Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

Visit these great anti-Madonna sites:

Madonna Blows Chunks: An Anti-Madonna Blog / Site (NEW!)

Madonna Blows Chunks: An Anti-Madonna Site (site closed as of May 2017)

madonnasuxx's Anti Madonna Site (Internet Archive)

Help us keep ads off our board!



Add us to your bookmarks!
(works in FireFox and Internet Explorer)
Please read the Discussion Board Rules before joining the board!
New Madonna haters: Come introduce yourself!
Board Help & Updates

Stop Forum Spam

  Full List of Emoticons
Avatars
Thread Indexes:

One Stop Index Thread | Persons | Subjects A - L | Subjects M - Z | Aisha's Lawsuit

Life Universe Everything Forum Index

Barf-inducing Madonna links or news -


Flea on Twitter: @fleadip / Link to Flea's Twitter Page | Follow admin Melissa on Twitter @melissatreglia


BREAKING & IMPORTANT MADONNA-RELATED NEWS:

See the "Shout Box" Section at the bottom of the discussion board's main page for the latest anti- Madonna news and links

Welcome to The Anti-Madonna Discussion Board. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Iran in the News; -previously the Iran Debate Thread
Topic Started: May 29 2006, 11:32 PM (360 Views)
blueangel
Member Avatar


:grr: why shouldnt iran have nukes, is it only the usa that can drop them twice on japanl
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

Please Note: We already have an Iran debate thread in this forum that touches on Conspiracy Theories, so please, do not bring up conspiracy theories in this thread. Thank you.
--------------------------------------
USA = sane, rational people. Used nukes to shorten the war
(no, I don't buy into the theory that the bombs were really dropped to scare the Soviets, and that the Japanese were "already beaten," and that the USA kept refusing to accept their surrender. :rolleyes2: )

USA has not used nukes since then. If USA = immoral, USA would have dropped nukes on North Vietnam, North Korea, USSR, and currently, Iraq, but the USA never did, hmmmm.

Iran = run by nut job who has publicly stated that he wants to "wipe Israel off the map," he wants to completely destroy all of Israel, not just a few cities in Israel because he hates Jews. The leader of Iran wants to destroy Israel not for legitimate reasons, as Israel does not pose a thread to Iran.

Iran also has long range missiles (that can carry nuclear warheads) capable of reaching European cities such as Paris and London.

Israel, by the way, has nukes, and I fully support them if they decide to use them on Iran if it means Israel's survival.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

The funniest parts of Ahmadinejad's speech at Columbia University were, in my opinion, the part where he said there are no homosexuals in Iran.

- In a way, that is true, because homosexuals are hanged in Iran (as well as rape victims).

If you regularly kill the homosexuals in your nation, I guess you are going to have few to none of them.

Another funny line: when Ahmadinejad stated,

"I am a Muslim. I cannot lie."

Response:
1. Taqiyya and Kitman: The role of Deception in Islamic Terrorism
2. Arab Propaganda and the New York Times

(Lying and deception are sanctioned -and even encouraged- in Islam and in Arabic culture in general.

Maybe your supposed Muslim 'moderates' don't practice it (?), but your extremists definitely do.)

Iranian dissidents rally against Ahmadinejad in New York

Ahmadinejad Remarks Meet With Scorn, Laughter
  • September 25, 2007

    .... Despite the statements noted above, the comment that has sparked the most laughter and outrage is Ahmadinejad's assurance that there are no homosexuals in Iran.

    NBC Nightly News showed Ahmadinejad saying: "In Iran, we don't have homosexuals like in your country."

    The CBS Evening News noted the Iranian leader "was literally laughed at" after that remark.

    The Wall Street Journal also reports Ahmadinejad's response "elicited boos...and one loud burst of laughter." Likewise, the AP says Ahmadinejad "provoked derisive laughter" with his comments.

    At any rate, the Iranian president did not appear to have a good time yesterday in New York.

    For starters, University President Lee Bollinger -- criticized for extending the invitation to the Iranian gave Ahmadinejad a tongue-lashing before his speech.

    The Wall Street Journal reported Bollinger "ripped into the Iranian leader even before he had a chance to speak."

    Under the headline "Iran's Leader Booed, Laughed At During Event," USA Today noted Bollinger called him "a petty and cruel dictator." The Washington Post bluntly states that Ahmadinejad "faced a public skewering" and "appeared shocked and insulted."
Inviting Iran’s leader: free speech or freewheeling insanity?
  • Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is clueless if he expected to visit the United States, lay a wreath at Ground Zero, and not upset the American people.

    Or, is he?

    Perhaps we are the ones who are clueless based on how Ahmadinejad’s visit to the United Nations headquarters in New York City this week is being handled by the press and by Columbia University.

    While we in America have come to expect such nonsense from the United Nations and CBS, shouldn’t the line be drawn when it comes to a leading U.S. university extending a civil invitation to one who declares he will wipe Israel from the face of the earth?

    As the host country for the U.N. headquarters, Americans have learned to hold their collective noses at activities hosted by the United Nations.

    Allowing Ahmadinejad into the United States to visit the United Nations is bad enough, but inviting him to address a leading U.S. university is another matter.

    Ahmadinejad said in a CBS interview during his trip to the United States that “of course” he is against any killing or any terrorist activity!

    I didn’t hear the entire interview, but did they ask Ahmadinejad how exactly Iran is going to carry out its vow to “wipe Israel off the map” being that he is so opposed to killing and terrorism?

    Why was CBS interviewing him anyway?

    Did they ask about Iran’s policy toward women?

    Or its intolerance of gays?

    Was he asked about his ties to al-Qaida, Hezbollah, and to the militants (politically correct term for terrorists because we want to be sensitive to Ahmadinejad) in Iraq?

    Was he asked about the bold military display in Iran on Saturday just before he left for the United States? (Among other things, the parade featured trucks hauling Iranian missiles painted with slogans such as “Down with the U.S.” and “Down with Israel.”)

    Were the tough questions asked either by CBS or by students at Columbia University where Ahmadinejad had gone to participate in a forum?

    Said one supporter of Columbia University’s decision to invite the Iranian leader: “It never hurts to be cordial and if nothing else, take an opportunity to get to know your enemy.”

    Said Ahmadinejad, in so many words, on CBS when asked about Iranian weapons being found in Iraq, “Who do you want to believe? Me or Bush?”

    So much for good faith.

    Regardless of the questions asked, just allowing this man, who thinks nothing of boldly asking for our destruction and then “wanting to show respect,” to visit is a win for Ahmadinejad.

    Assuming any tough questions do get asked, just his presence in a respected American university will make for great propaganda television back in his home country.

    And one more point about the open-mindedness and dedication to free speech at Columbia University: This is the same esteemed organization that kicked out the ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) years ago, and just recently denied a visit from the leader of the Minutemen, the vigilante group dedicated to protecting the borders since the government seems not to be doing it.

    The United States finds itself in a predicament because of its policy of blindly following politically correct speech.

    It’s my contention that there is a basic difference between free speech and politically correct speech, and we no longer know the difference.
    - One Opinion
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

Columbia's Squalid Mistake

Ahmadinejad Meets With US Muslim Leaders - Media Yawn
  • There has been absolutely no mention of this in US media, but according to the Islamic Republic News Agency, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had a special meeting with US Muslim leaders—at which he denied the Holocaust.

    [snip article quotes]

    Who were these “Muslim leaders” he met?

    And why doesn’t our media do its job? Clearly, they’re more concerned with their careers, and political correctness, than with informing the public about important issues.

    This is of a piece with the disgraceful performance of the National Press Club yesterday, whose president smiled and laughed along with Ahmadinejad, asked questions without having the research to back them up, and never followed up on a single issue.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

I thought we had a regular Iran thread, but all I could find was this one in the index. If I can find the other Iran thread, I'll merge this one with it. If not, I might repurpose this thread, to turn it into a regular thread, vs. a 'debate about Iran' thread.
Folks in Iran are upset.

Dinnerjacket (Ahmadinejad) won the elections, the citizens are saying it was rigged, so they've been out in the streets protesting for the past day or so. At least one person was beaten to death, and tonight, shots were fired.

Iranian drama intensifies

Unrest follows Iranian elections; opposition says they were rigged

I don't like the NY Times, but here's a story they're carrying:

Recount Offer Fails to Quell Political Tumult in Iran

Excerpt:
  • By NAZILA FATHI
    Published: June 16, 2009

    TEHRAN — Iran’s leaders failed on Tuesday to halt a second day of huge demonstrations against last week’s election results but, placed on the defensive, offered another concession to the sustained rage here, saying they would allow a limited recount.

    They received a resounding refusal — first from reformist politicians who said they would accept only a new election and then on the streets of the capital, Tehran. Supporters of the defeated opposition presidential candidate Mir Hussein Moussavi jammed into a line more than a mile long. They marched mostly in silence, some carrying signs in English asking, “Where is my vote?”

    The numbers of opposition protesters did not match those on Monday, when hundreds of thousands of Iranians joined in the largest public demonstration since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, enraged that the conservative president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was declared the winner of Friday’s election with 63 percent of the votes.

    Fear, many said, was a factor. Seven protesters were killed overnight. Gritty and uncensored images, some taken by cellphone cameras, were beamed around the world via various Web sites.

    Worry over the future of Iran, a country crucially important for its oil, position next to Iraq and Afghanistan, its nuclear program and ties to extremist groups, spilled over its borders.

    In Washington, President Obama said that it would be counterproductive for the United States “to be seen as meddling” in the disputed Iranian presidential election. He dismissed criticism that he had failed to speak out forcefully enough about the growing unrest in Iran.

    “I have deep concerns about the election,” Mr. Obama told reporters at the White House. “I think that the world has deep concerns about the election.”

    As the confrontation inside Iran continued to build momentum on Tuesday, each side laid down more cards.

    Reformers, with substantial popular support but without the power of the state, worked to gain religious backers, urging clerics to break with the government. “No one in his sane mind can accept these results,” a senior opposition cleric, Hassan-Ali Montazeri, said in a public letter posted on his Web site.

    The government, meanwhile, sought to limit the damage by cracking down with only limited success on electronic media, revoking press credentials for foreign journalists and ordering journalists not to report on the streets. Supporters of Mr. Ahmadinejad — though apparently less than 10,000 of them — marched through Tehran’s streets proclaiming their candidate the election’s fair winner and chanting, “Rioters should be executed!”

    In an intervention that suggested a growing concern over the scale of the protests, the nation’s supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, took the unusual step of meeting with representatives of the four presidential candidates, urging national unity for the second time in recent days. He did not address the protesters’ demands for a new election.

    The Guardian Council, the watchdog body that needs to certify the results, said it was willing to conduct a partial recount of the votes, the IRNA news agency reported. Ayatollah Khamenei, who had urged the council on Monday to examine the vote-rigging claims, said Tuesday that the candidates needed to resolve the issue through legal channels.

    Mr. Moussavi’s representative, Ali Akbar Mohtashamipour, said a recount would not meet the demands of the protesters, Ghalamnews, a Web site linked to Mr. Moussavi, reported.

    “We believe there has been fraud because our representatives were not allowed to supervise the elections, and we have evidence of many irregularities,” he was quoted as saying.

    He gave an example: votes cast at some polling places, he said, exceeded the number of eligible voters in those areas. He also said the Guardian Council had not been impartial before the election because some of its members even campaigned for Mr. Ahmadinejad.
Twitter Is a Player In Iran's Drama

This should maybe go in the Obama thread rather than here, I dunno...
Obama reaction to Iranian protesters stirs debate

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

Iran's Revolutionary Guards threaten crackdown

Iran: where did all the votes come from?

Riot police use tear gas to halt protest in Iran

Was Iran's election stolen? New study makes a convincing case

Analysis casts doubts on Ahmadinejad's victory

---NEDA SOLTAN---

Neda Soltan, Young Woman Hailed as Martyr in Iran, Becomes Face of Protests

How Neda Soltani became the face of Iran's struggle

Neda, Is She Iran's Joan of Arc?

Amateur video turns woman into icon of Iran unrest

Iran bars funeral for opposition icon

Like the student in Tiananmen Square, Neda has become a tragic icon

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
flea dip
Member Avatar
Rock Star From Mars

Fatal Thinking: Would Obama have accepted a nuclear Nazi Germany?
  • by P. Gellar

    The conventional thinking around the Beltway and its perimeter is that we still have time to address Iran's nukes.

    Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, however, said Wednesday that "the Zionist regime and its backers" (that means the U.S. -- apparently he hasn't been keeping up with Obama's harassment of Israel) "cannot do a damn thing" to stop the Iranian nuclear program.

    Obama is too busy stealing from working people, from the private sector, and from our children in order to fund his socialist revolution to be concerned with national security. National security is just so last century. The individual built; the collectivist dismantles.

    The idea of watered-down sanctions is completely useless.

    Obama is saying something, anything, simply for the sake of saying something, anything.

    Obama is prepared to live with a nuclear Iran. Would Obama have accepted a nuclear Nazi Germany?

    Back in 2007, George W. Bush was for all intents and purposes cut off at the knees. Whatever plan he may have had for de-nuking the brutal jihadist regime in Iran was all but scuttled when the National Intelligence Estimate issued a fallacious report on Iran's cessation of their nuclear program.

    It was a thinly veiled attempt to change the direction on how we were going to handle Iran's nukes. And it clearly succeeded.

    That was an end-run around the Bush administration, and it easily provided the much-needed excuse to everyone on the security council, the EU3 (France, Germany, and the U.K.), the Democrats, and everyone who had been loath to take any action on the development of Iran's nuclear weapons.

    And of course, the New York Times and the left-wing media hungrily devoured the bait.

    It was treachery at the highest levels of government -- an attempt that had stalled until their man seized power. Back in January 2008, I warned of this treachery and predicted that Obama, if elected, would betray our ally Israel. And now here we are.

    The people of this great nation did not elect the foreign officers at the Office of the Director on National Intelligence -- un-American, disloyal, and seditious as they are -- but these officers have imposed their foreign policy agenda on this country.

    It was, in fact, a coup on the White House. There should be no permanent diplomatic institution, even at the federal level.

    They're too readily converted into bastions for America's enemies.

    And now we have the CIA finally admitting Iran's nuclear capacity. The CIA's annual report to Congress says, "Iran continues to develop a range of capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons, if a decision is made to do so."

    Most people know this and shrug. The left loves to repeat the mantra that we can't be sure -- that after all, we got the intel wrong in Iraq. But I say, so what? Saddam Hussein was removed. The threat of his despotic regime was destroyed.

    And now we are taking the opposite approach. Inaction based on bad intel is a deadly formula.

    Iran's nukes are not just Israel's problem. They are the non-Muslim world's problem. It is the world's complicity with Islamic barbarism that catapults the Jewish issue to the fore because of the fierce Jew-hatred that is commanded in Islam.

    But the hate and the prescribed conquest that Islam mandates is against all infidels and non-believers -- and these teachings are devoutly followed by the mullahcracy in Iran, which promises to attain that conquest.

    Even the godless cannot escape this religious war declared on the world by Islam. The fact is, this is a values issue. Right and wrong. Good and evil. And what side you are on in the war between the civilized man and the savage speaks volumes about your character, your credibility, and your morality.

    The well-developed obfuscations used by the haters of good -- words like nuanced, gray area, complicated -- are tools to confuse and confound lazy thinkers. On this issue, the opposing sides could not be more clear. Yes, there is a very definite good and a very definite evil.

    If national self-interest converges with what is good, so much the better. But at the end of the day, if your national self-interest aligns itself with evil, then your country is on a one-way trip to nowhere. History is proof of that.

    Americans know this. Time and time again they have demonstrated their support for Israel (invariably, Americans support free men), even if their political leaders have not.

    The clock is ticking on Iran's nuclear program. Must we wait for the catastrophe?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
« Previous Topic · Global Outlook · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Disclaimer: The contents of the posts contained herein are the sole property of their respective users and do not necessarily reflect the forum's views as a whole.
All content Copyright © 2005-2018 The Anti-Madonna Discussion Board, unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved.