Monday, September 24, 2007

Oo, Gross!



Saw this on my Dad's truck. Liked it.

I was preparing a post on the Media's Flying Circus regarding Ahmadinejad, but I realized that our House of Pravdas news sources we're going to cherry pick the propaganda and leave us with polarized debates on irrelevant talking points. I can sum it up accurately and succinctly by saying, "A guy talked at a college." All else was posturing on all sides.

Oo, gross.

15 comments:

Pandabonium said...

Oo,Gross. Like totally heavy, man.

What is pathetic about much of the posturing (on both sides) is that Ahmadinejad isn't even the guy in charge. He doesn't control the military, the Republican Guards, the nuclear power program, any of it.

but one important fact we gleaned from his talk is this: "There are no homosexuals in Iran". Wow, just like the Republican Party! There's common ground here...

The Moody Minstrel said...

You beat me to the punch, Snabbie! I was going to post here about all the embarrassing cheap shots and trash talk oozing out of the U.S media and internet surrounding Ahmadinejad's visit to the U.S.. I mean, I have issues with a number of things in Iran, but as an American, I find this humiliating. We're showing our true colors to the world, and believe me, they're NOT red, white, and blue. Frankly, I think it would be far better to show our integrity and pride in the values we supposedly stand for by letting the guy visit Ground Zero and pay his respects regardless of what we think of him.

Oh, I forgot; this is the "War on Terror" era, and we're all supposed to be self-righteous bigots now. How silly of me.

People, Iran had nothing to do with 9/11. Iran was also one of the first nations to express sympathy in the aftermath of the attack.

(I remember seeing footage of candlelight vigils in Tehran...contrasted with certain "allied" Middle Eastern countries in which people were dancing in the streets and handing out sweets. "Who's your friend, bro?")

DON'T fall into the same trap we were led into before we attacked Iraq!

Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on ALL of us.

Or was that "Fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me...you can't get fooled again"?

Don Snabulus said...

My favorite was the woman protesting Ahmadinejad at ground zero with a sign that said, "Outlaw Sharia."

Since Sharia is the purview of a sect of Sunnis and Iran is completely controlled by Shia Muslims, I think her wish was granted retroactively.

Dang brown people with the weird God always trying to keep us from our oil...gosh!

Maximilian Strange said...

Ah, you're glossing over the finer points of the story...Before Imajihad spoke, the president of Columbia University publicly insulted him by reminding the audience all of his flaws. Why invite someone to speak if you're going to rip em a new one?

But Moody, I must disagree with you. Iran is in fact a state sponsor of Al Queda, and all though it was Osama bin Laden that orchestrated the attack, Iran contiues to this day to supply money, munitions, and aid to Al Queda.

But if you get your news from Moveon.org, I obviously can't compete.

ladybug said...

I agree w/Panda - the guy's a talking head. Kind of like sending Karl Rove over to the Middle East for the Bushies.....

Of course he knew in advance his Holocaust denier (standard rhetoric for right-wing muslims) stance was going to be unpopular. Loved the "no homos in Iran" business too, pure propaganda genius! I guess he'll be popular in Utah since there are no gay Mormons....(Ha Ha!)

I can confirm that what Max said is true, have a friend workin' in Afghanistan now (worked in Iraq and hated it). Says Arms coming in from Iran from the West, people to fight from Pakistan...(he has worked for the CIA and other, um, folks too).

The thing is Iran has will do anything a country CAN do to protect it's sovereignity....so I think it's best to deal with them respectfully. Russia's giving them a hard time too....and we give them respect when they come to visit.

His views aren't popular, but that's why the KKK can have public rallies. It's called free speech.

The Moody Minstrel said...

Iran is in fact a state sponsor of Al Queda

I've already seen this argument elsewhere, and I have also seen it ripped apart. Basically, there was a report, put out by the same "intelligence" sources that provided the "reasons" for invading Iraq, that claimed Iranian officials had arranged for meetings with Al Qaida representatives and had also helped fund Al Qaida's activities in Northern Africa.

Tellingly, every single accusation was preceded by the words "We believe that...," and not a single concrete name, date, or location was given. In other words, it was all inference based on hearsay.

Kind of like the Iraqi uranium purchase in Africa, only totally different.

Yes, I'm well aware of the reports saying that Al Qaida leaders have apparently been granted safe haven in Iran. (Link is notably dated.) True or not, there are a great many other issues involved.

Al Qaida is a militant Sunni group, and Iran is Shia. In other words, they are historical enemies. I've heard the claim that, in times of jihad, it's okay for Sunni and Shia to work together. However, Osama Bin Laden himself has already proclaimed Iran an "infidel state" and has called for its elimination. The fact is that the Sunni and Shia busily slaughtering each other in Iraq right now could very easily be labelled a proxy war being fought between Al Qaida and Iran.

In fact, there have been increasing terrorist attacks inside Iran. The Iranian government is trying to blame many if not most of them on the Coalition, but Al Qaida has also been blamed.

Does that mean Iran is sponsoring attacks on its own people? Not bloody likely.

I repeat: Iran had nothing to do with 9/11.

But if you get your news from Moveon.org, I obviously can't compete.

I don't generally visit that site, as you should well know. Of course, I don't visit World Net Daily, either, as you should also well know. Actually, I don't know why I'm even bothering addressing this kind of juvenile, populist remark, so SIUYAWBH.

The Moody Minstrel said...

I can confirm that what Max said is true, have a friend workin' in Afghanistan now...

And U.S. soldiers in Iraq are saying that militias are using Iranian arms against them. Yes, that is very likely and not really surprising at all. It was pretty much a given from day one that Iran wasn't going to sit still while American troops massed in neighboring countries. However, there is a big difference between giving arms to resistance groups (something the U.S. used to be quite famous for), especially right across the border, and being a "state sponsor" of Al Qaida.

I think the government in Iran is simply looking out for its own interests, and actively supporting Al Qaida would NOT be conducive to that.

(Of course, Hizbollah is another matter...)

Don Snabulus said...

Snab:

Since Sharia is the purview of a sect of Sunnis and Iran is completely controlled by Shia Muslims, I think her wish was granted retroactively.

Sorry, I confused Sharia with Wahhabism. My mistake.

Max:

But if you get your news from Moveon.org, I obviously can't compete.

That's okay. MoveOn.org can't compete with the Conservative pundits on all the major cable networks. Besides, MoveOn doesn't do news, they do activism like the NRA.

PB:

Ahmadinejad isn't even the guy in charge. He doesn't control the military, the Republican Guards, the nuclear power program, any of it.

That is the better explanation of my point. I boiled it down to, "He's just a guy talking at a college."

MM:
People, Iran had nothing to do with 9/11. Iran was also one of the first nations to express sympathy in the aftermath of the attack.

Indeed. Also, most people don't know that Iran has a Jewish member in their legislature.

LB:

I am sure there is a secret dirty war under the surface in Iran, Afghanistan, and Iraq between the US and Iran. I think of it like this...if China invaded Canada and publicly spoke of bombing America and removing our "regime," would we provide Canadians with arms to defend themselves? Yes. Would other enemies of China secretly support us even while chiding us in public? Yes. This is the fog of war...but you already know all this :D.

Pandabonium said...

Who backs al Qaeda?

"If I could somehow snap my fingers and cut off the funding from one country, it would be Saudi Arabia," Stuart Levey, the under secretary of the Treasury in charge of tracking terror financing, told ABC News.

Despite some efforts as a U.S. ally in the war on terror, Levey says Saudi Arabia has dropped the ball. Not one person identified by the United States and the United Nations as a terror financier has been prosecuted by the Saudis, Levey says.

"When the evidence is clear that these individuals have funded terrorist organizations, and knowingly done so, then that should be prosecuted and treated as real terrorism because it is," Levey says.

Among those on the donor list, according to U.S. officials, is Yasin al Qadi, a wealthy businessman named on both the U.S. and U.N. lists of al Qaeda financiers one month after the 9/11 attacks.

ladybug said...

I have to agree about Saudi Arabia...I mean 17 of the 19 hijackers were SAUDI!

I remember thinking "Um, why why aren't we invading Saudi Arabia - there's obviously some major funding of Al Queda going on there.."

But, they are America's bed-buddy for oil, and they have Mecca-(which would incite most Muslims if "non-believers" even came near the place..); two cards which they play to the hilt.

Incidently, Saudi Arabia has one of the worst human rights records against women, foreign workers and just plain corruption (drugs, alcohol and sex flow freely behind doors)....so why are we not "liberating" Saudis from their oppressive regime?

Don Snabulus said...

MM:

I think this is a cynical enough world where Iran could provide enough material to so-called Al Queda to screw the USA up without giving them enough to blowback in Iran, even while fighting their own Al Queda funded dissidents in Iran. The problem is that the foreign fighters in Iraq call themselves Al Queda more for shock effect than for specific allegiance to the Bin Laden Al Queda in Afghanistan and I think there are splinters under one name in Iraq, so to compare the all the groups as one is problematic at best.

PB:

The Saudi connection has been apparent to me for many years now and is truly the elephant standing in the room that nobody wants to see. It is a measure of how tightly they have us by the cajones that we don't really do much beyond a certain point.

Maximilian Strange said...

And now the NEW FRANCE is getting behind the idea of going to war with Iran too. That is very peculiar.

I think I'll stick that in my PIPE and smoke it rather than that other thing mentioned.

Swinebread said...

We have no homosexuals in Iran would have been funny if...

The Moody Minstrel said...

Iran would not be a good place to sing Dylan's "Everybody likes to get stoned"...

Don Snabulus said...

Amazing how much mileage we got out of an old pickup. ;)