He sure speaks English much better then bush!

we call him a madman--and look whos leading us!

Terrible @ 1:

He sure speaks English much better then bush!

I'm guessing you didn't watch the video. The interview was translated back and forth. Ahmadinejad is a lot smarter than bush though. I think we can safely say that.

You know... IF bush is religious that religions central tenant must be the destruction of the United States because that's the only thing bush has been pursuing religiously the past 6 years.

When he quoted Bush, I thought at first he was talking about how isolated America has become etc.. not Iran.

Bush's words to Ahmadinejad, sound like what Bush has done to America.

#11 EXACTLY my thoughts

Yeah. I felt the same way. And I'm glad this guy is getting the chance to speak on 60 minutes and at Columbia. Apparently our government isn't into the act of diplomacy so we have to depend on doing it ourselves. I remember in the madness leading up to "The War in Iraq" the only interview I saw with Saddam was done by Dan Rather. And in hindsight it looks like the dead Iraqi dictator was telling the truth then. Sad.

justabill @ 5:

Terrible @ 1:

He sure speaks English much better then bush!

I'm guessing you didn't watch the video. The interview was translated back and forth. Ahmadinejad is a lot smarter than bush though. I think we can safely say that.

I still stand by my statement! Ahmadinejad does speak English better then bush. The fact he didn't speak English in that interview is irrelevent to the statement. He can at least make a complete sentence. :-)

Maybe there is some some hope for mankind after all: JEWISH GROUPS’ ‘PIECE’ OFFERING TO AHMADINEJAD: A SECOND CIRCUMCISION

Ahmadinejad isn't being coy. He is aware that his interview will play on Al Jazeera.

Politically, he cannot back down and surrender his nation to Bush's threats.

The chimp is on the tube. He's speaking 15 minutes early, for those of you who feel the need to hear his latest refusal to raise taxes.

Terrible @ 17:

justabill @ 5:

Terrible @ 1:

He sure speaks English much better then bush!

I'm guessing you didn't watch the video. The interview was translated back and forth. Ahmadinejad is a lot smarter than bush though. I think we can safely say that.

I still stand by my statement! Ahmadinejad does speak English better then bush. The fact he didn't speak English in that interview is irrelevent to the statement. He can at least make a complete sentence. :-)

Not only does Amin speak English better than bush; the majority of illegal aliens and americans speak the English language better than Bush. That's painfully obvious with each time his handlers let him out of his cage. When he goes "off the cuff" and off the teleprompter, there's no telling what this buffoon may say to embarrass himself and this country.

Ahmadinejad was definitely coy, but he didn't come off as someone who is "crazy", he came off as an idealogue with a strong hand to play. Too bad Bush has no idea how to really engage in the kind of diplomacy that would allow the some of the most intelligent people in the world that work at the state department (I'm talking career diplomats, not lackies like Rice et al) to come up with a savy diplomatic strategy that would reign in Iran. Its so obvious that Bush want war for more reasons that just to "protect America". Its clear that the Bush administration has this extreme cynicism that allows them to creat world conflict for the profit of a few. I hope its not too late by the time there is another president. As for Pelley, SHEESH, this guy is practically in a rubber suit begging for Bush to call him a good boy.

Strength takes a first step towards peace, not weakness.

Any American that does not want to extend a hand in friendship and walk a path towards peace is a victim of propaganda.

kelley b. @ 18:

Bu$hie worships an Elder God that Crucifies those He loves.

Lovecraft would have written about Him, but He was too obscene, squamous, and mad for even H.P. to describe.

Dick Cheney reads the Necronomicon to him at bedtime.

justabill @ 28:

Terrible @ 17:

I still stand by my statement! Ahmadinejad does speak English better then bush. The fact he didn't speak English in that interview is irrelevent to the statement. He can at least make a complete sentence. :-)

I stand corrected! lmao!!!

....and I'm still waiting for Bush to extemporaneously make a complete sentence that is gramatically correct. hahah!

"What trait do you admire in George Bush?"

WTF!!!!

Not bob @ 352:

So let go of the ttpical American Arrogance that says we know what is best for the world - we dont know whats best for ourselves let alone a country as old as Iran.

I never suggested that "we" know what is best for Iran. I specifically stated that only Iranians themselves should have the right to determine their governance. It is also a fact that they currently do not have that right under the Islamic Revolution. So, I'm not sure what your point really is.

Do you oppose the thousands upon thousands of Iranians who have risked beatings, imprisonment, torture and death to speak out in their own country for those freedoms? Do you oppose the Iranian students who, by the thousands, protested against the clerical regime?

Weaseldog: Your accurate assesment of the Arab/US collusion and the idea that our country is free is spot-on. We have been living under pretend free elections for decades, the power players dont come up for election, they sit on the board of the Fed and tell the whitehouse and congress what to do.

The only problem weaseldog is that its easier for joe sixpack to beleive in terrorists that are thrown in his face on the news than to believe that his life and country are being run by someone else. So lets demonize the leader of Iran - lets pick another fight with someone who isnt a threat to us physically but is threatening our oil and money supply and ultimately threatening the rich and powerful in the world.

And I'm still waiting for any response on the treatment of homosexuals, women and Christians in Iran (seeing as how Mahmoud is so enlightened).
But perhaps you all prefer to ignore these atrocities.

Bobaloo @ 359:

BaScOmBe @ 357:

Bobaloo @ 342:

Shadowgm @ 276:
Who said anything at all about religion? But I notice you ignored the actual substance of that part. I don't give a shit about the religious aspects, what I said was accurate.

christianity DOES advocate genocide. just ask any southern baptist.

Why don't you enlighten me so I don't have to go find one. Really, this should be rich.

King David was ordered by God to kill all of the Philistines (ie: Genocide). He didn't do the job right, so God punished him. God loves genocide.

If you listen to preacher on the radio here, you'll hear them ranting about the flaming sword of Michael or the armies King David and our duty to God, anytime they want to fan the flames. I got to hear a lot of this after 9/11, at a warehouse I was working at. the Evangelist was telling us that in times like these the Old Testament is relevant and we should go forth and strike down the heathen.

Check this station out when the drumbeats of war are beating.
http://www.tbn.org/

Bobaloo @ 364:

And I'm still waiting for any response on the treatment of homosexuals, women and Christians in Iran (seeing as how Mahmoud is so enlightened).
But perhaps you all prefer to ignore these atrocities.

So we should rain nuclear weapons on Iran, kill a few million of them, then take their oil?

Bobaloo @ 364:

And I'm still waiting for any response on the treatment of homosexuals, women and Christians in Iran (seeing as how Mahmoud is so enlightened).
But perhaps you all prefer to ignore these atrocities.

Chet will soon explain to you that you are just too stupid to understand, and that in fact, by murdering people, what he meant to do was hug them. You just don't grasp that what you call a hanging was in fact just a friendly, albeit snug, "neck hug."

Weaseldog, and Janet, do you know what a paper tiger is? If not, just read your own unlettered comments.

Ahmedinejad is Bush without a tie.
And yes, way smarter.

Weaseldog @ 368:

Bobaloo @ 364:

And I'm still waiting for any response on the treatment of homosexuals, women and Christians in Iran (seeing as how Mahmoud is so enlightened).
But perhaps you all prefer to ignore these atrocities.

So we should rain nuclear weapons on Iran, kill a few million of them, then take their oil?

I see we were thinking alike. We wanted Saddam gone because of the atrocities he committed and look at the results. No, I don't know what the solution is, but I know it's not worth killing a million people and destroying their country to get one man.

Weaseldog @ 368:

Bobaloo @ 364:

And I'm still waiting for any response on the treatment of homosexuals, women and Christians in Iran (seeing as how Mahmoud is so enlightened).
But perhaps you all prefer to ignore these atrocities.

So we should rain nuclear weapons on Iran, kill a few million of them, then take their oil?

When did I say that? No, it's a simple response to how "decent and intelligent" many posters say Mahmoud is.

How do you think George Bush feels about Amadinajad's smirk?

Joel @ 376:

OK, Weaseldog, I'm REALLY going to go out on a limb here. Somebody hold my hand, mmmkay? I DO NOT SUPPORT A HOLOCAUST TO PROMOTE GAY RIGHTS.

Wow, not sure what the reaction will be to that. But I haven't felt this free since I came out of the closet as a gay man. Group hug everybody?

What idiocy, Weaseldog, what complete idiocy.

Ok, clarify your position then. It really looks liek you're arguing for war in order to get Iran to change its laws on gay rights.

Ok, what do propose then in order to force regime change on Iran, so that they'll legalize homosexuality?

Professor Farnsworth @ 125:

Weaseldog @ 118:

Professor Farnsworth @ 81:

Freakaloin @ 79:

America executes 15 year olds? Really? Source?

We do it in Iraq. Smart bombs and phosgene don't discriminate. We slaughter newborn babies in order to clear out neighborhoods. Just look at Fallujah. We filled the city with phosgene and cooked thousands of children alive in their own skins.

Source?

Source for what?...

Are you seriously saying we have not slaughtered Newborns, infants, children ????

For fucks sake man... before we even stepped foot in Iraq we took out 500,000 kids...

They were on sale ... and "The price was worth it"

If needed in 10 minutes I can provide 500 images of mangled and twisted dead bodies of children.

In case you have been under a desk for the last 5 years and have not caught the hundreds of thousands of DEAD Iraqi civilian images that are on the "internets"

OH HEY I found the comments where I was "arguing for war," Weaseldog, so don't strain your eyes. I had commented previously that:

"Iran’s clerical regime should go, should be overthrown, should be placed in the dustbin of that nation’s history. And it should happen as the result of the efforts of the people of Iran themselves."

and

"only Iranians themselves should have the right to determine their governance"

So, there you have it. I'll leave it to you to go ahead and apply your own unique brand of logical process to conclude those were arguments for any shade of external control on the clerical regime's life, much less the kind that comes from a frickin' invasion. Yeah, I see where you got that. MY BAD!

ysbaddaden @ 347:

BaScOmBe @ 345:

pelley is simply a piece of schitt.

He wants a piece of her?

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/duncanblack/race6.jpg

Kindred spirits, to be sure! :lol:

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., said he thought Columbia's invitation to Ahmadinejad was a mistake "because he comes literally with blood on his hands."

Ahhhahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Oh man, that's fucking rich coming from a warmongering pile of shit like LIEberman.

Bobaloo @ 386:

Amitola @ 384:

I don't really see much difference between Ach-me-job and Dubya. They're both power hungry, macho-men, who "use" religion to foist their personal agendas upon the citizenry. Each has exhibited a penchant for denying civil and human rights as well as the wanton use of coercion and violence to get their way - the ends always justify the means - right? The world would be better off without both of them - I just hope we can make it to the end of their respective terms in office with our world still intact.

I'm no W fan, but kindly show me where the "moral squad" that beats women for improper dress and the hanging squad for killing the homosexuals exist in America.

Pretty much all over. They aren't government sanctioned hanging squads. They are non-state actors. There's a word for non-state actors that commit crimes which try to intimidate people or force some social or political change.

Bay Minette
Published on 05-08-2007
"Christopher Gaines, 22, was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the 2004 robbery and murder of his gay roommate. Gaines strangled Scotty Joe Wheeler with a rope and then set his body afire in a remote area. "

Hate Crimes:
Serious violence against gays said to rise

I know the second link is old, but it was trending upward.

And as a short answer to a previous question:

Aristotelian Virtue Ethics
Mill's Utilitarianism
Kant's Kingdom of Ends

None of them require any notion of religion, spirituality, or gods. Take your pick.

weaseldog@347;

Ah, now you're getting down to the nitty-gritty of it all... Now those are the sordid details noone wants to look at or acknowledge. Anyone besides a few here feeling totally played for a sucker yet???? I know I've been feeling this way for a few years now... I'm thinking yea, it's totally a big ol international three card molly game designed to enrich a few at the majorities expense... That is, the majority of the 'worlds populations' expense... And a well heeled minority of international individuals and families unbeholding to any nationality really, are pulling the strings on all this shit.....

Hey, here's an idea... Tired of this fucking war, been hearing how congress doesn't want to fund universal health care but are more than willing to give Chimpy endless blank checks for wars or other bullshit? And we've also been privy to an endless stream of privatization ideas over last dozen years or so, courtesy of the republicans... All just proxy globalization scheming. The question rises up to the conscienceness. If the U.S. government is now in the business of giving up its' various responsibilities to the private sector? Then what the fuck are we paying taxes for government for ???

I'm beginning to think the best way to shut this shit down now, is not to bitch at politicians or even plan on voting the 'rascals out of office' anymore... Seems there's mounting evidence that repub or dem, there is something else driving all this the transends political party affililation and smells more like classism... The congress of wealthy politicians writes checks for the executive branch in opposition to the electorates will, the executive branch spends it on whatever the hell it wants which increasingly seems to be objectives which destablizes our national infrastructure as well as the general stability of the world in pursuit of war mongering, science undermining, territorial resource ursurping, and privatization schemes of any and all institutions... That, folks, is 'OUR' money congress is writing those checks against... That is 'OUR' money this presidency is using to undermine all of our lives for the sake of their globalist inspired ideology and its ultimate agenda...

My sense at this point, and seeing all other manner of response within the confines of the existing system, lacking... I'm thinking, fuck em... Maybe it's time to quit giving them tax money since they aren't spending those funds wisely anyway... Yea, why not, I'm not giving them another dime in tax money... I'll quit their paying taxes game.. I don't really want to since I can see the inherent fairness in such a system as long as it's not perverted... Which ours kinda is these days...But that's an aside and a different debate.

Then lets see how much mischief they can focus on internationally while they're dealing with a real bonified tax revolt. Not the phony p.r. kind haggling over the politics of the dems verses republicans view on taxes.. and whether or not that's hard on business... No, I mean a revolt where millions of regular people just don't send in the check next winter. The federal tax coffers just dwindle down till there's no money for any of the neato toys the MIC or the fundies might want or was counting on fed ducets to help buy. Might play into their privatization scheme but at this point, given they are blowing the wad on their own bullshit anyway, don't see what difference it's going to make anyway..

I don't want to privatize the world or see the nationstate or the concept of sovereignty shredded in the interests of privatized profit gouging by international greedmongering globalists, but I might be willing to cut off the taxation money spicket long enough to wreck the plan, to 'drown the privatizer' to turn a favorite libertarian quote on its ear so to speak..... If nothing else, something like that should be newsworthy enough to make a statement that can't be ignored. One, both the administration and the rest of the world would hear.... One that hopefully says enough!!! The citizens of the United States are fed up! Stop this crazy shit now!!!

After the crash and burn of it all, I am willing to see a new 'fair across the board' tax structure developed and put in place. One that neither punishes overly nor lets business and the corporate world completely off the hook (as is the case in many situations today), or tries to bullshit me into believing a business entity is the same thing as an indivdual...(that is a law that needs repealed BIG TIME)... But for now, this moment, I'm inclined to believe the only way we will shut down this war and a lot of the rest of Bush's bullshit is to shut off the moneytrain. If congress won't do it for us, then maybe it's time we did it ourselves thru withholding our tax payments... OF course this plan only brings pressure if WE ALL DO IT......... ( I won't hold my breath for this idea to take hold.... Will probably hear crickets chirping first...)..............JD

xoites defends Constitution @ 35:

"What trait do you admire in George Bush?"

WTF!!!!

I'm thinking, I'm thinking....

The Smiths Go To Washington @ 36:

Many Americans have been asking for a very long time.

“What religion, please tell us, tells you as a follower of that religion to occupy another country and kill its people, please tell us, does Christianity tell its followers to do that?”

King David was famous for genocide. There are biblical lessons in war, slaughter, genocide, robbery and slavery.

Bush is an Owl worshipper.
He isn't a Christian by any stretch.

It's Owls all the way down for them!

I don’t know about Ahmadinejad, but the people of Iran took pity on the US on 9/11 and are not our enemy. But the Chimp is trying his best to color Iran as another evil country that needs a lesson. What could be a good relationship with a little diplomacy will become the next hot spot on the globe because of Chimp’s blind crusading actions. We are the aggressor here, obviously, and cooler heads need to prevail so that this Idiot in office and the goons with their fists up his ass calling the shots don’t get us into more shit down the road.

Question: Who has Iran invaded?
Answer Nobody.

You'd think Iran had invaded another country, killing hundreds of thousands of men, women and children; and displacing 4 million more.

Of course Iran is more than one man. Ahmadinejad will be gone within two years. But demonization is necessary for U.S. domination of the Gulf.

I watched parts of the interview and I had a few thoughts:

1. I want to know how edited it was, I think they were doing real-time translation, and yet the interview seemed disjointed. I'd love to see the whole unedited thing.

2. That reporter is a wanker. Asking bush to present him with a question just belies how completely bought off our MSM truly is. My jaw dropped when he asked that question.

3. There is no way in hell that the iranians want us to attack them. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. They've seen what happened to Iraq - even if they think they might resist more effectively, they'd have their infrastructure destroyed.

"Today's assertions by President Ahmadinejad that there are no homosexuals in Iran would be simply absurd were it not for the fact that international human rights watchers have long documented some of the most horrific acts of persecution and violence committed against gay people in Iran. These acts of terror have included incarcerations, beatings, and brutal executions. Ahmadinejad's denial that there are gay people in Iran shows the extent to which he devalues the lives of the many citizens his government has and continues to violate."

- Human Rights Campaign, press release today (largest gay rights org in America)

"It is extremely unfortunate that the President of Iran, who used a prestigious academic forum to speak the "truth" about his country, nevertheless spoke so disingenuously about the human rights situation in Iran," said Ettelbrick. "The Iranian President's stark denial of our reality reflects his government's ongoing refusal to recognize the basic human rights of LGBT people. IGLHRC and other human rights organizations have documented widespread and systematic violations of the rights of members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community in Iran."

- International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission, press release today

FreedomOfInformationAct @ 396:

"Mr President You Exhibit Signs Of A Petty, Cruel Dictator"

Now, is that anyway to address your fearless leader, der georgie duhbya boosh?

No, but it is an admirable manner in which a very progressive academic leader addressed the President of Iran.

Sluggirl @ 392:

On the Ahmadinejad thing, the NY Times had a good article on why he’s really irrelevant. Most Iranians are puzzled as to why we’ve made such a huge deal about him. It’s like our politicians have no concept of how Iranian politics works.

Of course they know how the system works in Iran. They need a boogie man, they need a new Saddam... they need that to sell another disasterious war.

Jack Damage @ 400:

Should I send you an invitation if I decide to take an action that might be considered a civil disobedience?

Yes, 'cause that'll be the day. And as to your comment about the topic at hand, Iran, you...oh...wait. Crickets again.

Joel;

OK Joel, just for the record and to try and connect the dots... The subject is Iran... Their president is over here running his mouth at Columbia university and I'm suggesting that is a sideshow to the real issue because there does not appear to be a real effort at diplomacy going on here on either sides part. Which does not relieve our president of his culpability for the wreck we call the Iraq war or his administrations manipulations to coorce a war with Iran. The situation is a desire by some to wage war on Iran... Wars take money... We pay taxes to fund our government.. That would be the government within which 'some' at least wants to take that money and wage war on Iran with it... Tax money to wage war...and if 60 or 70 million people don't pay up?? Am I connecting the dots for you yet or are you still hearing crickets??....

Whatever dude, I have read some of your other posts, you seem to be a defender of the LGBT community... More power to ya, you should just stick with that... You don't know dick about me or what I'm about...And you are not going to learn anything about me here. And I still ain't heard word one from you about what YOU would do to fix any of the larger problems which the Bush administration and the middle-east situation including Iran is a big part of.... Problems caused by our government and a destabilized geopolitical situation along with a growing environmental problem that doesn't care about politics or anyones sexuality.. Big problems numerous world governments including ours are culpable for that effect everyones lives, be they gay, straight, bi or transgendered...

Think on that as you compose a snarky response... Or maybe come up with an 'idea' to propose that might change the situation for the better... Don't like me, fine, don't like the not paying taxes idea... fine.. Come up with something yourself, can't be any worse then what I've heard lately out of politicians and so-called experts. But as far as you and I going back and forth, ......... 'clogging up this thread' with our little pitch and catch?... This chit-chat is dun as far as I'm concerned.. So feel free to get the last little word in Joel........If it makes ya happy. I'll read it if you post, but I do not believe I'll respond any further on this subject................JD

Depressing. President Ahmadinejad is obviously the sort of person that would welcome diplomatic discussion. Our president, on the other hand, wants to bomb him. And he probably will. If he does, he won't be held accountable by any laws to include those made my man or the kind that come from a supreme being that he purportedly believes in and has thus far in his life shown no evidence of that belief.

Scott Pelley asked some of the most arogant, pompous and silly questions I've ever heard.
'What do you think of Pres. Bush" Who the fuck cares in you country Scottie?

Tell me what is wrong with asking this question.

What would you think the outcome would be if both Bush & Ahmadinejad interviewed each other, each asking 5 questions that only they wanted to ask each other, to show the world, who the frig knows what he is taking about.
Personally, I think Ahmadinejad has more intellect, knowledge of either the Middle-East/USA and war-time savvy and would blow NumbNuts to smithereens in the most embarassing way.

Retired Navy @ 405:

Depressing. President Ahmadinejad is obviously the sort of person that would welcome diplomatic discussion. Our president, on the other hand, wants to bomb him. And he probably will. If he does, he won't be held accountable by any laws to include those made my man or the kind that come from a supreme being that he purportedly believes in and has thus far in his life shown no evidence of that belief.

You're right and one of the biggest differences between these two guys is; Bush has never seen the atrosities that a war leaves (first hand) as Ahmadinejad has. He speaks in a way you can tell, he's trying to avoid this bloodshed. Bush gives a shit.

Bush said: you've made terrible choices for your people, you've isolated your nation, uyou've made it into a pariah state internationally. Are we sure Bush wasn't talking aout the USA???

This interviewer is both glib and smug from the outset. What a terribly unattractive combination, and it does little for PR or diplomacy.

Ahmedinejad did quite well, IMO.

As we beat the drumbeat of war, the president of the ENEMY voluntarily comes to our country， and have a nice sit down chat with our news media。 How unreasonable is it to send thousands of soldiers there to invade？

If he can come and chat， we can go and chat。 It makes the U。S。 look utterly stupid to talk war， nukes or no nukes。

Not only that， but Ahmin even gives Pelley an “out” at the very end， offering that Bush‘s words might only be someone else’s interpretation， meaning， there is still room to discuss issues on the table。 Pelley completely misses the point。

Check out the WashingtonPost article， Dan Froomkin‘s “What has Bush done to the government？” and the words used to describe Bush and the administration is， “incompetent。”

lefty losers.

kevin @ 415:

lefty losers.

Actually losing seems to be perview of conservatives--losing the gains we made in Afghanistan, losing the war in Iraq, and losing the security of our own people in the face of a natural disaster.

John @ 416:

Funny to see how everyone's hatred of Bush causes them to think of Ahmadinejad as a wise and rational leader. If Hitler was opposed to Bush half the people here would think highly of him. Fortunately there's the odd person who knows they're both despicable.

Amen to that. What disgusts me most about the Ahmadinejad apologia posted on here by many fellow liberals is this--it is simply the flip side of the same dumb coin by which many "nuke 'em" conservatives view the world, which is to say ONLY in relation to their domestic American outlook.

It is indulgent and myopic to view intra-national behavior through a domestic American political lens. It is embarrassing when done by Repugs, and even more embarrassing when done by folks on my side of the fence.

jeremy @ 3:

we call him a madman--and look whos leading us!

Only wise words make of someone a leader. We missed them and here they are now.

Being religious is the best he could come up with for Bush? Holy crap.

If someone in the media could be fair & unbiased & ask some real questions, we could all make up our own mind with the facts instead of getting riled up about the utter dribble coming out of the interviewers mouth (and siding with the enemy of our enemy out of frustration). Or is that part of the master plan?

[...] Crooks and Liars

Dean @ 420:

Hey Retards-

Just thought I'd drop a quick line for all you short bus riders in here. Why don't you actually take a look around in the world you live before making the statements you are all making. I have no political affiliation and would agree Bush is pretty much a tard. However after reading all the comments that were made and seeing the previous posters giving virtual BJ's to a president of a puppet government run by mullas, Bush looks pretty damn wise. When the balless French talk about taking military action against Iran, you know the guy can't be bright. Later Babypenises.

Blah blah blah. Iran doesn't have imperial hubris like the PNAC people do. If this war happens then it will be another war of choice against a non threat. It's amazing that even the French have now sunk so low in wanting to bomb Iran and it so far perfectly legal nuclear program. No evidence for a weapons program have been presented...

Well, the idiot said today that there are no homosexuals in Iran--so much for his credibility.

Scott Pelley should be asked, "What do you like best about working for George Bush? Is it the pension or the perks? How long have you been a nazi?"

Hu Jintao, China:
Despite China’s economic liberalization, President Hu Jintao’s government remains one of the most repressive. Some 250,000 Chinese are serving sentences in “re-education and labor camps.” China executes more people than all other nations combined, often for nonviolent crimes. The death penalty can be given for burglary, embezzlement, counterfeiting, bribery or killing a panda. Hu’s government controls all media and Internet use. Defense lawyers who argue too vigorously for clients’ rights may be disbarred or imprisoned. And if minorities (such as Tibetans) speak out for autonomy, they’re labeled “terrorists,” imprisoned and tortured.

but we do business with him?

Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan,
Two years after seizing power in a military coup that overthrew an elected government, Gen. Pervez Musharraf appointed himself president of Pakistan. He recently agreed to step down as head of the military, then reversed his decision, claiming that he was best suited to unite Pakistan’s contentious political and military elements. “The country is more important than democracy,” he said. Pakistan has endangered the world by spreading nuclear technology. Last year, it was discovered that Abdul Qadeer Khan, head of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program, had been selling nuclear technology to North Korea, Libya and Iran. As for civil liberties in Pakistan, a woman who has been raped may present her case only if she can produce four Muslim men who witnessed the attack.

but we do business with him

Crown Prince Abdullah, Saudi Arabia
Bending under strong international pressure, Crown Prince Abdullah and his family, who have absolute power, are holding Saudi Arabia’s first elections in 40 years—municipal elections, that is. Women may not vote or run for office, owing to “technical difficulties”: Most Saudi women don’t have the photo IDs needed to register; there aren’t enough female officials to register those who do; and men may not register women, because the sexes are forbidden to mingle in public. Worldwide, the royal family promotes an extreme form of Islam called Wahhabism, which considers all followers of other religions—even other Muslims—“infidels.” In 2004, the U.S. State Department added Saudi Arabia to its list of nations in which religious liberty is severely violated.

but we do business with him

why can't we deal with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad diplomatically???

“What religion, please tell me, tells you as a follower of that religion to occupy another country and kill its people, please tell me, does Christianity tell its followers to do that?” Ahmadinejad asked.

In the last 12 hours, and thanks to 60 minutes, McLaughlin Group, and TiVo, I have found myself agreeing with points made both by a radical Iraninan idealouge, and Pat Buchanan. Buchanan was hitting points out of the park this week.

Holy shit.

Thanks George W. Bush ... you asshole.

He's a madman, granted. But he's a madman with an excellent sense of snark.

steve davis @ 54:

He's a madman, granted. But he's a madman with an excellent sense of snark.

why is he a madman

why is he a madman? examples please...

The exchange about Amaninejad's ability in English reminds me of a video of Bush in France on D-day (60th anniv.) - the translator had a TERRIBLE time trying to get his sentences into something reasonable in French. At one point he just stopped because it was hopeless. Remember, garbage in, garbage out-- so I think we can safely conclude that the Iranian president can speak coherently in his own language, at least.

And not only is willing to (visit and) face questions in a hostile country, he's not willing to do it in his own! I wonder if he has thought of having someone make a President-mobile, like the Pope-mobile.

Finally - that comment on which religion proposes occupying another country was PRICELESS!

From Reagan on, the Republicans who have run our country have lectured the rest of us about taking responsibility for our own lives and actions, their code for cutting social programs, while they have been the slipperiest, sleaziest, most clandestine, least accountable bunch to come down the pike and the most successful, through war and corruption, at feeding at the public trough. We will be stuck with the bill for their gross malfeasance for the next 200 years.

Does anyone remember a US reporter being similarly tough on Bush in the last seven years?

Ahmedinejad is a jerk, just like our president. If you don't think so, ask the people who protest him, ask the women. Just because he hates Bush, should not make him a hero.

The media are going to use these next few days with Ahmadinejad in NY to push the neo-con plans of attacking Iran. If they can repeat the lie about "wiping Isreal off the map", among other lies, over and over again, I fear the people are going to fall for it again.

And Bush is just a puppet in this Admin...Darth Va...um I mean Dick Cheney is pulling his strings...

US Vice President Richard Cheney has considered provoking an exchange of military strikes between Iran and Israel in order to give the United States a pretext to attack Iran, Newsweek magazine reported in its Monday issue.

Gort @ 43:

I don’t know about Ahmadinejad, but the people of Iran took pity on the US on 9/11 and are not our enemy.

True that. Most Americans believe what Bush would have them believe. That all Iranians are radical, hostage-taking, turban-wearing maniacs, running around with giant Ali Baba style sabers. They don't want you to see the teenagers riding skateboards in their Levi's who could give two shits about anything the radicals have to say, or vast numbers of moderate adults who could give two shits either.

Granted, the whole 1979 hostage crisis sticks in people's teeth; even then it was the radicals. Even the Ayatollah thought, "Well shit." when he learned of the hostage taking. But he was in for a penny; he stayed in for a pound.

So, yes, some Iranians are assholes. But many are moderate, peaceful, and reasonable ... which is more than I can say about anyone in the Bush administration.

Immigrant @ 62:

Does anyone remember a US reporter being similarly tough on Bush in the last seven years?

Yeah, but she's something like 87 yrs old and they hardly ever let her ask a question- certainly no sit down interviews.

another question:

how come a man with obviously little-to-no-credibility have so many people hanging on his every syllable?

just throwing it out there...

How insulting. This is the president of a Nation, belittled in front of millions by a petty reporter. He is a bad man, but please show some decency as a journalist. How insulting, the same ideology about about the how we Americans are arrogant and ignorant..which is soo far from the truth, yet the people in positions to speak keep reinforcing

ghastly mistake of talking about “wiping Israel off the map”. I heard that he said he had been mis-quoted on that, but no serious world leader can afford to have things like that on his record, at least not without an abject apology for a stupid mistake. /em>

Is there a particular reason that this quote is so offensive but Bush declaring his so-called 'axis of evil' states and his intent to destroy their governments and affect a regime-change in the soverign nations that constitute these states is _not_ so offensive? Openly declaring his intent to kill millions of people, at least 1 million hes actually gone on to murder in fact... this is fine?

Is regime-change just like terrorism - ok when its done by the "Good Guys" (like John Negroponte or Ariel Sharon for example) , but its bad when done by people with the wrong skin colours?