And guess what that makes Iran.

Now, go put on your bombing vest and draw your 'I hate Israel' cartoons and since you are an Iranian American eat a Big Mac too.

Moving along after that piece of shit pointless comment. I am not going to villify the President of Iran you know why? To fucking easy.

Everyone can make all the fucking excuses for that guy all they want, they can say all they want to make him look like not a dick. But facts are facts, he hates Isreal.

Hates it.

Hates Jews.

You know that's why he had his little anti-semetic cartoon contest, his the 'holocaust' is fake conference, and supports terrorism!

That is why we keep finding Iraqi insugents supplied with Iranian weapons, because he wants to be our friend. But I say let him talk, let him speak, because at the end of the day?

Never forget he is what he is, and all his smoke and mirrors won't change it.

Furthermore, from what I heard? The reason they didn't want him to visit Ground Zero was mostly security and safety concerns, the same reason they don't want nearly anyone to visit it now-adays.

Oh yeah, and my last point: He wasn't president in 2001.

Go fig.

Now you all may commence calling me stupid, ignorant, or simple.

If you had posted that image with your first post, I wouldn't have had a problem with it (per se. I would be shocked, but it's the type of image to shock people.) Instead you put up that "LOLZ HE'S KISSING A GUY" image, which makes you a child.

It's totally absurd to try to keep those we disagree with from speaking. However, I heard an interesting comment made by a conservative commentator on Fox News, believe it or not. He wondered how a university that no doubt has an iron-clad policy against "hate speech" and wouldn't hesitate to expel/fire students/professors for saying something that was deemed "harmful" enough, would invite someone like Ahmadinejad to speak-- as a distinguished guest, no less. The point is that political correctness, insofar as it stifles hateful or offensive speech, is not unlike the hysteria you're seeing being whipped up by the right wing because of Ahmadinejad.

Yeah you know why you don't have the phenomenon? Because they are executed.

I was doing some research, and did you know that Canada, Amnesty International, and Human Rights watch all think Ahmadinejad's regime has a poor human rights record.

You know, because he is such a swell guy. A guy who banned a ton of words for being 'too western', and also:

From Wikipedia
The translation of his statement has been disputed. Iran's foreign minister stated that Ahmadinejad had been "misunderstood": "He is talking about the regime. We do not recognise legally this regime."[118] Some experts state that the phrase in question is more accurately translated as "eliminated" or "wiped off" or "wiped away" from "the page of time" or "the pages of history", rather than "wiped off the map".[119] Reviewing the controversy over the translation, New York Times deputy foreign editor Ethan Bronner observed that "all official translations" of the comments, including the foreign ministry and president's office, "refer to wiping Israel away".[120]

Ahmadinejad has compared Israel's actions in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict to Adolf Hitler's actions during World War II saying that "Just like Hitler, the Zionist regime is just looking for a pretext for launching military attacks" and "is now acting just like him."[121]

On August 8, 2006, he gave a television interview to Mike Wallace, a correspondent for 60 Minutes, in which he questioned American support of Israel's "murderous regime" and the moral grounds for Israel's invasion of Lebanon.[11]

Nice, eh?

I just love when people start off speeches like this

Gives me a warm fuzzy feeling all over

Futhermore, because I am on a roll! Two more points:

1. He referred to Isreal as a stain on the Islamic world.
2. Everyone knows that Mordor is New Jersey.

I believe he also said he would drive the jews into the sea.

I'm mildly amused by the fact that there's probably more Americans who fit the stereotype from the first commenter than there are Iranians who fit the picture you drew. But I'm easily amused.

Plural ... comments ... yours up to that point definitely qualified as "piece of shit pointless" as well in the grand scheme of things and using the definition you seemed to by applying.

I'm lazy, and this really isn't a sarcastic request, honest ... can you pretty please go quote a few of the places where people are trying to make him look like he's not a dick? There seems be fairly unanimous agreement that he is, in fact, a dick, from my inspection of the comments thus far .. but its late, I might have missed the flood of "i heart Ahmadinejad" comments.

Well at least you qualified this with "from what I heard" so you aren't saying you're definitively correct.

I expect the "security and safety" that could be an issue would have to have been that nobody wanted to have to deal with protecting him from assassination while near the site ... that's remotely plausible.

But uh, unless by "visit it" you mean actually descend into the construction site (formally known as "the pile"), you can walk right up to the fence surrounding it, enter the NJ PATH train station that actually does go down into the pit, and buy all manner of 9/11 commemorative merchandise every 10 paces or so from the people tripping over themselves trying to sell it to you. There's next to nothing that's super secure about the site at this point. It is, in fact, a tourist destination in all the glory of NYC tourist destinations.

In fact, I believe I read about the safety and security concerns in the Pile as you call it in the Newspaper.

But I'll be damned if I remember who wrote it.

I'm sorry as a child of the 80's? You say Iran and I remember a flood of people burning american flags and chanting 'Death to the Great Satan!'.

Much better then what I think of when I think of them now.

And okay, maybe you are right! Maybe there is no flood of 'I love that guy!' letters, but this shit of:

'Oh, he didn't mean that. He didn't mean this. He's misunderstood. We should talk to him and open a discussion because he's not that bad!' shit is fucking stupid.

I say we talk to him, but I don't believe a word that comes out of his mouth so why bother.


More from Wikipedia:
Richard Krege maintains the allegation of diesel exhaust gas chambers to be an "outright lie," and showed a model of the Treblinka extermination camp to illustrate this.[21] He claimed that up to 10,000 people died in the camp, and of disease, not extermination. Most historians believe that at least 800,000 prisoners were murdered in the camp.[21]

"There is no scientific proof to show that this place was an extermination camp. All that exists are the words of some people," he said .[21]

On the second day of the conference, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad predicted the disintegration of the Israeli regime once again, saying that, "The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon the same way the Soviet Union was, and humanity will achieve freedom".[22] He said elections should be held among "Jews, Christians and Muslims so the population of Palestine can select their government and destiny for themselves in a democratic manner."[22]

By the way, there is one Jew in their parliment.

One.

To my knowledge and interpretation of the posts up until this point, no one is saying that Ahmadinejad is a nice, upstanding Mandela-type figure. You seem to be interpreting our defense of letting him speak as an endorsement of his actions and character. As many here have pointed out, letting him speak has highlighted precisely why he's not going to invited to the Rose Garden anytime soon.

I don't think the issue has ever been about where he's ranked on the warm-fuzzy scale. It's been about the childishness of not letting someone speak because you disagree with them. This patently Bushian maneuver will hopefully go the way of the dodo with his administration in January of 09.

The other point was that SURPRISE! the US was calling the kettle black and is guilty of (in varying degrees) many of the same things we vilify Iran for. Both sides are tuning up their war drums, and the last thing the hawks on both sides want is to hear the other side talk. See, talking could potentially lead to peaceful resolution. Terrifying.

Now hopefully FTR will forgive me my synopsis.

If FTR could lick Osama's taint he would, then he would write an in depth article on SG news about it. Then again its the degenerates like him that claim Bush flew remote controlled planes into the WTC, global warming is so out of control that we'll all die by 2020 etc. Instead of responding to people on here that have countered him with factual responses he will dig into profile and recant with statement's like "you are a drunk" etc. Well Ted Kennedy is a drunk, killed his wife in an accident and is an icon to liberals. Shouldn't drunks be idol's of yours then friend?

I'm going to have to spend some additional time searching for a reference for that, but the immediate results turned up this tidbit ...

"On 11 October 1961 Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion declared in the Israeli Knesset:

'The Arabs' exit from Palestine...began immediately after the UN resolution, from the areas earmarked for the Jewish state. And we have explicit documents testifying that they left Palestine following instructions by the Arab leaders, with the Mufti at their head, under the assumption that the invasion of the Arab armies at the expiration of the Mandate will destroy the Jewish state and push all the Jews into the sea, dead or alive'.

...

The phrase has been variously attributed by Zionist supporters to Yasser Arafat, Gamel Abdul Nasser, or any other of Israel's enemies, but none whom I have challenged, including U S Congressman Henry Waxman who made the claim in a letter to me, attributing the phrase to Nasser, have been able to provide any documentation of support for their claim. This 1961 speech certainly predates Arafat's 1968 ascension to the head of the PLO. The phrase is very much entrenched in the thinking of Israel supporters and is taken as a factual basis for an Arab intent of Genocide and of their own potential for peril.

The speech by Mr. Ben Gurion appears to be the origin of the phrase. A search of the speeches of Gamel Abdul Nasser fails to reveal it, nor does it reveal any other than a pragmatics approach to his dealing with Israel. This phrase is sufficiently dramatic and threatening so that if it was in fact uttered by a significant Arab leader, it would be prominent and easily found in any competent historical treatment, which it is not. The phrase, thus, has a Jewish origin and not an Arab origin. Mr Ben Gurion is the originator of the phrase, in all likelihood."

But yeah, without an exhaustive search of everything he's stated publicly ... it's certainly possible that he uttered the oft-used phrase. I'm afraid its going to take more that your belief though to make it fact.

He's certainly no friend of Isreal after all ... which we all pretty much unanimously agree upon.

And just in case ppl still need the clarification, none of my comments above imply that I think Ahmadinejad is anything other than, to borrow a phrase, an asshole fuckface.

I get that, but I personally think there are too many people who give this knee-jerk 'Bush is making this guy into a fucking boogie-man scenario'.

By the way, I am sure nearly every country in the world is guilty of those things in varying degrees, but again there are far too many people who seem to assume that America is the only one guilty.

Pretty much and I would also like to add to that the fact that quoting wikipedia is borderline retarded.

The reason there is one Jew in parliament in Iran is because there are only 20,000 Jews living in the country. And quite happily from what I have read. Or else they would have, you know, MOVED.