning. Article 104 states, with reference to the penalty for adultery, that the stones used should “not be large enough to kill the person by one or two strikes, nor should they be so small that they could not be defined as stones”.

Your position is pathetic and the fact that you hate our country so much just proves how sad your stance is.

Keep defending this guy...

BTW....where do you learn to hate so much?

 
Just thought I would repost this since it got buried by mine and benditto's small talk:

1.) Bush is not trying to start the end-times that is absolutely false....the fact is that Ahmadinejad is part of a religion that feels it is their duty to exterminate the infidels before the coming of the 12th Iman. Do some research on it....Ahmadinejad extends invitations at the beginning of each of his speechs to convert the "infidels"

As far as a direct quote. At the beginning of each of his speeches he quotes the Basmala, which is a set of suras from the Quran that ask for pity and sympathy for the "infidels" or unbelievers of Islam and to provide pity on the infidels soul because of what must happen.

2.) It has always been a fact in Iran that if you are gay you will be punished by death or torture. There have been several international cases between Iran from 2004-2007 where Iranian men sentenced to death for homosexuality have tried to leave for other countries such as Japan, The Netherlands and even pleaded their case to the UN. But still were sentenced to death. Here is text from the Iranian law:

Sodomy is a crime for which both partners can be punished by death, if the participants are adults, of sound mind and consenting; the method of execution is for the Shari'a judge to decide. A non-adult who engages in consensual sodomy is subject to a punishment of 74 lashes. (Articles 108 to 113) Sodomy is proved either if a person confesses four times to having committed sodomy or by the testimony of four righteous men. Testimony of women alone or together with a man does not prove sodomy. (Articles 114 to 119). "Tafhiz" (the rubbing of the thighs or buttocks) and the like committed by two men is punished by 100 lashes. On the fourth occasion, the punishment is death. (Articles 121 and 122). If two men "stand naked under one cover without any necessity", both are punished with up to 99 lashes; if a man "kisses another with lust" the punishment is 60 lashes. (Articles 123 and 124). If sodomy, or the lesser crimes referred to above, are proved by confession, and the person concerned repents, the Shari'a judge may request that he be pardoned. If a person who has committed the lesser crimes referred to above repents before the giving of testimony by the witnesses, the punishment is quashed

3.) It is also a fact women are treated unequally in Iran....how you can argue that point is pretty remarkable.

Last summer a group of women were arrested and detained for a feminist gathering for equal rights. Yeah soo since they are treated so equal they just have they feminist gatherings for fun....right?

"Police dispersed a group of activists who had gathered at the Haft-e Tir square in Tehran on Monday, reportedly using pepper spray and beating up some of the protestors. The group was staging a demonstration calling for equal treatment for women under the Iranian law and better protection of their rights. The Iranian Justice minister Jamal Karimirad later said that 70 people were detained in connection with the event, of whom 42 were women." (June 13, 2006)

4.) "On the eve of his trip to New York City, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stood before a banner blaring "Death to America," showed off his military might and declared his extremist regime will not bow to Western pressure." that is from http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/23/2007-09-23_irans_ahmadinejad_issues_new_threats_aga.html

In the same going away party speech he also said how his missiles could easily reach American and Israeli functions in the Gulf.

------No one is trying to demonize anyone....but just keep letting Ahmadinejad pull the sheets over your eyes..I have nothing against the Iranian people..but its the crazys and their parliaments and their terrorist friends who can ruin it for the whole lot
 
Thats not denial that is minimizing the amount of people that died. That value is highly discussed and not concrete at all since the remains of so many jewish people were irradicated. Thats like saying there were a million native americans in the americas before columbus or any other explorers.
 
As I understand it, he claims that the holocaust is just a "theory" and needs to be studied. This is holocaust denial shrouded (and not very well, I might add) in the clothing of intellectual discourse.

Yes, many of the Jewish bodies were incinerated, but the fact remains that even without bones we know that the number was in excess of 6 million (not to mention gays, political prisoners, gypsies and other undesireables) because these people lived in recent times - they had birth certificates, mariage licenses, union cards and all sorts of other indicia of having existed. These are not people from pre-history about whom we can only speculate. They had relatives who survived and who searched for them. And the Nazis themselves did a very thourough job of keeping records about the identities of who they rounded up, what camps they were assigned to and what became of them. There are literally thousands of historians and tons of artifacts that can be easily pointed to.

It would be great if after Columbia, the United States Holocause Museum in Washington extended an invitation to Ahmadinejad.

Of course if he came, he'd probably claim that the Palestinians have it just as bad today.
 
Well of course it wouldnt be WWIIII because thats impossible.

IIII isnt even a roman numeral...

but I understand anyway.

Also, you must remember that the US IS into world domination. Not in such as destroy a country, and take over it and go from there like Nazi Germany, but as put our corperations EVERYWHERE. I mean, they have mcdonalds in every country on the face of the earth... Including crazy, non-western countries like Burkina Faso, Kyrgizstan, Moldova, etc. etc...

and THAT is what our country does... some countries dont like that, and you can understand why... they want their OWN buisness endeavors to grow and have their OWN markets develop.

Regardless, if the United States, right now... just decided sporadically to invade Iran, there would be HUUUUGE uprising against the government... in other countries as well as our own...
 


thanks for not being retarded like... oh, 90% of the posters on here...

what amuses me is that the people who are on here defending their good iranian buddy are also those who decry the current "neocon" administraion, and who bemoan all things right wing...

you guys know that amedinhajad is like... conservitive times a billion right? i cant believe that youre defending someone who makes bush look like ghandi.
 
Most of us arent actually DEFENDING him in a sense of making him look angelic or something man...

we are simply stating that hes no more criminal than most people.

You must realize that the beliefs that he has are as normal to him as the beliefs that you and I have. Its a little crazy to us to see it his way. He sees us as ridiculus as well.

Bush on the otherhand, well... I believe he could very well be as crazy as Amedinhijad if he had the ability to, but if he did.. being the questionable nature of our government, as well as the people's right to question it, he cannot be so.

There are PLENTY of crazy ass christians in this country... I mean think about the evangelicals that have those gargantuan churches, and then they have random "sick" people come up to the podium, some guy in a white suit starts speaking mad ridiculus jibberish, slaps them on the head and says 'RELEASE THE DEVILS!!!' and they fall to their knees.

Have you ever seen Jesus Camp? Those people are just as nuts as a guy like Amadinijad. Those are the people that pushed to vote in bush, because HE is the hardcore christian that they want.

I'm not anti-christian whatsoever... I'm a raised Catholic... but some people have no common sense with where they see religion... and that is a problem.
 
yea but people dont know for sure if someone walked on water it is 110% confirmed that the holocaust most definitly happened, oh and hes not super bad but i definitly am against a few of his idea's. Oh and not totally on topic but my friends dad is a popo in NYC and he said on 9/11 at several mosks (sp?) in NYC people stood outside and fucking celebrated, they were arrested obviously but were free because we were dead afraid of what might happen if we arrest them. Try seeing that on Fox anyone i bet you cant
 
did you guys see how he was introduced at the speech he made at columbia university? I mean, i don't think that he's a good guy, but if you invite somebody to speak at your school, you might as well show him some god damn respect. they demeaned him in every way possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top