How many Iranians saw Obama’s Nowruz message?
How many Iranians saw Obama’s Nowruz message?
The AP reports that “Iran played down” President Obama’s new video message to the Iranian people recognizing the holiday Nowruz. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s press aide said “minor changes will not end the differences” between Iran and the United States:
“Obama has talked of change but has taken no practical measures to address America’s past mistakes in Iran. If Mr. Obama takes concrete actions and makes fundamental changes in U.S. foreign policy toward other nations including Iran, the Iranian government and people will not turn their back on him,” Ali Akbar Javanfekr told the Iranian state-run English-language Press TV satellite station.
It wasn’t clear how many Iranians were able to see the video, which was not aired on state television in Iran on Friday. It was likely shown on Farsi-language TV stations beamed in from outside of the country, but many Iranians don’t watch television in the first days of long Nowruz holiday that is normally filled with family gatherings or vacations away from home.
“Iranians could see the video on the White House Web site, but other popular video sharing sites like YouTube are blocked in Iran,” the AP notes.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
So, if you have any Iranian friends who have family in the country, ask them to download it and send a file.
March 20th, 2009 at 12:47 pmI wish they could see it, but everything is censored there. Still, it makes sense to go directly to the people, and some people are bound to see it. Diplomacy, yes! War, no!
March 20th, 2009 at 12:55 pmIt seemed to me the money graf of the address was the admonition by Obama that Iranians should require their government to act responsibly. It was not much different in tone from pretty much EVERY US propaganda message to Iran over the last 20 years, more or less.
I am not sure the message was even directed at the Iranians, and NOT at Obama’s domestic constituency.
But then I don’t EVER trust these phuckers…
March 20th, 2009 at 1:02 pmBut, but, but Obama was on Leno, how could he do that and send the Iranians a message too?
¶ AIO
March 20th, 2009 at 1:03 pmI hate to ask, but if we are in control of Iraq, why aren’t we broadcasting anything?
Iranians deserve to have “I Love Lucy” reruns broadcast to them, as well as presidential addresses that their government might not want them to see. I am really surprised we aren’t doing this. I know we did it in WW2, Korea, and Vietnam to name a few.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:04 pmI remember in the late 90’s, how it was news worthy or reporting on the Network news, that “for the first time in 30 years, Iran’s newspaper printed a picture of the American flag with respect (not distorted or disfigured in any way.)” They showed a photo of the front page, with both the U.S. and Iranian flags both appearing at the top of the page above a story regarding Clinton’s Palestinian peace talks.
It took 30 years to get to that point, and it was destroyed literally overnight by GWB. Iran may downplay this olive-branch, but after a few more, Obama could actually make major headway in doing damage control following Bush.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:18 pmBlocking youtube that’s kind of funny.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:22 pmRebecca Lobo Says:
How is this video ‘appeasement’ exactly?
March 20th, 2009 at 1:30 pmFacts?
Give it time, Reb.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:30 pmAnd how is it “backfiring”?
Do you understand the concept of “backfiring”?
March 20th, 2009 at 1:32 pmThe word will get out, and the Iranian people will find a way to see this message.
With this one video, President Obama has engaged in more diplomacy than the Boy King did in 8 years.
Refreshing.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:37 pmThe cooling of the language is already kind of heartening. Both sides are now talking about what needs to happen to move forward, rather than saber rattling.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:37 pmI have a chat buddy in Tehran who is a grad student and I asked him this morning and he said, “of course I saw it” seems like it was not difficult at all for him.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:39 pmThat’s fantastic, elRey. Thanks for letting us know.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:42 pmlobogal: Have you even read what Obama said to the people of Iran? If so, how do you come up with appeasement? Are you dense or have a problem reading?
March 20th, 2009 at 1:42 pmThat is good to hear, elRey. Thanks.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:45 pmAll twelve of them that can read.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pmMike71654, I must have missed something. What twelve are you talking about?
March 20th, 2009 at 1:53 pmMike71654 Says:
All twelve of them that can read.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Careful, your racist dumb ass is showing.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:00 pmMaybe Obama should start by apologizing for the US CIA overthrow of the Iranian democracy back in 1953 and its replacement with the vile dictator Shah. Dictator Shah tortured and murdered thousands of Iranians. And our lovely CIA thugs had to teach his police how to torture…
March 20th, 2009 at 2:03 pmIt will take time for this Diplomacy tactic to work, but it is a start, and word will get out to the Iranian populous…
….with the US’s past actions with Iran, it will be a slow process for them to trust us…
…I mean, just look what the LAST 8 YEARS has cost us in the worlds eyes…
…would you trust us if you were them….I wouldn’t.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:03 pmI don’t think Obama is looking for friends when he talks to Iran. I think he understands that Iran is a very powerful country in the middle east, and we need to be talking to each other. Dialing down the name calling is a good way to start. We had eight years of the evil empire shit, and look were that has gotten us.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:03 pmMike71654 Says:
All twelve of them that can read.
March 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
__________
Iran’s literacy rate is 77%. The population is more than 66 million. 77% of 66,000,000 is not 12.
Except perhaps in Base 5 Million.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:05 pmOval12345678 aka James K. Sayre Says:
Maybe Obama should start by apologizing for the US CIA overthrow of the Iranian democracy back in 1953 and its replacement with the vile dictator Shah. Dictator Shah tortured and murdered thousands of Iranians. And our lovely CIA thugs had to teach his police how to torture…
Yeah, that’d be a start…
Nagahapun, though…
March 20th, 2009 at 2:07 pmOn this thread alone, Rebecca Loco has two strikes (not describing “appeasement” and how President Obama’s speech is “backfiring”). Someone please throw another hardball at her and when she lets it go by the plate, it’s strike three and we can just talk about her.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:07 pmOval, why the hell should Obama apologize for something this country did when he was just a kid? Showing weakness is not going to do much to get a meaningful dialog going with the current regime in Iran. Obama needs to take a forward looking dialog with Iran.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:08 pmfake-progressive troll.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:13 pmangels81 Says:
“why the hell should Obama apologize for something this country did when he was just a kid?”
I personally don’t think he should necessarily apologize; however, acknowledging those and other specific mistakes would certainly be a huge leap forward in foreign policy.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:15 pmangels81 Says:
Oval, why the hell should Obama apologize for something this country did when he was just a kid? Showing weakness is not going to do much to get a meaningful dialog going with the current regime in Iran. Obama needs to take a forward looking dialog with Iran.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
_______________
Admitting past sins is not a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength. And given the resentment many Iranians continue to feel more than five decades after the Mossadeq overthrow, it would be a REALLY good start that shows we’re serious about starting a real dialogue.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:15 pmThe Al Jezzera showed the video while Americans were sleeping last night. Sorry to say to the GOP the comments were positive. I know Bush Loyalist would love the hate to continue for Iran and other countries Bush lied about. Everything President Obama says and does is open to the World.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:16 pmI think it important to ask, of those Iranians who heard about the message, how many of them told their friends who told their friends etc.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:17 pmConservatives are Criminals,
There are millions of people there and they are not all the same.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pmAdmitting past sins is not a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength. And given the resentment many Iranians continue to feel more than five decades after the Mossadeq overthrow, it would be a REALLY good start that shows we’re serious about starting a real dialogue.
Rightee-o…If you wanna press the ‘reset,’ you gotta come clean. It is only we in the USofA who believe that more than half the world has no right to hate us…
March 20th, 2009 at 2:19 pmIf that is how Obama is going to start this dialog with the regime in power by admitting pass sins of this country, it will be seen as a sign of weakness. I think just by this country electing a man like Obama should tell the Iranians how we feel about past sins. Until we come to a place with Iran were both sides are talking with respect and honesty the time is not now to be saying where sorry for what we did five decades ago.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pmThe current Ayatollah regime is worse than the Shah’s. I don’t get why some progressives really adore a regime that oppresses women, Minorities and Kills homosexuals? ARent we against that? Why do we give Iran a pass? Sorry I break with the rest of you, Iran is a Not a progressive nation, they should go in the Ash heap of history like Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. Iran and Saudi Arabia are cancers on humanity.
All the problems you enumerate in Iran today are directly attributable to theUS/CIA ooverthrow of Mossadeq.
Mossadeq was democratically elected in secular–not religious–elections, and won a huge majority.
Eisenhower (well, that arch phuck-stick, Allen Dulles, really) took him out.
EVERYBODY in Iran knows the story.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:23 pmConservatives are Criminals Says:
“This regime is worst than the Shah’s. Why not work with the opposition?”
Would Obama and the Democrats have won if it came out that Iran was “working” with them? Think about it.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:27 pmWhat no one is recognizing is that Obama was doing the same things for Americans as he was for the Iranians, going straight to the people, on Leno’s show.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:27 pmHe has finally realized that to get to his own people, without the suffocating newsmedia mullahs interfering with his message, he has to go where they are. He can have a press conference everyday but only the wonkiest of us will watch. Then there will be two hours of lying by the media as to what he said. When he wants to talk to the people he will be forced to go directly to Leno, Letterman, and Stewart, because that is where we are.
Conservatives are Criminals Says: Please get yourself a dictionary and look up the words support and talk. See a difference?
March 20th, 2009 at 2:28 pmTHat’s because you’re not really a progressive.
if you were, you wouldn’t think that progressives “adore” the Iranian regime.
That’s a default position of right-wingers. You’ve been outed.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:28 pmHating Iranians isn’t productive, even if they are a Religious fundamentalism. Hate and fear are the trademarks of the religious fundamentalist Republican Party. Progressives should avoid prejudice based on hatred and fear, look what it has done for Republicans.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:40 pmConservatives are Criminals Says:
“Progressives should be against this regime.”
We are, but non-diplomatic engagement could lead to nuclear war. Is that what you would prefer?
March 20th, 2009 at 2:47 pmCaC is beginning to sound very familiar but since I really try not to remember old trolls, especially concern trolls, I’m not sure who it reminds me of. The “I guess you are…” is the key.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:50 pm“Why can’t we stand up to this regime they way we stood up to the South Africa back in the apartghied days.”
Because the US have the relationship w/ Iran that we did w/ South Africa. We HAVE to start somewhere, otherwise, what effect would it have on actual change? You’re not exactly wrong, you’re just being impractical.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:57 pm*doesn’t have
March 20th, 2009 at 2:57 pmWhat makes you think i support the Iranian regime?
What indication have I given you of my position either way?
Seems like a convenient and unfounded assumption on your part — the kind of assumption a right-wing troll might make.
March 20th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
March 20th, 2009 at 3:06 pmUnexpressed premise rule. A party may not disown a premise that has been left implicit by that party, or falsely present something as a premise that has been left unexpressed by the other party.
Obama said he wanted “constructive ties” with Iran, which could take its “rightful place” in the world if it renounced terror and embraced peace.
But will the USA/Israel also renounce TERROR and embrace peace? Israel has nuclear bombs and is not a signatory of the non nuclear proliferation treaty, while Iran is a signatory and therefore has the RIGHT to pursue Nuclear Energy. Iran does not have a nuclear Bomb.
Obama is very eloquent, however, the USA has no International credibility due to its hypocrisy.
March 20th, 2009 at 3:18 pmConservatives are Criminals Says:
Since when is being a progressive mean you support religious Fascists?
March 20th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
____________
Talking with someone is not the same as supporting them, Trajan.
You’re talking with us, do you support us?
We’re talking with you, and we obviously don’t support fascist, racist, Latin King wannabes like you.
Good try, though! You almost had us fooled!
March 20th, 2009 at 3:23 pmConservatives are Criminals Says:
Levi the Oracle,
I am talking about the Iranian regime, not the people. Progressives should be against this regime. I guess your OK with WOmen being stoned and Gays Hanged then? Really progressive, don’t you think.
March 20th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
___________
Yes, it is. It is really progressive to push for dialogue with a regime that commits acts we disapprove of, such as stoning women and hanging gays.
It means that we can see beyond the narrow ideology of religous fundamentalism on our side and theirs, and see that if we both stop demonizing each other, we can help promote an environment in which a future Iran will not persecute women and gays.
It’s forward-thinking. That’s progressive. That’s why we support the dialogue, even if we don’t support the Iranian regime.
March 20th, 2009 at 3:29 pmWhat can a speech do if Neocon Dennis Ross is the man appointed by this administration is now advising Hillary Clinton and the President on the issue of relationship with Iran?
March 20th, 2009 at 3:30 pmRoss is advocating more painful sanctions and a war with Iran .
Ross like all Neocons takes his advice from AIPAC and a third country.
hussein toasterhead,
I was fumbling over the same point. Well said.
March 20th, 2009 at 3:40 pm53 Conservatives are Criminals Says:
I am against any regime that discriminates against woman and homosexuals. While the Iranian regime is more violent in their treatment of woman and homosexuals, we have seen Republicans to be inappropriate in their treatment of woman and homosexuals here at home.
Do I oppose the Iranian regime? I would prefer if they treated woman and homosexuals better, surely, but frankly it’s their nation, not mine. I am trying to prevent that type of behavior in my own country by voting for Democratic candidates, who are generally more supportive of woman and homosexuals.
I am not sure if I can speak for all progressives, but how the Iranians treat their own people isn’t as important to me as how Americans threat their own people. I guess my priorities are closer to home. If Iran wants help solving their internal problems, they can get in line.
March 20th, 2009 at 3:51 pmThere has been a large movement of very well educated Iranian youth working toward change that we can’t see. I think it best not to meddle in Iran’s affairs, and risk a government crackdown. Democracy can’t simply be instilled, it has to evolve. Any American who is honest with themselves will see that women and blacks got the right to vote around two hundred years after we established our democracy. I think Iran might move a little faster, but they would move in a manner that worked with the culture they wanted to keep.
A lot of students are seeing Obama’s message, and that is good for Iranians to see goodwill from Americans—if that good will is honored. It’s not our job to structure Iranian society.
March 20th, 2009 at 4:14 pmRebecca Lobo Says:
Looks like Obamas appeasement video is backfiring….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Every time I see one of your ignorant posts it is stupider than the last one. You are a complete moron. Did Obama cede Egypt to Iran or something? My GOD you are ignorant. You sick warmonger morons had your day. You screwed up everything in sight. It is time for you to STFU and let the adults do the driving.
March 20th, 2009 at 4:37 pmhussein toasterhead Says: 31
Exactly so HT well said
March 20th, 2009 at 4:38 pmangels81 Says:
——————————————————————————–
If that is how Obama is going to start this dialog with the regime in power by admitting pass sins of this country, it will be seen as a sign of weakness. I think just by this country electing a man like Obama should tell the Iranians how we feel about past sins. Until we come to a place with Iran were both sides are talking with respect and honesty the time is not now to be saying where sorry for what we did five decades ago.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I think you are wrong Angel. First of all the regime in POWER is moderate. You act like Aahmadinejad is in OFFICE not in power. He is president which in Iran doesnt get him a parking space unless Rafsanjani the head of the counsel of experts who have the ACTUAL executive power says so. Second it IS talking with respect to admit it was wrong to overthrow a democratically elected government it IS the place to start as it tells them we arent trying to DO IT AGAIN. Remember that Bush tried to overthrow Chavez just six years ago.
March 20th, 2009 at 4:42 pmThat would make it 20 years.
And while we’re at it, why don’t you butch up and describe what Bush did to sour relations with the country where they’ve chanted death to you for the duration.
You know, in between committing acts of war against you, sponsoring bombings of your citizens, running organised kidnapping rings of your citizens, being the world’s largest sponsor of terrorism and running several proxy terrorist groups to maintain a constant state of war with several of their neighbours.
Tell us about what Bush did to sour that rosy relationship.
March 20th, 2009 at 5:36 pmOr better yet, tell us what the difference was under Clinton or if Gore had been elected. Try.
53
If you haven’t seem em hung from a crane as a public installation you ought to have the brains to know how stupid you look making this comparison.
You can either s.t.f.u or defend your characterisation of the public executions of minorities as “inappropriate”. And yeah, you did just say that when you made that comparison.
March 20th, 2009 at 5:43 pmWell first off, if you’re gonna try to engage in a decent debate, you’re gonna have to stop trying to portray another argument as describing a “rosy relationship” when the paragraph immediately previous to the one you quoted said:
I remember in the late 90’s, how it was news worthy or reporting on the Network news, that “for the first time in 30 years, Iran’s newspaper printed a picture of the American flag with respect (not distorted or disfigured in any way.)” They showed a photo of the front page, with both the U.S. and Iranian flags both appearing at the top of the page above a story regarding Clinton’s Palestinian peace talks.
You see, what Mugsy was saying was that such a small indicator of movement took a very long time to come about, and that this little bit of progress was completely undone by the jingoistic saber-rattling that substituted for foreign policy under President Bush. There was no mention or suggestion of a “rosy relationship”.
That would make your “rosy relationship” a Straw Man Argument. And thus would represent a serious blow to any credibility you would bring to the discussion.
March 20th, 2009 at 5:44 pmOh, and s3n… don’t bother railing against any of the arguments put forth by “Conservatives are Criminals”.
That one’s a “fake-progressive” sock puppet troll.
March 20th, 2009 at 5:47 pms3n Says:
Your post is delusional. What did Bush do to sour relations? You mean BESIDES calling them part of the axis of evil? Threatening war with them? The only way to say they are sponsers of terrorism is their link to Hezbollah. They ARE terrorists but they are terrorists who care about NOTHING but Lebanon. They have NEVER done any international terrorism. Cough up the evidence they are killing OUR countrymen? Running several proxy terrorists groups or maintaing a state of war with ANY of their neighbors. Iran has not invaded ANY COUNTRY since the time of Xerxes. You are spewing propganda and flat out dont know what you are talking about.
March 20th, 2009 at 5:48 pmYeah and what do you know?
You might want to ease up on the caps there son.
March 20th, 2009 at 5:51 pmI don’t recall seeing any news that the well-known and long-term US government policies of doing precisely that got stopped any time recently.
s3n Says:
You might want to ease up on the caps there son.
I don’t recall seeing any news that the well-known and long-term US government policies of doing precisely that got stopped any time recently.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are right. I havent seen it reversed either and yet it SHOULD BE. We SUCK at regime changes everytime we do it the people of those coutries suffer. We overthrew DEMOCRACIES in Iran, Guatemala, Brazil and Chile and replaced them with military dictatorships then watched as tens of thousands were slaughtered in each of those countries except Brazil. We also INVADED the Dominican Republic to STOP them from reinstalling their freely elected president Juan Bosch and KEEP a military dictatorship. I Say it is time we stopped doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.
March 20th, 2009 at 5:56 pmGood to see you’re back Becky.
Wanna explain how the video is “appeasement”?
Or how it is “backfiring”?
Thanks, doll.
March 20th, 2009 at 5:59 pmRebecca Lobo Says:
Obama is in lock step with Sal Lewinski.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Oh my GOD you are astonishingly stupid. YOU are in lockstep with the Marching Moron Society
March 20th, 2009 at 6:03 pmSame link in my prior post.
March 20th, 2009 at 6:13 pmRebecca, was it something i said?
March 20th, 2009 at 6:13 pmLMAO. You’re calling me delusional while you’ve written this?
Okay, well why don’t you describe the relationship that existed the day before Bush did those things. And here’s a thought, why not try having a spine and including the unambiguous history I mentioned while you do it.
So you’re saying that the only way to call them sponsors of terrorist groups is if you include their sponsorship of terrorist groups?
Okay. I guess the only way to say that the US has a navy is their link to the US navy.
If you simply said that you really wanted to excuse a terrorist sponsor from this undeniable charge but couldn’t, you could do it in a less comical way.
OMFG, you actually think this means something don’t you.
The IRA only cared about Northern Ireland. The Tamil Tigers only care about Sri Lanka. For the love of god do you see any kind of pattern emerging?
Or better yet, let’s hear a defense of US proxy wars in which local paramilitry groups who qualify as terrorists was cool if they only cared about their home country.
I don’t recall the Contra’s branching out their beef to include Brazil. So let’s hear it. Go for it.
Tell us about how sponsorship of them was okay because….. well you haven’t actually told us why that is yet. But I’m real sure you’re just about to.
Wow. So in summary, you’re telling me that you are aware they sponsor terrorism and proxy wars but can I come up with any examples of that, like the one you just confirmed in the previous paragraph?
Gee, I dunno. I might have to do something along the lines of citing some part of a 30 year history in between “the Shah” and “Bush”, which doesn’t seem to rate a mention here yet.
Then again, you did just ask me if I could come up with an example of Iran conducting a proxy war. I guess 2 years is too far of a stretch to remember.
March 20th, 2009 at 6:17 pmYeah, but you did it by proxy by sponsoring groups that only cared about the country they were in. That makes it okay, right?
March 20th, 2009 at 6:19 pmI don’t read names. I quote them only so people can know who I’m talking to.
March 20th, 2009 at 6:21 pmI wasn’t suggesting any different. I’m just letting you know — if you think you’re railing against a genuine progressive opinion, you’re not. It’s a fake.
March 20th, 2009 at 6:22 pms3n Says:
Yes because your post was delusional.
Hezbollah and Israel exchange terrorism. When the leader of Hezbollah was blown up by a carbomb the guy responsible was Mossad. Israel illegally invaded Lebanon and that is what CREATED Hezbollah they did not EXIST before 1982. So yeah it isnt the same thing as international terrorism. The man with REAL power in Iran that is Rafsanjani has TWICE offered to end their support for Hezbollah AND their nuclear program. We wouldnt even talk to them. Their government isnt like ours it is complicated in that the Mullahs still have a lot of political power and THAT is a problem. Talking to Rafsanjani boosting HIS standing would only be good for us. The guy HATES Amadinijead they are longtime political enemies. The demographics of Iran are encouraging. about 60% of the country is under 30 and they dont hate the west. They arent Afghanistan and never were. They are a natural ally they arent Arabs and see themselves as surrounded by enemies because of it. They would benifit from a lessening of hostility with us and we can use that go gain quite a bit from them.
Back to Hezbollah. Yeah they commit terrorism. So does Israel but we dont just TALK to them we support them unconditionally. We supported Rios Montt while he slaughtered tens of thousands in Guatemala. We supported Pol Pot AFTER the genocide and we supported Suhuarto to the very end and he was one of the worst mass murderers in modern history but we shouldnt even TALK to Iran? Get real. IF we engage with the moderate elements in Iran that already have a good bit of the power we can enhance the democratic elements. The politics of hate here are stupid and shortsighted.
March 20th, 2009 at 6:27 pms3n Says:
Yeah, but you did it by proxy by sponsoring groups that only cared about the country they were in. That makes it okay, right?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I dont even know what this is supposed to mean. But NO we sent the Marines into the Dominican republic. We bombed Guatemala. Our CIA was directly involved in Brazil, Chile, and Iran and gave the first two direct material support.
March 20th, 2009 at 6:30 pmRebecca?
“appeasement”?
“backfiring”?
No?
March 20th, 2009 at 6:31 pmRebecca Lobo Says:
What really matters here is who said it not what was said. Let’s make that clear.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Let me make THIS perfectly clear. You are a liar a fool and a moron. For me at least it is NEVER about who said it. It is always about WHAT is said. How did you get so stupid? Did it involve, training or drugs or was it a natural gift?
March 20th, 2009 at 6:33 pmWe train terrorists.
March 20th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Tell us, Rebecca, why should we pay any attention to what you say when start off the thread with a comment like this:
…yet refuse to clarify what you meant by ‘appeasement” or by “backfiring”, even after being asked several times to to so?
What does it say about
a) the quality of the discourse you offer
b) the willingness to engage in discussion that you display
or
c) the responsibility you take for what you post?
March 20th, 2009 at 6:43 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
Propaganda parrots cant CLARIFY. They can only regurgitate what they have been programed with. You will have to wait until Rush or Hannity TELLS her what it means or what to think tomorrow. Higher brain function from the Limborg is about as likely as Nobel Prize winning literature from a bonobo ape
March 20th, 2009 at 6:48 pmYou mean, if you ignore all the borders involved.
Either way, this might be a point worth making in caps and all if it related to anything being discussed.
I’ve said that they’re the world’s largest sponsor of terrorism and that they use these groups to fight proxy wars. You’ve admitted this is the case, you haven’t suggested it isn’t and you’re not going to.
That would seem to resolve any question you have over what I wrote or whether you can continue to suggest you disagree with it, with any amount of credibility.
No, sorry. Since the claim was that they offerred to end support for Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, you don’t get to talk about this.
Not after asserting that Iran is only connected to terrorist sponsorship via Hezbollah, not involved in international terrorism, proxy wars etc, when apparently trying to suggest that my statement about them doing this was untrue.
95% wish you would address what is written rather than reciting irrelevant history.
International terrorism?
FFS why should I bother talking to you if you cannot even keep track of your own arguments? Can’t I just write a series of digits in response and you keep arguing with yourself?
Who are you talking to? You’ve responded to everything I’ve written here. You know I haven’t expressed giving a sheet about talking to Iran.
March 20th, 2009 at 7:04 pmAgain, I don’t appear to be necessary in this argument you are having with yourself.
Yes you do. You can’t even convince yourself this doesn’t look supremely lame.
I’m struggling to imagine what I could find that would be more childish that someone pretending that they can’t understand their own argument, when quoted back to them.
Were those all the examples you cited, or were there a few sponsorships of local paramilitary groups involved too?
No doubt you’ll be eager to discuss this further, since you don’t know what I’m talking about. It’s not like you’re intentionally avoiding discussing this, because you know your own arguments contradict themselves.
March 20th, 2009 at 7:16 pmI don’t know what you are referring to.
March 20th, 2009 at 7:20 pmQuote what I’ve written if you want to respond to something specific.
You mean, if you ignore all the borders involved.
Either way, this might be a point worth making in caps and all if it related to anything being discussed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You took it out of its context and IN context it DID make sense that of what Hezbollah is about. They do terrorism, their FOCUS is defense of Lebanon. And I dont get what you mean ignoring the border. In 82 there had been NO cross border attacks for a year when Israel invaded, since their ceasefire agreement with the PLO they invaded to destroy the PLO politically not militarily.
I’ve said that they’re the world’s largest sponsor of terrorism and that they use these groups to fight proxy wars. You’ve admitted this is the case, you haven’t suggested it isn’t and you’re not going to.
That would seem to resolve any question you have over what I wrote or whether you can continue to suggest you disagree with it, with any amount of credibility.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I am suggesting that the whole premise is a biased take. Does Lebanon have a right to defend itself? I can argue they do WHILE condemning the way it is done AND pointing out BOTH sides are doing it so NO I dispute it is a proxy WAR. I am saying it is a terroristic defense against terroristic defense. Both sides are doing the same thing and using the same exuse. Both sides are wrong WE are supporting Israel, Iran is supporting Hezbollah I dont see one as worse than the other.
The man with REAL power in Iran that is Rafsanjani has TWICE offered to end their support for Hezbollah AND their nuclear program. We wouldnt even talk to them.
No, sorry. Since the claim was that they offerred to end support for Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, you don’t get to talk about this.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I get to talk about whatever I want. What I read was he offered to end support for Hezbollah and Hamas.
Not after asserting that Iran is only connected to terrorist sponsorship via Hezbollah, not involved in international terrorism, proxy wars etc, when apparently trying to suggest that my statement about them doing this was untrue.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
It is. Yeah they support Hamas also Hamas is the LEGITIMATE ELECTED GOVERNMENT OF THE PALESTINIANS. That isnt the same ballpark.
The demographics of Iran are encouraging. about 60% of the country is under 30 and they dont hate the west.
95% wish you would address what is written rather than reciting irrelevant history.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I wish YOU would get your head out of your ASS this is relevant. It is a reason we should do what we can to assist in the democratiziation of a country already leaning that direction instead of following the politics of hate and cutting off our nose to spite our face. THIS is just one reason this is so.
Back to Hezbollah. Yeah they commit terrorism. So does Israel but we dont just TALK to them we support them unconditionally.
International terrorism?
FFS why should I bother talking to you if you cannot even keep track of your own arguments? Can’t I just write a series of digits in response and you keep arguing with yourself?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
TALKING TO IRAN IS THE SUBJECT OF THE THREAD MORON. Since you are apparantly too stupid to follow an argument you are right you arent necessary. You are just a spewing moron
March 20th, 2009 at 7:21 pms3n Says:
Yeah, but you did it by proxy by sponsoring groups that only cared about the country they were in. That makes it okay, right?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I dont even know what this is supposed to mean.
Yes you do. You can’t even convince yourself this doesn’t look supremely lame.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I see. You are stupid. Or else you dont know the DIFFERENCE between defending yourself, with terrorism, which is what Hezbollah does and has NEVER tried to overthrow the government of Israel and OVERTHROWING THE GOVERNMENT Of A SOVIERIEGN country. I mean you arent saying they are the same thing are you? Hezbollah wasnt created trying to destroy Israel but to get them OUT of Lebanon. You arent very bright are you?
I’m struggling to imagine what I could find that would be more childish that someone pretending that they can’t understand their own argument, when quoted back to them.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Typically we send TONS of arms to the EXISTING military then recruit an officer to use them for a coup except the Domincan Republic where we INVADED. What we are talking about HERE is that we SUCK AT REGIME CHANGES. Since Hezbollah isnt TRYING to overthrow the government of either Lebanon or Israel it is, you know, COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
No doubt you’ll be eager to discuss this further, since you don’t know what I’m talking about. It’s not like you’re intentionally avoiding discussing this, because you know your own arguments contradict themselves.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
No they dont. YOU just arent very bright. Do you think apples are the same thing as chunks of pavement?
March 20th, 2009 at 7:30 pmObama will call and iran will answer, that’s it. Middle-east is not enemy of USA, they are enemy of BUSH and his father.
March 20th, 2009 at 8:33 pmIt is against the US Constitution for Barack Obama to be President of the USA.
In this interview by a Detroit radio station the Kenyan Ambassador confirms Barack Obama born in Kenya.
Following the above interview, World Net Daily contacted the Ambassador who stated he was referring to the birthplace of Barack’s father, and not Barack himself. However, a simple listen to the interview (or a read of the transcript) makes it obvious the Ambassador was referring to Barack.
In a followup interview by World Net Daily, the Ambassador is quoted as saying “I don’t know [if Barack born in the USA]“
March 20th, 2009 at 10:24 pmHow come the government offices in Hawaii say otherwise? Perhaps they are influenced by the Skull and Bones secret society. These Bonesmen stick together. After all, according to this 2007 article in the Yale Daily News, Obama’s economic adviser is in Skull and Bones.
Who else is in Skull and Bones? George Bush I and II, granddaddy Prescott Bush, John Kerry (who ran with GWB in 2004), John Bolton, and a whole lot more.
See this excerpt from New York Times bestselling author Alexandra Robbins, a Yale graduate who interviewed dozens and dozens of Bonesman. Hold on to your hats and she reveals these peoples’ goal to dominate the planet.
March 20th, 2009 at 10:25 pmCB_Brooklyn Says:
OH MY GOD. Not this abject stupidity AGAIN. How brainwashed do you have to be to take this seriously. The Sec of State has confirmed his birth certificate. The copy is shown on the internet and has been verified as accurate by Factcheck. The anouncement OF HIS BIRTH in the Honolulu newspaper AT THE TIME has been reprinted and NO ONE is questioning that it is authentic. Even IF he were born in Kenya, his mother was BORN in the US and WAS a citizen living here till her late teens so that would STILL make Obama elibigle. Why dont you fools give this stupid meme up it is embarassing to see you gusy flop around so desperatly. It is seriously time for you to increase your medication.
March 20th, 2009 at 10:34 pmHi Rebecca
March 20th, 2009 at 11:51 pmI am not buying. I encouraged you to join me in a polite discussion regarding Reagan’s support for terrorism and you avoided it. Would you like to discuss it now?
dbadass Says:
She will have to get back to you after Rush tells her what to think about that.
March 21st, 2009 at 12:53 amRebecca Lobo Says:
I’m saying that rule no. 1 here is to attack the messenger and ignore the message.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
What I am saying is that if somone is anywhere NEAR as stupid as YOU are that they should have the decency to be ashamed of yourself. You are a liar and a fool
March 21st, 2009 at 12:53 amBy the way Rebecca someday you ought to try HAVING a message other than liberals are bad Obama blah blah, and telling us what Rush told you to think.
March 21st, 2009 at 12:56 amYes, and the IRA’s focus is Ireland, the TTLE’s focus is Sri lanka, the Taliban’s focus is Afghanistan and the Pakistani Taliban’s focus is Pakistan.
We covered this already. What you are saying is pointless and you are saying it only because you have no other defense of what you’ve written and cannot disagree with what I wrote.
Well, what is your understanding of the word “international”?
You keep suggesting that “international terrorism” is somehow a major distinction here, but your shining example of what doesn’t qualify as international terrorism is a group dedicated to attacking a foreign country in cross border attacks. One that also operates on other continents mind you, but that’s a different matter.
There were also space shuttle launches. Lost the plot much have you? How on earth do you think this relates to anything?
Oh right, you’re just still trying to avoid acknowledging you were talking complete nonsense when suggesting that Iran isn’t a sponsor of terrorist groups.
Then my assessment is proven correct.
Ooooh how brave of you to write that response…. while editing out the context of my quote.
You don’t get to talk about Iran offering to cease support for 2 other terrorist groups after you’ve claimed they are only connected to terrorism via a 3rd group.
There is absolutely nothing you are capable of being honest about is there? You’re simply a compulsive liar.
They supported them when all they were was the elected group responsible for suicide bombings. That leaves your distinction where?
You really do suck at this whole logic game don’t you.
And the topic of this discussion is you and your unrepentant lies in defense of terrorist groups and their sponsors.
March 25th, 2009 at 8:35 amIt’s been quite enlightening.
It’s their mission statement, you ignoranus. The entire purpose of their existance. I don’t have to disagree with you on this point since THEY DO.
LMAO, again, what can I say? How about, try finding anyone from Hezbollah that agrees with you? Really. Try it you nutbag.
Apparently when OJ wrote his “If I did it” book, there might have been 1 person who still didn’t get the hint.
I’m struggling to imagine what I could find that would be more childish that someone pretending that they can’t understand their own argument, when quoted back to them.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Typically we send TONS of arms to the EXISTING military then recruit an officer to use them for a coup except the Domincan Republic where we INVADED. What we are talking about HERE is that we SUCK AT REGIME CHANGES.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. OMFG. This is it. The most ignorant statement I’ve ever seen.
In the space of 3 years you’ve seen 1 terrorist group stage a coup in Lebanon and incite a war with Israel and this is your assessment.
Well, simply put, you’ve told us that you think a universally recognised terrorist group isn’t one, it can do no wrong, the wars it fights are able to be dismissed and any and all actions of it can be excused.
I think that speaks for itself.
March 25th, 2009 at 8:49 am