President Ahmadinejad's Speech at Columbia University

[Gorgon]

I believe the definition of terrorist is someone who kills random civilians specifically for effect, a tactic that has yet to prove a winner in any example I can think of.

 

Not that I think the Iranian infiltrators burdened by moral consideratins.

[Calax]

You also forgot to mention Iranian terrorists currently in Iraq killing U.S. soldiers

which is the same as saying somthing along the lines of there are US people currently in Iraq killing Iraqi's. It's all about the point of view. You seem to forget that in Iraq, we weren't wanted and were the aggressor.

[Yuusha]

@GreasyDogMeat:

Just about everything after 1979 has reason, or was a tragic mistake (shooting down the airline). After kidnapping embassy staff you honestly think the U.S. is going to be nicey nicey with Iran?

What about before 1979? The US had no right to remove democratically elected government of Iran and then installed a dictator.

 

What about Chile? I'm sure you're aware that Augusto Pinochet was also a dictator installed by the US. Do you know how many Chileans died because of him?

 

Presidnet Arbenz of Guatemala was also forcibly removed by the US. 200.000 Guatemalans died in the process. The list goes on and on.

 

Tragic mistakes? I don't think so.

 

You also forgot to mention Iranian terrorists currently in Iraq killing U.S. soldiers, which makes me wonder whatever events you have failed to mention/copy and paste.

What are the US soldiers doing in Iraq again? They on a camping trip?

 

http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_iran.html

 

Again, I don't remember calling Iran 'evil'. Your hero Ahmadinejad, on the other hand... You call me a blind patriot yet you are unwilling to admit anything negative about Ahmadinejad. Blind patriot indeed.

That's a great site innit? Here's another great site http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/

 

Mr. Ahmadinejad is a great man. He knows that not all Jewish people are Zionists, so he avoids sweeping generalizations. He even invited a number of orthodox Jews to his conference regarding the historical validity of the holocaust.

 

Now if Mr. Ahmadinejad is as apocalyptic as you claimed to be, there wouldn't be a single Jew left alive in Iran today.

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

 

 

@Hurlshot:

Bah Yuusha didn't address my question

 

Why do you keep ignoring the free love movement we've got going here? Pull up a bean bag chair, enjoy a brownie, and watch the stars move to some Pink Floyd.

LOL. You mean I get to hang around a bunch of 'eager' chicks while getting high? I could definitely see the fun in it.

 

But tell me something, what is the definition of 'free love?' I'm not trying to make a point or start a debate, I'm just curious. Contrary to what someone here said, I am NOT a hippie.

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

 

 

@Tigranes:

A matrix of biased sources does not result in objectivity, because you come from a particular background and thought and you come with your own biases in analysing these coverages, because unless you believe everything every isngle oone of them say, you are applying your own standards of judgments on them. You are more likely to empathise with pro-Muslim sources; you are more likely to approach big name conservative Western media as deceptive, just to name examples. And if you hold any delusions about you making 'objective and rational' judgments about them 'purely on merit'.... nobody does that. Nobody can.

My point is that I'm able to acquire a lot of information regarding Muslims extremists and radicals. I know about 9/11 and other atrocities committed by Muslims because I, to a certain degree, hear both sides of the story. Muslim terrorists DO exist

and I recognize and acknowledge that FACT. Most of us moderate Muslims do.

 

The average American on the other hand do not understand WHY the US is being targeted by terrorists.

 

But this is where I return to what I've been saying - I think the first step would be to have a purpose that has nothing to do with the West (or rather, US foreign policy). Rather than your primary purpose or motivation being, say, for Muslim nations to break out of the negative influences of US foreign policy or 'show those bastards something', I think the important thing is to conceptualise a proper Muslim identity and state and work to achieve *that*; the rejection of US foreign policy is only a side effect. That's not the most important thing. Showing them who's the boss isn't the main thing. But your comments are coloured with that extreme distaste and hostility and if that drives you primarily, it can only end with sorrow.

I agree much with what you say. Although I must point out that I think what you're proposing here is a bit unrealistic. The US government would never allow any Muslim country to achieve certain level of developments. Be it through economic strangulations or military actions (this is an opinion and should only be treated as such). The US would never allow anything /anyone to threaten their hegemony. So even if we were to surrender Palestine and let Israel have their way, we won't ever be truly free to govern our own destiny. At the moment, we Muslims are a threat to the west. And I fear this is how it will remain for many more years to come.

[Atreides]

But this is where I return to what I've been saying - I think the first step would be to have a purpose that has nothing to do with the West (or rather, US foreign policy). Rather than your primary purpose or motivation being, say, for Muslim nations to break out of the negative influences of US foreign policy or 'show those bastards something', I think the important thing is to conceptualise a proper Muslim identity and state and work to achieve *that*; the rejection of US foreign policy is only a side effect. That's not the most important thing. Showing them who's the boss isn't the main thing. But your comments are coloured with that extreme distaste and hostility and if that drives you primarily, it can only end with sorrow.

I agree much with what you say. Although I must point out that I think what you're proposing here is a bit unrealistic. The US government would never allow any Muslim country to achieve certain level of developments. Be it through economic strangulations or military actions (this is an opinion and should only be treated as such). The US would never allow anything /anyone to threaten their hegemony. So even if we were to surrender Palestine and let Israel have their way, we won't ever be truly free to govern our own destiny. At the moment, we Muslims are a threat to the west. And I fear this is how it will remain for many more years to come.

What do you think of China's projected rise to rival the USA?

[Tigranes]

My point is that I'm able to acquire a lot of information regarding Muslims extremists and radicals. I know about 9/11 and other atrocities committed by Muslims because I, to a certain degree, hear both sides of the story. Muslim terrorists DO exist

and I recognize and acknowledge that FACT. Most of us moderate Muslims do.

 

The average American on the other hand do not understand WHY the US is being targeted by terrorists.

 

The thing is, your idea (unless you've lived on the US for a few years?) of the 'average American' can be pretty biased as well. In fact, the 'average American' in terms of the 'war on terrorism' especially is a thus far un-quantifiable chimera, and it's difficult to tell how many are the typical Texan stereotype that can't tell which hemisphere of the globe North Korea is on and thinks America is the best in the world spreading its awesomeness all over, and how many are the cynic, or the pacifist, or whatever. I think it's a big and rash call to say that most Americans don't understand the situation at all.

 

I do concede that you are in a more advantageous position to collect more data. But I question whether your interpretation of that data is suitable, especially from the way you speak of 'fact' and 'information'. There isn't a single version of history that makes it possible to tell what happened, why, where, when, and be certain. For example, how do you know that some of your Muslim sources (whose names I wouldn't even know) are not biased, and inflate, say, an Israeli bomb misfiring to kill 10 palestinians to a planned atrocity on a 100 palestinians?

 

The US would never allow anything /anyone to threaten their hegemony. So even if we were to surrender Palestine and let Israel have their way, we won't ever be truly free to govern our own destiny. At the moment, we Muslims are a threat to the west.

 

While your rhetoric would put off many Westerners, in a way this isn't wrong. Though I would argue that the current situation of animosity is only worsened by the reaction of some Muslim minorities (as well as US foreign policy, the Western media's portrayal of Muslims, the Muslim media and organisations' portrayal of the West, and so forth). But it's like two kids fighting in the mud - they ain't never gonna stop at the same time, before somebody gets hurt. Equally, if one kid just puts up his hands and says let's stop, he'll get pummelled. My proposition isn't intended as a solution to the problem; it's a preliminary step to the solution, rather, that the Muslims can take. There are steps the West can take, too, and others. But I'm not concerned here with what, say, the average American should or could do. Because no matter what vitriol you might spit at them, you won't affect that, Yuusha. What you and your 'side' in the conflict can do, is ensure that the terrorist, radical minority of the Muslim cease to represent the rest of Muslim so inaccurately, by refusing them your support; by ensuring that when an idiot 'journalist' calls Palestinian suicide bombers 'honourable', they are shouted down by the Muslims who actually live by the fatwa, not just use it for their own ends.

[Gorgon]

Why would you have a conference on the historical validity of the holocaust, unless you're retarded that is.

[Guest The Architect]

I'm convinced that Yuusha has me on ignore.

[Hurlshort]

I'm an American, and I spent last Saturday at a Mosque for Ramadan with 80 of my middle schoolers. They are all Americans too, although i didn't check their papers. Many parents were there too. It was an open house, so there were city council members, Christian clergy, and I think a few Buddhists there as well.

 

The US and Israel are not the Islamic world's biggest problem. The fact that Sunni's and Shi'ites bomb one another is. No Muslim country is going to achieve real economic success until fellow Muslims learn to live side by side in peace, even if there views on Islam differ.

 

But hey, Christianity went through all this for centuries. Christian denominations were at each other's throats, but in the last century it has been relatively quiet.

[Gorgon]

It has always been easier to unite against a common percieved enemy than getting along with oneanother.

[Rosbjerg]

It has always been easier to unite against a common percieved enemy than getting along with oneanother.

 

damn Swedes..

 

-

 

as a footnote I'd like to add that a very interesting documentary has been produced here in Denmark, partly in response to that whole Prophet Muhammed, blessed be his name, cartoon crisis. Incidentally very few of the Imams, who instigated the riots, saw the cartoons - several militant muslims circulated false pictures to several Mosques, supposedly in order to escalate the situation.

It would seem that certain political extremes in both the West and East are very interested in keeping the pot brewing. Much like in the Cold War era. This could very well be the kick off for a new Cold War (I don't hope anyone is stupid enough to launch an actual fullscale war of ideology) - it'll be interesting to see how China will place itself in this.

[Tale]

Woohoo, new cold war!

 

Does this mean we'll get kickbutt movies about secret agents some 30 years hence with fresh new material?

[Rosbjerg]

yeah - and they'll be about how BOTH Cold Wars were actually just a prelude for a much darker conspiracy that is taken form and everyone in the 20th and 21st century were totally fooled by it..

 

It's gonna be more awesome than that time I travelled to North Korea with Ted Danson, in order to singlehandedly stop the terrorist threat! *insert random Family Guy clip*

- cut to next scene -

[Yuusha]

Mr. Ahmadinejad's official blog. Edited October 8, 2007 by Yuusha

[Sand]

Nice link. I might have to share a few words with him.

[Volourn]

I find it funny that people seem to feel that the Palestinians are 'owed' land that wasn't even originally theirs to begin with. R00fles!

 

As for Prez Scumbag, the guy is nothing but The Chosen One for the people who have real power in Iran - The Ayatollahs of Rocknrollas.

 

Some of the guy's views, and other nonsense include the below crap, and I'm sure there's disgusting stuff he is for/has done that i don't even know of:

 

1. Believes the Holocaust didn't happen or at least is a myth in how it did happen despite any credible proof.

 

2. Wants to eradicate an ENTIRE country. I repeat he wants to eradicate an ENTIRE country.

 

3. Is so delusional that he 'honestly' believes his country has NO homsexuals. Give me a break. You may be powerful due to the dictators backing your presidency; but even you don't have that kind of power, Dumbnuts.

 

4. Doesn't give a damn about Palestinians as evidenced by the refugess in iran thata re STILL in (concentration) camps and haven't been allowed to just live their lives in Iran; but are instead segrated and forced to remain poor and dependent on the Iran's government 'good graces'.

 

5. Full support of terrorists, and 'freedom' fighters going into Iraq and intervering in that country's battle to save itself all the while bashing the US for intervering in that country. Look into the mirror, Buddy.

 

 

The list goes on, I'm sure... No justification for any of those to be sure.

[Meshugger]

Maybe i misjudged him. He seems really like a pretty swell guy.

[Dark_Raven]

A swell guy he is. He helps the poor and pats babies on the head.

[Walsingham]

Yuusha, I've only had time to read a few of your posts, for which I apologise. I do, however question the notion he is a 'great man'. I have a long list of points, but can you give me your opinion on the fact that homosexuals are publicly executed on TV in Iran? Or the fact that at another of his conferences a delegate praised Hitler for his genocidal attitude to te jews, saying it was analogous to 'jihad'?