Archive for Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Iranian president challenges Bush to debate

August 30, 2006


— Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday challenged President Bush to a televised debate, a proposal the White House immediately dismissed as a "diversion."

The challenge came during a freewheeling, 2 1/2-hour news conference and only two days before a U.N. Security Council ultimatum demanding Iran roll back its suspect nuclear program.

Ahmadinejad said no one can prevent Iran from pursuing what he called a peaceful nuclear program - not even U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who was expected to visit here Saturday.

"Mr. Annan, too, has to move within the framework of international regulations. No one has a special right or advantage," he said.

The U.N. Security Council has set Thursday as a deadline for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment - a process that can produce either fuel for a reactor or material for weapons. Iran has refused any immediate suspension, calling the deadline illegal, and instead this week offered a counterproposal that the United States and some European nations said fell short.

Ahmadinejad's latest show of defiance seemed to solidify the country's determination to snub the Security Council, following a string of war games and uncompromising public statements this month on the nuclear standoff. But whether the U.S. can muster enough support on the 15-nation council to impose economic or political sanctions remains in question.

In his criticism of the Security Council, Ahmadinejad singled out two of its permanent members with veto power - the United States and Britain - for what he called their failure to listen to the needs of other countries.

"The U.S. and Britain are the source of many tensions," he said. "At the Security Council, where they have to protect security, they enjoy the veto right. If anybody confronts them, there is no place to take complaints to."

"This (veto right) is the source of problems of the world," he said. "It is an insult to the dignity, independence, freedom and sovereignty of nations."

In his challenge to Bush, Ahmadinejad said the debate should focus on "world issues and the ways of solving the problems of the international community."

He did not rule out the possibility of direct diplomatic talks with the United States, saying it could happen if unspecified conditions were met. But he criticized the United States for "living in the dream of getting the Iranian nation back to 30 years ago," before the Islamic revolution.

Earlier this year, Ahmadinejad wrote a letter to Bush portraying the world as filled with an "ever-increasing global hatred of the American government." Washington promptly dismissed the letter as irrelevant and not addressing the key issue of Iran's disputed nuclear program.

The Bush administration had a similar reaction Tuesday to the debate idea. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said it was "just a diversion from the legitimate concerns that the international community, not just the U.S., has about Iran's behavior, from support for terrorism to pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability."


KsTwister 11 years, 10 months ago

Bush could not win a debate with himself let alone anyone else. Why do you think he keeps asking God questions all the time. God would probably answer if he could just quit laughing.

Tychoman 11 years, 10 months ago

Haha wow I'd pay money to see Bush take on Sata--er--Ahmedinejad in a debate. That's how they should fight wars anyway, since usually the problem is between the two disagreeing leaders. Lock them in a room together and watch the fireworks.

And who in their right mind would even think--(or not think)--of wanting Bush for a third term? Ugggggh.

Tychoman 11 years, 10 months ago

Yet again another troglodyte comparing Democrats to terrorist-sympathizers and Muslim extremists.

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


"Do you think Ahmedinejad will get the DNC seal of approval? Funny how Ahmedinejad and the DNC are on the same side?"

I'll take that one.

It is quite clear from reading above that AhmedineJIHAD has not a few tolerant multi-culturalists, at least, rooting against his primary opponent!

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


Your post at 9:32 p.m. was actually painful to read.

I think I speak for all when I say that what you've written here today are some of the most insanely idiotic things we have ever heard.

At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this board is now dumber for having read what you've written.

I award you no points, and may God (in your case, the miraculous self-generating universe that brought itself from nothing and ordered itself to consciousness) have mercy on your soul.


Billy Madison

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


I could care less about Ws debating skills or inability to articulate a speech to the public. That is merely one of many factors of leadership.

I have a question for you.

Do you think George Bush is a greater enemy to the United States than AhmedineJIHAD?

Do you hate Bush so much that you have found yourself strangely allied with an enemy that wishes our women in burkhas, speech suppressed, and rote recitation of the Koran in your local public school?

This post is exposing the politically motivated, "I'll do and say anything to win the next election" types, for what they really are.

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


"I do believe W is a greater threat to our country than any other foreign leader."

That's all I wanted to know. I hope there are only a few like you out there with that kind of hate in their guts.

We can't count on you in this war. Hopefully better men and women than you will prevail to ensure that we're not hearing the morning call to prayer in 2040.

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


"what war?"

Sharper than a bowling ball as usual.

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


"no, lepy, w's so-called war is BS. Like war on drugs. Let the police do their job and give them funds to do it, Quit paying politics and enriching your supporters."

Do ever watch CNN or are you too busy working on that excellent website of yours?

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


So its just a reading/viewing comprehension problem then?

Klickhammer 11 years, 9 months ago

"Hopefully better men and women than you will prevail to ensure that we're not hearing the morning call to prayer in 2040."

Perfectly sums up the irrational fear that prevails in the media and the mass culture over Islam, and hints at the undercurrent of racism that seems to have settled like fog over our country. Are these wars (Afghan, Iraq, and the War on Terror) founded on the principal of keeping the US from becoming a religious state? Clearly, the answer is no, based on the White House's own justification for these wars.

Let me ask you, do you assert that this country ought to avoid a religious theocracy, perhaps in the spirit of the Founding Fathers and their quest for religious freedom -- or are you simply scared of Islam? The prayer and the beards and the five pillars and all that? Currently, we are approaching a Christian theocracy in many regards (consider the political power of over 40 million unified Christian Right, the president talking to God, &c)-- would you support robust separation of church and state? Or do you feel there is something wrong with Islam, and if so, how do you justify this stance? How would you claim that swapping one religion for another would have any impact?

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


"approaching a Christian theocracy"

To think that the US is approaching anything even nearing a theocracy is simply a dismissive. Nothing but a technique to limit the speech and influence of a legal and effective voting constituency. To think that evangelicals and other christians are a bigger threat than militant Islam, is about as absurd as comparing the paltry numbers of Christians who have bombed an abortion clinic since 1973 in the name of Jesus with the plentiful numbers of Muslims who have committed terror in the name of Allah since the 1973. There simply is no real comparison to make, except for partisan purposes.

Since you seem to place your fealty in the secular state, perhaps you should vacation to Auschwitz sometime to the see the glories of secular rationality in all its glory.

Simply accusing someone of an "irrational fear" is yet another dismissive. If you have no fear of a primal force like historic Islam, which is merely re-expressing itself today in the only way it can, I would say there is a fourteen hundred year gap in your historical knowledge. Though we may have completely jettisoned our knowledge of history in East v. West in favor of a false sense of multiculturalism, I assure you Islam has not.

I personally fear the cowardly musings, gutless actions, and endless accomodation and compromise of Western liberals than sincere evangelicals Christians who have the "unmitigated gall" to hand you a bible on a street corner.

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that the West's birthrates are collapsing compared to eastern Islam's robust growth. Unrestrained immigration is enabling a not so slow displacement of those of us brought up in a liberal culture by those (in Europe) who oppose it. The history of Islam is not one of a love of secular culture nor classical liberalism. This doesn't brief well to an immediate gratification culture of mall children who don't want to be bothered with the facts. Most western people, absorbed in the easy life, take the Chamberlean position of inserting their heads in their posteriors rather than acknowledging the cold fact that someone may wish them dead and might be a mere breath away from holding their way of life hostage through nuclear means.

I believe in the separation of Church and State Klickhammer. This is historic Western Christianity in all actuality. The problem is that you and yours do not believe in the separation of Church and State. You believe the Church should be subordinated and controlled by State.

staff04 11 years, 9 months ago

On topic:

The Washington Post last week, in their little free daily that gets passed out at all the Metro stations, ran an unscientific reader's poll to ask who would win the debate.

Something over 60% said they thought Bush would not...

staff04 11 years, 9 months ago

That's because Katherine Harris IS a moron.

Last week she claimed to be riding a wave of support despite being 43 points down to Bill Nelson...

Pretty dense if you ask me.

staff04 11 years, 9 months ago


Thanks for pointing that out, but I am well aware that I called someone who doesn't recognize how badly they are losing a moron. I doubt you keep getting banned for calling people "moron." It neither offensive nor profane.

I agree that banning people for expression of ideas is harmful to this forum.

I have no problem, however, with banning people who consistently bastardize the screen names of others, spout completely refuted lies over and over in hopes that they will become true, and consistently try to sneak profanity into the forum.

I was actually tempted to contact the LJW to inquire about what I view to be a lopsided application of their TOU policy, but when I think about you and your friends coming to the forums with offensive names (moneyshot and mike_hunt come to mind immediately) and doing daily what I noted above, I am not so tempted.

staff04 11 years, 9 months ago

Oh, and Charlie Cook says you guys are toast this fall.

Look, I called you toast. Maybe they should ban me.

staff04 11 years, 9 months ago

c-man: Are you serious? Anyone observing this is probably laughing at what you just said. That is spin at its highest level...

Having seen the label of the beer in question, I'm pretty sure it is a reference to a Monty Python movie, not a religious reference.

How long did it take you guys to come up with that one?

nathancmartin 11 years, 9 months ago

It's disturbing that the Bush administration can dismiss both the letter Ahmadinejad wrote him and his call to debate on the grounds that they ignore the real issue of Iranian nuclear proliferation. Although the nukes are absolutely a key issue, scoffing at the world's increasing hatred of the U.S. government seems irresponsible, if for no other reason than it effectively puts U.S. citizens and soldiers at a greater risk of falling victim to terrorist attacks.

heysoos 11 years, 9 months ago

some of you guys are really ridiculous, and I don't mean in a funny way.

heysoos 11 years, 9 months ago

do you guys realize how stupid this sounds?

are you really at such a loss for meaningful things to talk about, such as the story above that you have to debate things like the level of offense of a Monty Python movie and the international computer symbol for butt-hole?

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago

Let me get this right...

Copy of email sent to Conservativeman:

"Bob, this is the exact post as I wrote it at the time indicated. Grail added "-------conservativeman"

after: ":.don't really notice Borris and myself."

The EXACT post is as I pasted below. She is a shameless Marxist wh@re of a liar connected to the LJW online staff somehow.

Posted by Harpo_Marxist (anonymous) on August 28, 2006 at 1:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Komrade Holygrailale,

"...we are attempting to be blog police, why not go full bore??"

Now you are talking Komrade! Excellent. Make sure to continue pretending you don't really notice Borris and myself.

Very clever!


There is no such things as equal rights. Party makes all equal, therefore no need for rights!

Wow, imagine that grail caught in yet another shameless lie? grail actually modifying a post to say something it didn't! Oh, that's rich!

Can't wait to watch her spin on this one!



What happened? Aren't you supposed to be ignoring Conservativeman and that "waste of time" Lepanto1571?


thomgreen 11 years, 9 months ago

This is the most ignorant line of commentary I have ever seen on these posts. Could you two (or more) continue your squabble somewhere else? You are both detracting from this forum.

heysoos 11 years, 9 months ago

heysoos cristo! you guys are still at it?

xenophonschild 11 years, 9 months ago

It would be a mistake to allow George Bush anywhere near a podium or microphone without Josh Bolten nearby, with cue cards at the ready.

If nothing else, this episode should be a lesson to voters: don't elect the "intellectually challenged" to high public office.

Would much rather have an ammoral philanderer in the Oval Office than a naive amateur, way over his head when it comes to fulfilling the duties and rigors of the office.

ksmoderate 11 years, 9 months ago


The last thing we need as a nation is for "Dubya" to lose a debate to that scum. Cue cards or not.

Tychoman 11 years, 9 months ago

1) Comparing Democrats to Iranian terrorists/fundamentalists has got to stop. You really have NO idea how much it sucks to be told that because of my political beliefs I am better suited to living in Iran than in the U.S.

2) Stop the obscenities with holygrailale's name. It's disgusting.

3) Grow up and stay on topic.

Tychoman 11 years, 9 months ago

He called you a Talibani for speaking your opinion on the board? Never mind I take it back he was right....just kidding. I can sense the "Simon says" quotes all over again.

ksmoderate 11 years, 9 months ago

Hmm, seems quiet around here. Did conservativeman and rightthinker get booted again?

xenophonschild 11 years, 9 months ago

Good morning, Lawrence!

How many of you think Iran is rushing to complete nuclear weapons capability?

Once they attain such capability, what do you think they'll do with it?

If they attack anyone, who will it be?

If they detonate a nuclear weapon(s) inside Israel, how should the United States respond?

Is there any wisdom in engaging Iran in dialogue (no debate, for such is both pointless and unthinkable) that recognizes their concerns in the Mid-East?

Do the Iranians feel they are the coming power in the region, one that can lead Shiites everywhere, one that can challenge Saudi Arabia and Eygpt for leadership not just in the region, but in the Muslim world as a whole?

What so few understand is that "evil" should be met on its own terms . . . completely objectively.

staff04 11 years, 9 months ago

"conservativeman gets points for the most inauthentic BS he has ever attempted to get to fly"

Agreed. That was the strangest display I think I have ever seen.

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


"Today's American Right is the equivalent of those in the past who insisted the earth was flat;"

A myth!

"the earth, not the sun, was the center of our heavens;"

We don't know how the universe and matter came into existence nor the real texture of sensible reality, does that make you an unenlightened doofus?

"They are the harbinger of a new dark age"

So embracing abortion on demand, euthanasia, bio-engineering, collapsing birthrates, rampant divorce, normalized homosexuality, and the rise of the single (if that) parent family are harbingers of an enlightened society?

Either interesting spin or shockingly blind partisanship!

"- unless of course, the American people rise in unison and deny them their insanity. Will America stand for truth, or continue to follow the radical Republican Right into humankind's unremittingly dark and frightening abyss?"

What is the truth Moira? If the Repubs are are the long glide path to the abyss, it would seem the Dems are struggling to overtake them.

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


"Forcing people to get driver's licenses and physicians to become licensed are also examples of "State Contol"."

So is the Gulag, Auschwitz, Tiananmen Square and the Killing Fields.

xenophonschild 11 years, 9 months ago

How about it, folks?

Can I get a response to my 5:51 post?

Anything of substance?

Or will our conservative friends continue to post inane drivel?

Ultra-conservative Republicans are a curse on the country - past, present, and sadly, even the future.

staff04 11 years, 9 months ago


No, seriously dude...that whole line of BS about the eucharist was possibly the most creative spin I have ever seen, and I'm surrounded by politicians!

Kudos for stretching that one out as long as you did. Even if you are the only person that really believes it!

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago


"How many of you think Iran is rushing to complete nuclear weapons capability?"

I'd say its a given. As Ahmadinejad tells us: "Our answer to those who are angry about Iran achieving the full nuclear fuel cycle is just one phrase. We say: Be angry at us and die of this anger," we won't hold talks with anyone about the right of the Iranian nation to enrich uranium."

"Once they attain such capability, what do you think they'll do with it?"

Since Ahmadinejad is a dyed in the wool disciple of Hojjatieh Shiism, he's pretty much unquestionably bought into the necessity for apocalyptic chaos, bloodshed and war to ring in the return of the Mahdi. Attainment of nuclear means assures an appropriate ability to create the aforementioned.

"If they attack anyone, who will it be?"

Hard to say, Israel probably. Plenty of public statements available that demonstrate that little bit of land is a real thorn in his side. He intends to provoke war, even if he loses. Martyrdom is a desired thing for Shi'ites. Eschatologically speaking, the return of the Mahdi will set things right, balance the scales of justice and force the desired conversion of the Infidel.

"If they detonate a nuclear weapon(s) inside Israel, how should the United States respond?"

I would say a strategy of interdiction and destabilization might be the best means to deter a detonation from ever happening. Take out their ability to enrich uranium, if at all possible. Build dissent and destabilize the regime (Ahmadinejad is lunatic fringe even for Iran). I don't think another attack like Israel's bombing of Iraq's Osirak plant in 1981 is possible. It seems enrichment means are well integrated, protected, buried into infrastructure and redundant. That means a long period of intelligence build-up and use of Special Operations, if and when, opportunities present themselves for attack or interdiction. Targeting the regime through covert means and building indigenous opposition I believe would have to be a continuous effort.

Lepanto1571 11 years, 9 months ago

Xenophon (continued):

"Is there any wisdom in engaging Iran in dialogue (no debate, for such is both pointless and unthinkable) that recognizes their concerns in the Mid-East?"

Yes, if nothing else to buy time to gain the precise intelligence required for such operations. This may also gain time to cultivate dissent among mainstream Imams (there are many) and build opposition within Iran (I think, a very real possibility) to destabilize the regime.

"Do the Iranians feel they are the coming power in the region, one that can lead Shiites everywhere:"

Yes, the disenfranchised street is looking for relief and an outward expression of Islamic vitality. Though Ahmadinejad's faction is lunatic fringe of Iranian politics and religion (I know this seems bizarre), the marginalized and disenfranchised pay attention and frenzy when an Islamic leader can defy the decadent West and generate the illusion of some sort of cultural/moral superiority.

"What so few understand is that "evil" should be met on its own terms . . . completely objectively."


Of course, Xenophon, Cyrus and the 10,000 would handle these particular Persians in a much different and more direct way. But sadly, times are not what they were 2500 years ago.

I'll close with a snippet from Mr. Ahmadinejad:

"Our revolution's main mission is to pave the way for the reappearance of the 12th Imam, the Mahdi. We should define our economic, cultural and political policies on the policy of the Imam Mahdi's return."

xenophonschild 11 years, 9 months ago

Lepanto 1571:

Thanks. I didn't know Ahmadinejad was a Mahdi adherent. That explains a lot.

Hope our leaders are aware of his philosophical constructs.

Tychoman 11 years, 9 months ago

Wow if rightthinker believes that Iraq turning into a "giant magnet" (what, two apprehensions in as many years? what else has been happening?) of al-Qaeda activity is completely unrelated to the U.S. occupation, those drugs he's smoking must be illegal EVERYWHERE because nothing legal (in the U.S. or the rest of the world) could possibly be that strong.

xenophonschild 11 years, 9 months ago


Ouch! Your spurs'll leave divots in our poor overmatched conservative friends.

Imagine how the late-lamented hero of Kaliwa received the post (Curtiss?) outlining the many initiatives William the Great tried to implement to combat Osama bin Laden and Islamic fundamentalism - only to be thwarted by the Republican Congress. I only wish I was perspicacious enough to find and post the material back when the hero of Kaliwa - where I believe he "saw a firefight" - was routinely posting drivel about how William the Great did nothing to combat terrorism or the threat of OBL.

Better late than never.

Tychoman 11 years, 9 months ago

Oh xeno you and your large difficult words.....and your small difficult words too :)

Commenting has been disabled for this item.