It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran's Ahmadinejad to speak at US university

page: 14
6
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
There's an enormous difference between wiping Israel off the map and not recognizing a regime. It's crazy hearing people talk like they want another war. They will do no deciphering themselves but will believe every word from ONE side of the story. That is very, dangerous and dangerously ignorant.


If you are refering to me I only posted facts, he was asked twice about hes remarks, he was asked twice if he meant for the DESTRUCTION OF ISRAEL and he DECLINE to answer. There is no misinterpretation no mistranslation or nothing, it happen today on our soil with millions watching.

He could have done himself a favor, now I dont care if he wants to destroy Israel or not, he wont get his wish anyways, but for a HEAD OF STATE to not even clarify that statement speaks volumes of what his intentions are.

[edit on 24-9-2007 by Bunch]

[edit on 24-9-2007 by Bunch]




posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I think it's funny how this has flown in the face of Columbia University's staff. They thought it would be a great idea, yet we Americans came off far worse than Mr. Ahmadinejad, who, I've got to give credit to here, kept his cool even while being barraged with undignified personal insults. At the very least, Columbia staff have missed a great opportunity to question some of Ahmadinejad's ideas civilly, instead of interjecting every other sentence with comments about his evil tyranny.



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues
 



Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
Hey, genius. Have you ever been to the middle east or associated with anyone who maybe from Iran, Afghanistan, or Pakistan? Your lack of knowledge about anything regarding the middle east is stupifying. It's not as easy as "They're bad, we're good." Get a plain ticket to Morocco or Spain and head east. Talk to the people in those countries and get their take on things. It'd do you a lot of good. It's pretty enlightening. And don't ever insult my intelligence again because I'd hate to rip you apart like I've been doing every post since I caught your half-wit statements back on the 4th page.

[edit on 24-9-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]

You haven't been right yet. Why not answer some of the questions posed to you instead of resorting to sophomoric name calling tactics? For example,
If they have such freedom, then why are apostasy and heresy considered crimes punishable by death in Iran?

Until you begin to act like an adult and answer the questions posed to you, you'll get no further response from me.



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by jsobecky
 


Review my posts because I'm not going to spell it out for you anymore. If you'd like to continue this discussion, message me. We should have our outs in private and spare everybody from our pointless little argument. That goes for anybody that wants to get into it aswell. I've seen first hand what is going down in Iran. I would love to explain or attempt to explain what's going on over there from my first hand experience. Holler.



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by The Crow
 


I agree totally, why invite a guy in the name of academic freedom and then lambast him with everything that we hear already. Although many points raised in the introduction were legitimate.

I dont think he did a good job himself in explaining anything but then again I really want to listen to the guy to see what he really stand for. I dont think he won any hearts and minds here, but he deserve it far more better treatment that the one he got. Needless to say that he wont being speaking in any more universities here at least IMO.

At least I can agree on that.



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by The Crow
 



Originally posted by The Crow
I think it's funny how this has flown in the face of Columbia University's staff. They thought it would be a great idea, yet we Americans came off far worse than Mr. Ahmadinejad, who, I've got to give credit to here, kept his cool even while being barraged with undignified personal insults.

I saw it entirely the opposite. While listening to him, I wondered which heads of a major western nation would have reacted the same way. Would they have kept their dignity or would they whine and cry as Ahmadinejad did? "I've been insulted! Oh poor poor me!"

But that seems to be typical of many mideast leaders. They take great umbrage to what they perceive as personal insults to them or their prophets or their religion. It's a way of avoiding the task of having to answer a direct question, imo.



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues
 



Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
Review my posts because I'm not going to spell it out for you anymore.

So in other words, you can't answer a simple question.



Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
If you'd like to continue this discussion, message me. We should have our outs in private and spare everybody from our pointless little argument.

It doesn't have to be a personal argument. We can discuss the issues above board like two adults, as long as you quit with the personal sniping and bragadaccio.

I'm not going to "message" you. Either discuss it where everybody can see it, or drop it.



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by The Crow
 



Originally posted by The Crow
I think it's funny how this has flown in the face of Columbia University's staff. They thought it would be a great idea, yet we Americans came off far worse than Mr. Ahmadinejad, who, I've got to give credit to here, kept his cool even while being barraged with undignified personal insults.

I saw it entirely the opposite. While listening to him, I wondered which heads of a major western nation would have reacted the same way. Would they have kept their dignity or would they whine and cry as Ahmadinejad did? "I've been insulted! Oh poor poor me!"


Actually, Ahmejimjam said that Bollinger insulted the audience and 'the information' by not allowing them to make their own minds up (paraphrased)

A few of Bollinger's comments:

"know thine enemy"
"the mind of evil"
"petty and cruel dictator"

there was plenty of other Dubya Speak.

Shame a professor couldn't do a bit better than that.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Boondock78

eh, i'm not too into guys floating around their turf with signs that say down with america and such, like the ones js posted....
down with america, then he gets to come to america, with american security, to speak at an american university....

nah, i'd rather see the mist..


So I take it you'd be comfortable with an Iranian sniper knocking off Bush should he have the opportunity the next time he visits the mid-east in retaliation to the "Axis of Evil" label and US posters continually calling for the military to "nuke" Iran then?

I'm sure alot of people in Iran would love to see the mist too.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch

He could have done himself a favor, now I dont care if he wants to destroy Israel or not, he wont get his wish anyways, but for a HEAD OF STATE to not even clarify that statement speaks volumes of what his intentions are.


No it doesnt, it probably shows that he realised that everything he said would be taken out of context. Its obvious many here took his statements out of context so his silence was probably well timed.


[edit on 25/9/07 by Chorlton]



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by mallory-john
Maybe because USA = good, IRAN = evil.


On what basis do you draw this conclusion? I'd really love to know.



Maybe because Ahmadinejad said that the holocost didnt happend


Fair enough. I can't and don't agree with him on that one.
I must point out however that Bush and Rumsfeld went on live TV and said there were WMD in Iraq and since then - based on that lie - some estimates put the death toll in the area at 655,000 + people. Try getting them to acknowledge that.



Maybe because he is trying to build a nuclear bomb to "wipe israel" from the map


Re-read this thread. Re-read the actual translation of what he said instead of relying on the "soundbyte propaganda". How about spending some time finding out about Irans economy and domestic power needs. Maybe you could also look up what the real power in Iran said about nuclear weapons, because you'll find that they declared a fatwah on their development.



But maybe its because Ajmadinejad is a foo and a former terrorist, hijacker and leading operator in a international terror cell.


And the US has never supplied weapons to anyone, ever, overtly and covertly huh? The CIA doesn't exist? The Noraid organisation didn't exist did it?



The problem is that most of you are against the USA because of 9/11, NWO, Bush, Iraq War. And that makes you blind. You do not see that Ahmadinejad is a evil jerk, a dangerous person who will not build a nuclear powerplant.


Actually, the problem that alot of us who aren't anti-US but ARE anti-Bush administration and anti-neocon have is the uneducated, ill-informed and ignorant opinions of those who blindly follow the party line without questioning anything thats put forward or bothering to actually look outside their own borders.



If Ahmadinejad would be now Hitler - would you allow Hitler to build a nuclear "powerplant"?


As far as I'm concerned, you can't compare the two, and if you think you can come up with a proper, psychoanalitical study that does then please post it.

What I will say is that you are trying to compare a man who systematically poisitioned himself in a strategic position to spread his own hatred at a time of depression in Germany, subsequently murdered his political opponents, and then re-wrote the German laws and constitution to his own ends, and then oversaw the systematic extermination of a number of races and social groups whilst aggressively pursuing a policy of war, resulting in the invasion of Western Europe and part of Russian and some of the worst atrocities of war ever seen, against a man who was democratically elected and who's country has not invaded any soverign nation except in response to an attack.


[edit on 25/0907/07 by neformore] For spelling

[edit on 25/0907/07 by neformore]



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 02:14 AM
link   
Iran and the US use the same tactics of propaganda and media control. US uses money, Iran uses governmental dictates.

Iran is ruthless and torture people to maintain control over those that dissent. The US tortures those that are considered enemy combatants and uses pyhcological means to control people outside of a self defined acceptable way of doing things.

Iran religious leaders believe the whole world should be converted to Islam, US religious right believes the whole world should be converted to Christianity

US has nukes and has used them. The US also has said they will use them again if needed, Iran may want nukes.

Iran fears we will bomb them, US fears Iran will bomb them.

The West displaced palestinian people and support the continued ownership of land by Israel. Iran believes the land should be back in hands of palestine and supports moving Israel out. Or if you like, removing its borders from the currently drawn up map that declares it valid.

The west wants access to oil under Iran for US companies. Iran wants oil controlled to profit Iran people.

I see many similarities between the two nations, I think which side you chose to side is not what is right, but what nation you already support. Assuming you do not believe to just follow what is right by saying people in Iran have same rights and value as people in US.

If you give them the same value, then you have to back off and let them keep their oil, just like we get to keep our wheat fields. If they have same value then each side gets to have nukes.

But we do not want a fair system, we want one that helps America. This explains most of the feelings of other countries and why they hate our 'freedom' as it is called.


[edit on 25-9-2007 by Redge777]



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 02:37 AM
link   
One more thing, if you do support the American agenda it is understandable, this is where our friends, jobs, and family are. But it is not right in the pure sense, it is selfish, but we are all selfish to some degree.

My only request is that people stop spouting off about 'they are this' or 'they did that' and honestly post the true reasons why they support the action. It supports the interests of the people(mostly the rich people) in the US.


[edit on 25-9-2007 by Redge777]



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore


If Ahmadinejad would be now Hitler - would you allow Hitler to build a nuclear "powerplant"?


As far as I'm concerned, you can't compare the two, and if you think you can come up with a proper, psychoanalitical study that does then please post it.


Why can't we compare both? Nazi-Germany and Iran were financial supported and armed by the USA. Both are regimes instead of democratical voted systems. Both are antisemics, against Jews. Both try to expand their own religion believings around the world.

Dont forgot the persian empire. Is was double of Rom Empire size.

I think we can compare both.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 02:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Redge777
 



I think most of this disagreement come down to basic differences in culture. Most Americans have never been outside of the US and dont even posess a passport. People from different cultures see the same things completely differently and interpet signals from others completely differently.

Take the simple act of nodding your head to signify yes. In some cultures, to signify yes one actually shakes the head from side to side to signify yes.

Its the same with any statement. If it can be misinterpreted it probably will be.
Ultra religious countries see any attack on religion as a direct attack against them personally. Western countries can give each other a dig in the ribs and laugh but other countries will interpret it as an Insult.

Its why most world leaders have people around them to help interpret, not just language but body language. The problem is, if those people have little actuall worldly experience themselves things can and do go tits up.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Redge777
One more thing, if you do support the American agenda it is understandable, this is where our friends, jobs, and family are. But it is not right in the pure sense, it is selfish, but we are all selfish to some degree.

My only request is that people stop spouting off about 'they are this' or 'they did that' and honestly post the true reasons why they support the action. It supports the interests of the people(mostly the rich people) in the US.
[edit on 25-9-2007 by Redge777]


Well, human mankind IS a civilization that build on WAR. We cant exist (sadly) without conquer and domination. The oilreserves are going down and there is no way to stop it. Instead our leader need to focus on the future and try to stabilize our needs and demands. So sooner or later every country has to decide. Them or us.

Nearly every ressource on earth is limited. Even the water you drink. Consider it. Our world grows faster then ever. Each year there will 129 Million babies born.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 02:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Chorlton
 


you pointed out many cultural differences, I agree. And I see culture as a wedge that makes people not identify and not give others value, thereby creating lack of empathy and a rational for selfishness.

I also see a targeted attempt to keep us from understanding culture so we do not question the greed motive. Look at the news, they literally are acting like first graders calling names, they should teach us culture, not just that we are best (wave flag- GO USA!) nationalism separates cultures and allows feelings of superiority, creating lack of identification.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by mallory-john
Well, human mankind IS a civilization that build on WAR. We cant exist (sadly) without conquer and domination. The oilreserves are going down and there is no way to stop it. Instead our leader need to focus on the future and try to stabilize our needs and demands. So sooner or later every country has to decide. Them or us.

Nearly every ressource on earth is limited. Even the water you drink. Consider it. Our world grows faster then ever. Each year there will 129 Million babies born.


I understand that motive completely. It is well explained. It is also a real argument. This should be the argument people make, not "he wears cloths to big", or he does this or that from the glass house that covers the USA.

And we must accept that if this is our definition of the way things work, then accept we too will be attacked in many ways. We must also not get mad at them when they attack us, they are just playing by the rules we defined and live by. We should say, ug, they got us there, nice move, my turn. Like it is an unfeeling chess game.

I don't want this kind of world, I like to think we can change it to something better, where this idea is not first.

or we can change nothing, and when we are all crawling around piles of ruble looking for left over cans of food, we can also beat our neighbors away with a stick and keep the rules as they are.

[edit on 25-9-2007 by Redge777]



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by mallory-john
Why can't we compare both? Nazi-Germany and Iran were financial supported and armed by the USA. Both are regimes instead of democratical voted systems. Both are antisemics, against Jews. Both try to expand their own religion believings around the world.

Dont forgot the persian empire. Is was double of Rom Empire size.

I think we can compare both.


For pitys sake, go and read up about Iran, and please, please, educate yourself. If Iran is anti-semitic, how come it has the largest jewish population of any muslim country, and the third largest population of Persian jews in the country (third after Israel and the US).

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 03:17 AM
link   

MR. COATSWORTH: One by one, it is, yes. (Applause.)
The first question is: Do you or your government seek the destruction of the state of Israel as a Jewish state?
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: We love all nations. We are friends with the Jewish people. There are many Jews in Iran living peacefully with security. You must understand that in our constitution, in our laws, in the parliamentary elections, for every 150,000 people we get one representative in the parliament. For the Jewish community, one-fifth of this number they still get one independent representative in the parliament. So our proposal to the Palestinian plight is a humanitarian and democratic proposal.



That is the clearest answer i have ever seen from this man ever.

They have the second largest Jewish population in the world , and are represented in governemt in iran _source) - how many other mp`s would take issue with a president directly!

he wants the removal of the zionist state , which has caused far more harm than nazi germany ever did - but actively supports judaism - THAT is the fundamental difference which so many people (spoon fed by fox and cnn) fail to grasp the concept.

You must seprate religion and governemtn for this case - The governement of Israel is the major destabilising influence in the middle east - and that is the issue he talks about.




top topics



 
6
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in

join