Two morons in a battle of wits

by Elsewhere 18 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Elsewhere

  http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?id=7670210

  Ahmadinejad: Bush can speak at a university if he should ever travel to Iran The Associated Press Friday, September 28, 2007

  TEHRAN, Iran:Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has extended an invitation to U.S. President George W. Bush to speak at an Iranian university if the American leader ever traveled to the Islamic Republic, state-run television reported Friday.

  As part of his controversial trip to New York, the hardline Iranian leader spoke Monday at Columbia University, where he faced hostile questioning and a combative introduction by the university's president, who said Ahmadinejad exhibited "all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator."

  "If their president plans to travel to Iran, we will allow him to make a speech" at a university, Ahmadinejad told state TV before leaving New York to travel to South America earlier this week.

  His comments were aired on state TV Friday and signaled an unusual readiness by Iran to receive an American president after more than a quarter century with no diplomatic ties.

  The harshness of Monday's introduction at the Columbia University forum prompted complaints in Iran and elsewhere that Ahmadinejad had been blind-sided by his host. Ahmadinejad complained that Columbia University President Lee Bollinger's speech had contained "many insults" and amounted to "unfriendly treatment," but he otherwise appeared to take the comments in stride.

  Back home, Iranians also were dismayed by Bollinger's introduction and said his words only added to their image of the United States as a bully.

  Tensions are high between Iran and the U.S. over Washington allegations that Tehran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons and supplying Shiite militias in Iraq with deadly weapons that kill U.S. troops. Iran denies both claims.

  Iran and the U.S cut off diplomatic relations in 1979 after Iranian militant students seized the U.S. Embassy and took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.

  Ahmadinejad left New York on Wednesday and traveled to friendlier ground in South America, first stopping in Bolivia — where he pledged $1 billion in investment — and then visiting Venezuela to meet his ally President Hugo Chavez on Thursday.
• 

  greendawn

  There is no doubt that in Iran the Mullas run a society that properly belongs to the medieval age so what is the Iranian president trying to promote?
  
  On the other hand Bush like all American presidents in recent times are being told how to run American policy by hidden powers so that it suits their agenda.
• 

  Terry

  The best solution to bad ideas is better ideas. The medium of exchange for ideas is dialogue. Open dialogue exposes ideas to the world at large.

  What has America got to fear from a despot or a religious bigot? Nothing. Nothing but wrongly held opinion about America which flourish in a climate of non-discussion and silenced debate.

  A public Q&A of Iranian "values" would be most revealing.

  To squelch this indicates fear on the part of the American public.

  If we fear to engage in debate publicly about our deepest-held beliefs, values, constitutional premises and freedoms, then; we are hopelessly feckless in persuading any world opinion to our side of the argument.

  We have nothing to fear in debate. We have everything to gain. The relative style of Bush is meaningless against the backdrop of the content of his questions to the president of Iran.

  "Why are Iranian weapons in the hands of terrorists in Iraq not grounds for the U.S. demanding an accounting from you?"

  "Should homosexuals be allowed to live?"

  "Are women in your country free to express their own talents and opinions openly? Why not?"

  "Was there a holocaust? Why did you say there wasn't?"

  "Should Israel be allowed to exist? If you called for its destruction why shouldn't Israel be allowed to call for yours?"

  "On what basis is Islam allowed to destroy those choosing other faiths? Why should the non-Muslim world tolerate its violence?"

  In 1959, at the center of the Cold War with Communist Russia, our own American Vice-President Nixon engaged in a series of public debates with the Communist premiere Nikita Khruschev. These were called the "Kitchen Debates". Nixon is not a beloved figure and never has been, but; he more than held up his end of the argument in bringing to light Democracy versus Communist impact on the common man.

  Communism failed and Democracy triumphed because the ideas of one were superior to the other. But, unless and untill IDEAS are clearly seen to be one or the other the world is held in thrall of only one-sided OPINIONs.

  Debate openly aired is a cleansing mechanism which should never ever be stifled!!

  Imagine the impact of open debate between Jehovah's Witness leaders and, say--a Raymond Franz! Imagine this debate published in all the newspapers!

  This is why such debates will never be sought by JW's! The side with the greatest fear avoids the openess of discussion with its opposition!
• 

  SWALKER

  Debate openly aired is a cleansing mechanism which should never ever be stifled!!

  Unless it's George W. Bush debating! Think about it! (From the President that asked, "Is our children learning?")

  Swalker
• 

  stillajwexelder
• 

  stillajwexelder

  Debate openly aired is a cleansing mechanism which should never ever be stifled!! Imagine the impact of open debate between Jehovah's Witness leaders and, say--a Raymond Franz! Imagine this debate published in all the newspapers!This is why such debates will never be sought by JW's! The side with the greatest fear avoids the openess of discussion with its opposition!

  Excellent points -but without being disrespectful to George Bush, he is not the right man. It needs an orator - somebody with a razor sharp mind.

  I never forget after the invasion of Iraq Tony Blair was questioned in Britain by a Muslim Girl who asked why the West alwys attacks Muslims. In one sentence he said "We dont - we go to their aid in Bosnia"

  OPEN DEBATE IS GOOD
• 

  stillajwexelder

  It needs a Churchill or even Bill Clinton
• 

  SWALKER

  Bill Clinton

  That's the guy to get the job done! Can you imagine that debate?????

  Swalker
• 

  stillajwexelder

  That's the guy to get the job done! Can you imagine that debate?????

  Yes they would ridicule hime for his womanizing I suppose
• 

  hillary_step

  Terry,

  Trouble with that viewpoint Terry is that the questions would come from both sides and Pandoras Box would never be shut again:

  Why did the US invade a sovereign nation?

  Did the US help to arm Iraq against Iran during their war?

  Were the chemical weapons used against Iran by Iraq during its war supplied by the US?

  Did the US back the regime of the Shah and train its torturers in interrogation techinques?

  Was the founder of Holocaust denial an American?

  Why were Jews not allowed free social movement within the US until the 1950's as they were and are in Iran?

  etc. etc. etc. You know the sort of thing.

  No, leave sleeping dogs to lie. ;)

  HS