Monday, September 24, 2007

Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University today, and it went off exactly like I thought it would. In short, it was a circus. First, the Univ President proceeds to dress down Ahmadinejad, calling him anything from evil to cruel. Then, he challenged the man on some of his provocative history, including the things I mentioned in my last post. He then closed by predicting that the Iranian leader would not answer any of the questions posed, and would provide no explanations for his ridiculous behavior. He was right. Which leads me to ask, what was the point?

I could have predicted weeks ago that Ahmadinejad would duck and dive any pertinent question, would deflect criticism and would blame (either directly or with subtlety) the West, the US, Israel and the Jews for most of the world's and the middle east's problems. That's exactly what he did today, while on his best behavior in an attempt to establish a sense of brotherhood with Americans, especially the Leftist radicals who share his hatred of America.

So this came as no surprise. The Univ president probably feels good about his harsh criticism, and I'm certain there are many who feel Ahmadinejad was made to look like a fool. Well, they're wrong. Ahmadinejad already looked like a fool, only now a major US University has granted him status and credibility as a world leader. So who looks like the fool now? What purpose was served today other than Ahmadinejad's? He came to Columbia as a terrorist dictator, and left a terrorist dictator that had been granted status and credibility by an US institution of higher learning. There are many who think today was a good day, but I disagree.

In another story, the NY Times has confessed to making a mistake with the ad and the Left wing group has agreed to pay the difference in the "discount". The paper claims it was an honest mistake, that it's looking into why it happened, and expressed regret that this will perpetuate claims that the Times is biased toward the Left. Personally, the Times seems to be sorry they got caught, not sorry they favored a radical Left PAC.


The Loop Garoo Kid said...


I don't want to argue about who thinks less of Ahmadinejad but I think that your conclusions are in error. First, Ahmadinejad has good political savvy inamuch as one does not become the leader of a populous nation w/o it. I am not going to say that elections in Iran are free and fair--they are not. Nevertheless, one does not obtain the imprimatur of the mullahs w/o some political savvy.

That savvy was displayed when he requested permission to visit Ground Zero which placed NYC in a no win situation. Certainly the lesser of evil results was to deny him permission which was what the city did.

Ahmadinejad is president of Iran. Ipso facto, he is a world leader and I agree, a terrorist dictator. You have taken the position that allowing him a forum at a prestigious American university somehow granted him status and credibility. W/ whom may I ask?

I, on the otherhand, take the position that allowing him that forum reinforces and publicizes all of his negatives. In this country, one does not garner credibility by denying the holocaust and NYC would be the last place any denier should wish to do so. NYC is the last place on the planet, even more so than the Pentagon or a particular field in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, where anyone should question the link between al Qaeda and the events of 9/11. Yet, Ahmadinejad did both of these things.

So the president of Columbia took his shots and Ahmadinejad evaded all the hard questions or denied the obvious. He said that there are no homosexuals in Iran and the audience laughed at him.

There more we can expose people like Ahmadinejad for what they are and for they do, the better off we are.


The Loop Garoo Kid said...

Interesting fact:

Dwight D. Eisenhower was president of Columbia University from 1948-1953.


Yes Loop,

When "I Like Ike" Eisenhower was
Responsible for that Great University, there were no Looney-Tune Demonstrators to mar campus life.
When Ahmadinejad held the mike, shaking an index finger, and saying
"No Gays In Iran" and "We Love All
Nations!" he was startled with the Jeers & Laughter! His sleazy 'image' took a beating at that podium! reb

rudy said...

Hilarious! Ahmadinejad comes off looking like a bigger moron than even Bush, the Univ. Pres predicts this, and somehow you find a way to give Ahmadinejad some credit? Oh, the hypocrisy...Reminds me of when Bill O was ranting on the same subject and criticizing the Univ for even inviting Ahmadinejad to speak. After his rant, Bill O announces that he was turned down by Ahmadinejad when he asked him to appear on "The Factor."

When Hypocrisy Prospers...sheesh.

John Washburn said...

Rudy, thank you for validating my point with your comment. Please come back anytime.

Loop, Ahmadinejad was not exposed at Columbia. Everyone knew he was a nut, a psycho, a lunatic, a terrorist. We learned nothing new about him, yet his own countrymen gave him a standing applause during his appearance. Columbia strengthened his status as an international leader and nothing negative came from it. The last thing you want to give a person like that is a microphone and a voice. It was a big mistake, and as I predicted, the Lefties are applauding Columbia for having him....see the comment above.

The Loop Garoo Kid said...


I discount what occurred in Iran as that would have occurred anyway when the state media broadcast his speech in front of the General Assembly. I don't think there are many fence sitters in the US when it comes to this guy. I think there many people in this country who are uncertain what course we should take w/ Iran.

To the extent that Americans can see this guy, perhaps later there will be a more unified response to dealing w/ Iran's nuclear ambitions and state sponsored terrorism.


rudy said...

John, Ahmadinejad's exposure did not strengthen his status. It showed the world what an idiot he truly is. "Everyone knew he was a nut..." I seriously doubt that, but now alot more people know what he is. Maybe you learned nothing new about him, but I assure you Ahmadinejad is not a household name. And yes, his countrymen gave him a standing ovation. I am sure that anyone there who did not applaud would have been labeled "unpatriotic," unIranian," or even "Lefty" by the more conservative there.

Naturally the common people don’t want war. But after all, it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag people along whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and for exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.” - Hermann Goering, Hitler’s Reich Marshall, at the Nuremberg Trials.

In order to understand the lunatics in the world and how they operate we must give them a voice as with the Columbia University "incident" and the Nuremberg trials. Hopefully the people will learn not to be fooled by the scare tactics and fear mongering that Goering confessed to, but I don't believe most Americans have learned this lesson yet. Does any sane person give Goering or Hitler respect after seeing the WW11 footage. Not a sane person.

You also either missed or ignored my point on the hypocrisy of O'Reilly's statement.

And thanks for welcoming me back to "validate" your point. I guess your alot like that evil Univ pres, eh?

John Washburn said...


So you seem to want the lunatics of the world to have a voice, and the more voice they have the better. So we should maximize the media exposure of these idiots. Very well. I will assume that you would also support maximal exposure for David Duke, the KKK, the neo-nazis and anti-gay groups. Would you be okay with these groups being given heightened exposure, airtime, and a "voice"?

rudy said...

Absolutely! So long as they are made to look like the fools that they are. How did you ever learn of these morons in the first place? It wasn't because they were stifled.

Since you ignored my point of the hypocrisy of O'Reilly condemning the Univ pres, then announcing that he too asked Ahmadinejad to be a guest on his show, does this mean that you think exposing Ahmadinejad to the billions of O'Reilly viewers is a bad idea?

BTW, what did you think of that Goering quote? Was his testimony true to life?


'Tis A Shame that O'Reilly cannot coax George Soros or MEDIA(MUD)MATTERS, or DailyKos before his national audience. But these types (The Hate Clubs) tend to avoid the sunlight.

The Four-Year Tsunami Of Hate People really need the exposure. It took a major goof to expose MoveOnDotTrash w/Gen Be-tra-Us Ad
to expose George Soros.

It rarely happens; nor will the
Wimp Vermont Judges show up, and explain why they give child rapists probation. Nor will the Supt of Schools in Golden, Colorado
show up. He's hiding under his desk.

We Will Not See New Orleans First Responder, Ray Nagin's Face on FOX. It's too easy to blame Bush for the Katrina Disaster in the N.O. Saints Stadium.

The Tv Camera Can Be A Great Tool for Whistle-Blowers like Mr. "O".

I'll Vote For Exposure! reb

John Washburn said...

Rudy, I ignored the O'Reilly thing because there was no relevance to the issue. As you read my blog you'll find that I expect my readers to stay on topic and I don't engage in tangential discussions. The post was about a terrorist speaking at Columbia U., not about Bill O'Reilly. But to humor you I'll say that if O'Reilly condemned Columbia and then also invited Ahmadinejad on his show then you would be correct in saying that he was guilty of hypocrisy.

And if he did invite Ahmadinejad on, then I would condemn him as well, and had he actually appeared on the O'Reilly show then he would have been the target of my criticism. But, as it is, that's not what happened.

As for the Nazi, again the relevance is escaping me, but something tells me that you're one of those who buys into the "Bush lied/Iraq is about oil" garbage that the Kool Aid Man has been handing out. If so, you're quote lacks context and applicability. I find it odd how the Left likes to quote nazis and fascists as a means of validating their own paranoia and suspicion.

I've debated many such people and learned that I shouldn't debate them anymore. I learned that no matter how much logic, reason and historical fact I use, I can't argue against paranoia, delusion and blind unconditional hatred. It's a futile task and a waste of time. You cite Goering, and I could cite Stalin and his references to America's 'useful idiots', or Chamberlain and his many appeasement follies, but would we actually get anywhere in the discussion? No. You believe what you believe and I believe what I believe. Let's just save ourselves the time and energy and agree to disagree, and move on to other things...with respect, of course.


The Far-Out Left cannot resist trashing Mr."O". He's a whistle-blower, the most effective one!

That's both the reason for his Ratings,
and the Volumn of Hatred. reb