Screw it. I'm not happy that Ahmadinejad is coming to NYC.

[Bicoastal]

He's a Holocaust-denying jerk who has clamped down on civil liberties in his own country and has been a posturing bully on the global stage every since he came into office. (And guess who was responsible for him getting elected? WE were. But I digress...) I personally have no problem with others having a negative reaction towards his wanting to visit Ground Zero. After denying the existence of one of the last century's most notorious and well-documented genocides, who knows what he'll do at the site of a mass murder on OUR soil? Futhermore, who ever gets elected in 2008 needs to show they can deal with his threats fimly--not militaristically, because all his notoriety stems from his ability to make hollow threats, but decisively. Open up a dialogue? Sure--if he drops the rhetoric and shows an inclination to move in that direction. But any world leader who explicitly and repeatedly proclaims they want to bomb ANY country off of the map should be handled at arm's length, with kid gloves.

Still, he wants to come to New York? Fine, let him come. But I'm not happy about it. Yes, he hates Bush, and perhaps even shares some similarities with him, but still--the enemy of your enemy isn't always your friend.

[applegrove]

1. I agree.

[bos1]

54. Iran is to women & gays what South Africa was to blacks.

He should be shunned, barred and protested for those reasons. But the mass murder -- oh, sorry, I mean invasion & occupation -- of Iraq has wrecked the US moral authority to point fingers.

[applegrove]

56. That it has. He and BUsh seem like mirror images of each other with both

of them being mass propagandaists.

[bos1]

59. opposing propagandists are glad to have each other as foils, as punching bags

to distract their own citizens.

Of course if the US attacks Iran, it will in effect justify Ahmadinejad's ravings.

[TwilightZone]

2. "Death to America"

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/23/2007-09-23_irans_ahmadinejad_issues_new_threats_aga.html

And, yet it seems that most DUers are saying that Barack and Hillary are in the wrong for suggesting that he not be allowed to visit Ground Zero. Obama and Clinton have both discussed that he'd just use it as a posturing opportunity.

I must be missing something.

[Clark2008]

10. You are - you're missing the meaning of diplomacy.

Diplomacy means we sometimes have to deal with, and treat fairly, people who we don't like, or even hate.

Seems HRC and Obama are simply siding with the simple and not coming down on the side of diplomacy.

Yes, Ahmadinejad sometimes acts like a certifiable nut (no more so than our own religiously-pandering president, mind you), but he's a powerful certifiable nut. And we MUST deal with him - and the entire region - with diplomacy as an alternative to war.

We really don't need to play into his hands and condemn him for visiting Ground Zero. As far as I know, the people who hijacked those planes were NOT Iranian. They were not funded by the Iranian government and I'm sure many Iranians died in the collapses of those towers. He has as much right to visit Ground Zero as the nut on college campuses who screams that all co-eds are whores.

[TwilightZone]

18. The concepts are not mutually exclusive.

Dealing with him is one thing. Staging a photo op at Ground Zero is another. Diplomacy doesn't require the latter.

He has as much right to visit Ground Zero as the nut on college campuses who screams that all co-eds are whores.

I don't see how the two situations are in any way remotely similar.

[Clark2008]

22. Of course they're similar.

He has as much right to visit tourist sites as any nut, provided he's allowed into the country.

And, he has as much right to stage a Photo Op as Edwards did in New Orleans. I didn't say it was tasteful - I just said he has a right.

This whole thing is stupid - making a big deal out of it is stupid - that's exactly what he wants. If no one said a word, I doubt he'd even go.

[TwilightZone]

40. He has no "right", and neither do most people.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20070921_Iranian_is_denied_ground_zero_visit.html

So who gets access these days to the 16-acre pit where the World Trade Center once stood, a site that many regard as hallowed ground?

Construction workers. The families of victims. The occasional journalist. And not too many others, in stark contrast to the days immediately after Sept. 11, 2001.

[cali]

47. He has zero right to either visit or stage a photo op and

comparing his visit to NY with Edwards to New Orleans, is absurd. Edwards is an American citizen. Ahmadinejad is not.

That said, I believe he should be allowed to visit Grouud Zero. He should not be allowed a photo op.

[Agnomen]

43. I agree

Photo ops at Ground Zero are Bush's prerogative.

[mhatrw]

64. On what basis are you denying him access to Ground Zero?

If it's the fact that you don't like what he might say there, what makes you different from a fundamentalist mullah?

[Yael]

3. Agree as well

[fenriswolf]

4. i agree with you

he is one twisted nut, but if he is trying to show an act of solidarity it can help our forign policy and might just quite down the war talk thats going on. the only thing accomplished by denying him the opportunity to share this "hallowed ground" is by increasing the war talk and furthering the war mongers agenda.

[Bicoastal]

6. No argument there.

In fact, I hope he does get to go to the WTC site. If nothing else, it'll be a good PR move--for the US. We'd be showing the world that our country is a haven for free speech, no matter who the speaker.

So how much do you want to bet it won't happen?

[Cleita]

5. This has happened before, when a head of state comes to

address the United Nations. We didn't want Castro, or Chavez or many other heads of state that we didn't like at that time. But if we are going to host the United Nations on our shores, we can't be picking and choosing. I have been an advocate of moving the UN elsewhere myself into some neutral territory, a nation that isn't globally bellicose and doesn't take sides.

[Bicoastal]

8. Absolutely. We have a duty to invite him to the UN's neutral territory.

But on our soil, nothing says we have to be happy about it. I hope to see plenty of Jews out with picket signs, banners, and other forms of non-violent protest.

[chimpymustgo]

7. Why not hear what he has to say? Perhaps we can even get a fair translation.

Many of the charges he is alleged to have made have been based on deliberate mis-translations.

[durrrty libby]

9. You can listen to his propaganda tonight on 60 minutes

[chimpymustgo]

11. Well, I'll listen t what he has to say, thank you.

I still believe in the old America - free speech and all.

[durrrty libby]

12. Would you let Hitler come here and give some "free" speech

and say the Jews need to be exterminated etc?

[maximusveritas]

20. Well, maybe if we'd heard him say that here, we would have acted sooner

to stop him.
Seriously though, I don't have a problem with him coming to NYC and speaking at Columbia. I just think we need to be careful not to allow him to use this for propaganda purposes.

[durrrty libby]

21. Propaganda is his middle name. That is exactly what he wants to do

[sendero]

53. Propaganda..

.... is George Bushs' middle name. What the FUCK is your point? We should only get to listen to state-sanctioned propaganda?

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Ahmadenijad has never said that the jews need to be exterminated.

Nor is he a Hitler, nor is Iran an international bully. Ahmadenijad's flirtation with holocaust denial is repulsive, but that is about as far as it goes. His core complaint is about injustice not about the holocaust.

If Ahmadenijad and Iran are opposed to internation terrorism, and wish to demonstrate that opposition by a ceremonial visit to the WTC site, we should encourage them to do so, rather than seek to push them away and act as if somehow Iran shares some responisbility for that attack.

[durrrty libby]

27. His speech before he left home

"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.

"Those who think, that by using such decayed tools as psychological warfare and economic sanctions, they can stop the Iranian nation's progress are making a mistake," Ahmadinejad said yesterday outside of Tehran.

As the hatemonger spoke, a parade of anti-aircraft guns, missiles and military hardware moved before him. Three jet fighters flew overhead.

In a menacing move, Ahmadinejad's military henchmen said the medium-range missiles could reach Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf."


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/23/2007-09-23_irans_ahmadinejad_issues_new_threats_aga.html

[Warren Stupidity]

32. How dare they!

The mighty USA, a huge plantetary military bully, threatens to destroy Iran if they do not submit to our authority and we are irate that they dare to display a militant unwillingness to submit?

[mhatrw]

65. Now that's fair and balanced journalism at its finest! n/t

[cali]

48. You're right that he's not Hitler.

You're correct that he's not an international bully. But he has an obsession with Holocaust denial, not a flirtation. He is a hater.

That said, I think not allowing him access to the WTC site, is dumb.

[treestar]

33. If we'd let him do that, we'd have known about it

Much sooner, wouldn't we have?

We could have done something.

Likewise here. We could learn where he's coming from and have more time to do something about it.

It doesn't really help to "punish" the person by pretending they don't exist. It makes them worse and gets them to go underground. That makes it more likely they'll succeed in pulling off some evil thing.

[Bicoastal]

13. delete

delete

[Bicoastal]

14. I think he's been pretty explicit, translation or no...

Check out the pictures here, especially the one in the middle. In the midst of all the military fanfare, two government signs that not only say "Death to Isreal," and "Death to the USA," they say them in English. There's no misinterpreting that message...unless you think the photos were doctored.

Look, I honestly don't think he's being misunderstood, although we can all agree it's mostly empty posturing. Sure, let the man talk, but honestly, what do you THINK he's going to say--that he loves everybody?

[izzie]

15. I think the deal was any one could come to the UN and it was

one reason it was set up in NYC. I think any one should be able to come and we should hear them all. More you hear the better you can judge.

[Chipper Chat]

16. We let Kruschev go to Disneyland.

And he said "we will bury you."

[goclark]

55. I had forgotten about that--- nt

[stillcool]

17. call me crazy...

but I could give a shit... I do not trust that I know who the man is, what he's said, or what he's done. I have a hard enough time trying to figure what is going on in my own country. More than 2 million American's imprisoned rubs me the wrong way. The Jenna 6 bothers me...as does Killing a million Iraqi's and displacing many more from their own country. Almost 4,000 dead soldiers for American business interests troubles me. Being lied to incessantly by the United States Congress, I find irksome. I hope, for the sake of the Arab world the man has a nice visit, and makes it home alive.

[madrchsod]

19. if i remember correctly the Iranian people

showed great sympathy for what happened to our country that day. as an elected president of that country he does have the right to represent his country,especially since iranians died in those buildings and i`m sure their remains are still there.
a simple solution is to let him go there and not comment one way or another....but we all know the media is incapable of restraint.do`t blame him, blame our media for what a circus they would stage...

[AZBlue]

41. They did - and even more, they were moving toward democracy on their own until WE

decided to invade the Middle East. We practically got Ahmadinejad elected in 2005.

[madrchsod]

23. the tribe of abraham have been in persia for 3000 yrs

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5367892.stm

[Bicoastal]

26. So what?

I never made the Hitler comparison. In fact, I've been saying all along that Ahmadinejad's posturing is mostly for propaganda purposes. Doesn't make him any more appealing as far as international guests are concerned.

[PDJane]

24. Let's try this one more time.

Iran has historical issues with the United States, mostly because Iran itself insists on independence. The US overthrew a democratically elected leader in that sovereign country and installed a dictator, remember? That was over oil too...Mossadeq wanted the oil resource and profits to go to the Iranian people. Can't have that, now can we?

Admenijad is crazy like a fox; he makes enough ridiculous statements all on his own, then the US translators get to them and things get really weird from there. He says things that make him sound like a nutcase, and a lot of his actions are patently transparent. (That sounds like someone else I know....oh, yeah, him. That Bush guy.) However, he has no power. He does not run the country, and has less power than any other "head of state." The country is run by the Islamic councils, and the various councils that make up the government have the final say in all matters, including military.

It's very convenient to demonize Admenijad. He is muslim, after all. He isn't Arabic, but that seems to get glossed over too. Technically, Iran isn't even part of the middle east. IRAN WILL STOP BEING AN ENEMY WHEN THE US STOPS MAKING THEM AN ENEMY. The only reason they've become a bogeyman at all is that the US and Britain were so incredibly pissed off at losing their western-installed dictator to the revolution. Jeez, that really got their knickers in a knot.

Get over it. Act like a grownup nation. Allow him his propaganda for the folks back home. He can't possibly do anything more to tarnish the American reputation unless you do decide to make an issue of him going where he wishes to go. That will simply back up everything that he's been saying so far.

[Bicoastal]

28. Oh, come off it.

There's nothing childish about protesting someone's presence. Propaganda may be propaganda, but it still gets under your skin--especially the Holocaust stuff, which personally infuriates me to no end. Look, I never said he was Hitler--I didn't even say he was really that dangerous. But irregardless of history, he still deserves to be held at arms length. He has every right to come, and we have every right not to be happy about it and express our disapproval.

Moreover, you can't tell me not to "make an issue of him going where he wishes to go"--not unless you're prepared to give the same protection to Bush and Cheney.

[PDJane]

38. They go where they want and do what they want.....

at the moment, at least. After they leave office, they may be like Kissinger, who is wanted for war crimes here and there.

Yeah, Bush and Cheney tend to run into protests here; life's like that. The protesters are kept at a distance from the problematic heads of state. I suspect Admenijad would be the same thing; you wanna get out there with a sign, fine. As far as deciding where folks can go, blocking a head of state from laying a wreath, no matter for what reason, is just useless.

Iranians as a whole don't hate the US. They don't like things the US does, but that's just life. I don't like things the US does either.

[mhatrw]

66. Protest whatever you want. If you can get 16 others out there with you,

Fox News will make you all instant celebrities!

[Dr. Strange]

29. Well, you'd better GET happy!

This guy is the fourth Gandhi! (The first one being Mahatma, the second one being that Circuit City guy, and the third one being that tasered kid.)
Now you make nice!

[Snarkturian Clone]

31. My 12 foot Lawgiver statues for sale to duers

will have to include this guy in addition to sheehan and chavez!

[tkmorris]

30. Good stuff aint it?

[malachibk]

34. I get FAR angrier when Bush comes here eom

[glowing]

35. What is up with this enemy stuff... seems like you've been pulled in

by the MSM mantra.... Seeing other countries as enemies of state set up the presedent for wars.. It is an us/ them mentality that makes one clentch their fists and want to defend. Have you spoken to a normal Iranian person? Have you listened to the people in their country. Would you say it was fair for other's around the globe to think that Bush represented your opinions, actions and thoughts. Leader's tend to hijack their position and use their power to gain more for themselves and their elite friends.

First step in stopping stupid wars is to stop thinking of other's as your enemy. Then start listening to real people.

As far as not wanting to listen to a visitor to the country or not liking him for personal reasons... that is of your own judgement. I personally do not know this man well. I do not know how to decipher his language to know whether or not the interpretor's are doing a good job or not. And I do not follow Iranian politics on an everyday basis. Perhaps I should, since everyone seems hell bent in bombing the shit out of them. Personally, I think all his postulating and propagandizing is used to show a tough guy persona and to make the rest of the world think twice about bombing the shit out of them.

[Bicoastal]

36. So let me get this straight....

...first you accuse me me of plenty of things I clearly haven't done. Did I criticize Iran as a country? Did I criticize the Iranian people? Did I say we should go to war with them? NO.

You tell me that I've been taken in by mainstream media propaganda. Then you admit that you yourself haven't done enough research on the President of Iran or Iranian politics since 2003 to form a coherent opinion. In other words, I'm wrong because I've been hornswoggled by faulty information, but you're right because you have NO information. That's pretty outrageous, my friend.

[glowing]

37. You had a line in their about enemy's.... Thinking of anyone as an

enemy, even your neighbor changes your perception about them. As far as speaking to normal Iranian people, I think they want to raise their families and live without bombs reigning out of the sky. Politics is different than normal one on one interaction with persons from the actual country.

It was the enemy thing that I was picking up on, not your assertion not to like the Iranian president.. and I would say that a lot of people in Iran are not so keen on him either (especially Arab people's)... I refuse to keep identifying countries as enemies. For the most part people who live in them have no choice, for that was the place they were born. Many countries subdue information or twist information so that people are trained to hate... similar to this country and its info-twisting or major blackouts... especially on any war protests and general info on conditions in Iraq or the horrendous way the veterans are treated when they come back.

Kucinich has a beautiful campaign slogan and it really makes sense... Strength through Peace. Its the only way to make a world without fear and without hatred. I would love to see enemy erased from the dictionary and from everyone's vocabulary.

[AX10]

39. I don't like him either. I worry that Bush could become...

the next Ahmadinejad. He doesn't like Bush, but the two are too similar for my tastes.
Should he (Ahmadinejad) have the right to speak, yes, but I can also go to New York and protest him too if I want too. At the same time, dialog is the best thing we can have right now. We cannot afford any more wars now. Better to talk than to fight with guns.

[AZBlue]

42. I look at it as respecting the people of Iran, who this one man is only a

representative of. And, in that vein, I think we should show him courtesy and respect. (I'm not saying we bend over and take his every command - there is a line to draw, obviously)

[DeepModem Mom]

44. K&R

[RFKJrNews]

45. Ahmadinejad has every right to come here and speak...

...and Iran has EVERY right to defend itself as a sovereign nation against the threatened invasion/occupation/war that is now hanging heavily in the political air.

Try to look at it this way: if the shoe were on the other foot and Iran was threatening an OUTRIGHT invasion of America (which they are not and never have), do you really think we would just lie down and let them? Or would we start rattling sabers and flexing our military muscle to let them know who they are dealing with?

In that context, one begins to understand why Iran is doing what they are doing. The militant propaganda is intended to deter us from even thinking about starting a war with Iran...

And we should think long and hard about it. Because like most occupied Islamic countries, these people are *serious* about defending their land, their culture, their population and their natural resources. They will fight us tooth and nail, possibly for years on end, and a lot more of our sons and daughters will be cannon fodder in this never-ending war.

Hey, if *their* tanks were rolling down *our* streets, and our homes were being invaded by foreign troops daily, our family members being shot right before our eyes, we might just feel inclined to fight back.

And we wonder why islamic militants are gaining new converts to their cause! In their eyes, we are indeed "the Great Satan"; the greedy, oilthirsty invaders driven by bloodlust and money, without the slightest regard for their religion, their way of life, their once- beautiful and historic land, or their very humanity.

Whether or not you subscribe to this belief or think the Arabs are just plumb crazy, you need to understand that it is *their* belief, and these people will fight to the death for it. For as long as it takes. Until every last infidel is dead, has surrendered or left their country.

Are we committed enough to our beliefs that we will fight every bit as long and hard for ours? Because if we cannot withstand the trials and sacrifice of a 100-year war in the middle east, we shouldn't have started one in the first place.

[Hieronymus]

46. You make some good points .. we still stand for free speech, right?

[Pawel K]

51. Thank you, couldn't have said it any better. nt

[pingzing58]

60. The Israeli nation has nuclear weapons. They bombed, with U.S. permission, a Syrian nuclear project

Iran knows that they are next. Bushco plays us for fools. I agree with you 100%. And, I don't trust the Israeli opinion on this matter nor do I trust American Israelis and Christian Zionists on this matter UNTIL they agree to the creation of a Palestinian Nation-State.

[Zandor]

49. K & R n/t

[Pawel K]

50. Like we have a moral leg to stand on

The world is evil, they are evil, we are evil. The more we push them away the worse off we are. Remember, Iran wanted to give us everything we demanded before the Iraq war started, Bush refused his offer because apperantly, you don't negotiate with brown people. Because they are brown they are guilty by association. So he has shown willingness to negotiate with us, we refused. Now we have to take action to bring him back to the table, he isn't going to ask us a second time, especially when we continue to threaten him. Even most of us here think that Bush is set on attacking Iran, how do you think he feels? You have every right to hate the guy, I think he's a prick too. But we have to understand that not everyone shares our definition of morallity and frankly we don't have a right to have that arrogant holier-than-thou attitude everywhere we go.

[bos1]

52. The WOT hoax distracts from the human rights nightmare that is Iran, Saudi Arabia

and so many other places. The invasion & occupation of Iraq has destroyed any moral authority the US had to confront these hellish places that execute children, execute people for being gay.

He should be a pariah, and barred, for those reasons.

[PDittie]

57. He has his faults, certainly

but I like him in that Castro/Chavez/Putin thumbing-*-in-the-eye kinda way.

He really fed it back to Scott Pelley on 60 Minutes last night, too (I thought).

[jberryhill]

58. The Best Response

...is not to give him the attention and importance he wants.

It seems that most of his bluster is intended to play well with his electorate.

Reminds me of someone.

[ludwigb]

61. What annoys me

Is no one will directly engage the substance of what Ahmadinejad says in his speeches. He's constantly calling for peace with the West based on shared values. And the Holocaust denying accusation is either untrue or wildly overblown. He has no intention of attacking Israel.

I don't agree with very much of Ahmadinejad's worldview. EXCEPT the part about nations not attacking one another and people's being allowed to develop their own resources and build their own society without being bullied.

Our oil companies used to have Iran's oil and they want it back. Wake up yo.

The US and Iran have all sorts of common interests--both are enemies of Al Qaida and the Taliban, Iran is one of the more democratic nations in the region, Iran's religious orthodoxy is not as extreme as the Wahabbi variety that breeds real-life terrorists. If America was committed to national determination and national sovereignty, then they would support the rights of the Palestinians, as Iran does.

Oh, and one more thing. IRAN SUPPORTS THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT. Ahmadinejad sees it as legitimate, and calls it "legal". The weapons coming from Iran are for militias friendly to the Maliki government, while WE are arming the Sunni insurgents.

Iran ought to be our best friend in the region, but greed and religious fanaticism has won out. The least we can do is try to keep the debate honest in the public sphere.

What's wrong with talking? There is something to be said for the fact that Ahmadinejad is convinced that he can reason his way out of war with the US--that the people can change US and world policy and they are amendable to persuasion. I'm not going to spit on the man holding his hand out in friendship who has done nothing to me.

[pingzing58]

67. Agree with you absolutely! I refuse to believe an Israeli until there is a Palestinian state.

[polichick]

62. I'm more sick of our "propaganda" than I am his these days...

And I'm glad for the opportunity to hear his message without US media filters ~ thank you to Columbia U!

[mhatrw]

63. Wow! Ever consider a job in corporate media?

I think you have what it takes!

[superkia]

68. How would we feel if another country continued to talk about blowing us up?

Our government has been doing this all in the name of profit, nothing else. I don't support our government in this attack on another country, I don't believe everything they tell us and our controlled media tells us. Not saying that Iran is the greatest country but we are not the world dictators or well we shouldn't be but our government is trying to take that role. Don't fall for the hype.