Ahmadinejad goes more bonkers

September 25th, 2010 at 10:42 am by David Farrar

AP reports:

’s hardline President provoked yet another controversy on Thursday saying a majority of people in the United States and around the world believe the American Government staged the September 11 terror attacks in an attempt to assure Israel’s survival.

He’s gone from holocaust denial to 9/11 conspiracy theorist.

Now he is not the only demented person in the world, who really thinks the Holocaust was faked, along with 9/11.

But he is the only one developing nuclear weapons.

Tags: ,

67 Responses to “Ahmadinejad goes more bonkers”

  1. Viking2 (10,703 comments) says:

    Man of peace eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Inky_the_Red (718 comments) says:

    Actually Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has never claimed the Holocaust was faked. His words were similar ‘if there was a holocaust happened it was committed by Europeans not Palestinians So why are the Palestinians punished for it?’

    So the MSM and bloggers pick up on the ‘there was a holocaust’ words of the quote (ignoring the if) while the much more important part about Europeans and Palestinians was ignored. But we in the west are so clever.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    His first 2 theories might be loopy, but number 3 is on the money.

    That the attack was the work of ‘‘a terrorist group but the American Government supported and took advantage of the situation’’.

    Left out of the NZ HErald story you linked to, but included in today’s The Press is the following:

    Ahmadinejad said the US used the September 11 attacks as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, killing hundreds of thousands of people.

    He argued that the US should have ‘‘designed a logical plan’’ to punish the perpetrators and not occupied two independent states and shed so much blood.

    I don’t think anyone can deny the useful pretext 9/11 gave mor can thaey disagree that the US lacked a logical plan for its response.

    The attacks were not an act of war, they were the act of criminals. The appropriate response was not one of war, but of criminal investigation and prosecution.

    All the US has achieved is the creation of further enemies, the catalyst for more acts of terror and no capture or prosecution of the perpetrators.

    Ahmadinejad says some foolish things; but he also has, at times, valid points to make.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “But he is the only one developing nuclear weapons.”

    Got any incontrovertible evidence for that?

    As you know, Russia has agreed to dispose of the used fuel, so that it can’t be enriched.

    It’s entirely possible of course that Iran already has nukes courtesy of the black market of the 90′s. But let’s not conflate that possibility with what you’re accusing Iran of doing.

    Anyway, if it’s good enough for Israel, precisely why is it not good enough for Iran.

    And why is it, when this question is discussed, do some people automatically assume that even if she had them, she would therefore use them?

    And finally, naturally if Iran did have them, the firing decision is not up to any single individual. I mean, this is not fantasyland. It’s not a Bond movie whereby stopping the bad guy saves the world.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. scrubone (2,971 comments) says:

    And finally, naturally if Iran did have them, the firing decision is not up to any single individual. I mean, this is not fantasyland. It’s not a Bond movie whereby stopping the bad guy saves the world.

    Actually, your entire comment comes from fantasy land.

    First you ask for incontrovertible evidence of something that would by it’s nature be well hidden.

    Then you ignore the fact that Iran sponsors terrorist organisations, and is a fundamentalist Islamic government. These guys are not, repeat not, rational.

    Finally, “not up to any single individual” – um, yes that would apply to the US where nukes are kept within systems to prevent their use unless it is 100% clear that the president has ordered their use. But this is Iran, and we can have no assurances that they would do that.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. scrubone (2,971 comments) says:

    I don’t think anyone can deny the useful pretext 9/11 gave mor can thaey disagree that the US lacked a logical plan for its response. The attacks were not an act of war, they were the act of criminals. The appropriate response was not one of war, but of criminal investigation and prosecution.

    Wow. If only Bush had asked the Talaban to give up Bin Laden before they joined the already existing war there.

    Oh wait, they did that. It didn’t work.

    I guess in your world, that means they should have written a letter of complaint to someone and waited for him to organise the next attack?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Pauleastbay (5,030 comments) says:

    Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
    Inky the Red
    My name is Jack
    Reid

    Fuckwits all,

    I realise that ” Fuckwits all” adds nothing to the debate but neither do the comments 2, 3 and 4 on this thread, so I feel vindicated.

    Scrubone has made the mature comment here

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “First you ask for incontrovertible evidence of something that would by it’s nature be well hidden.”

    Well since DPF didn’t express any doubt whatsoever as to the veracity of his assertion I just naturally assumed he had some. I mean why else would you assert something like that? Personally, I haven’t seen any myself, so I haven’t made up MY mind about this. I just assume that those who have, know something I don’t and can point me to some facts. That’s reasonable, isn’t it?

    “Then you ignore the fact that Iran sponsors terrorist organisations, and is a fundamentalist Islamic government.”

    No I didn’t ignore it I just didn’t mention it since it wasn’t germane to any of the points I was making.

    “These guys are not, repeat not, rational.”

    a) who precisely, are “these guys?” and
    b) you’re making a subjective judgement call about the entire command structure of one of the most powerful and populated countries in the ME and on what grounds do you make that – surely you can back it up or is it just a “feeling?’

    “this is Iran, and we can have no assurances that they would do that.”

    See b) above.

    “I realise that ” Fuckwits all” adds nothing to the debate”

    Hey paul, all I’ve done is asked anyone to back up their viewpoint with facts. Apparently, this is what people do when they want to get to the truth of any particular matter, so I’m told.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. bhudson (4,720 comments) says:

    Ahmadinejad said:

    “Some segments within the US Government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order also to save the Zionist regime…”

    It’s OK though. As Ahmadinejad has proven himself a conspiracy theorist Luc Hansen will be along shortly to denounce him as intellectually bankrupt. That is, he will do that once he has reached true self-enlightenment and managed to renounce his own bankruptcy first.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. tom hunter (3,999 comments) says:

    Bonkers?

    Try Crazy Like A Fox – and read this WSJ piece about the presser Ahmadinejad had with a bunch of journos a few days ago. I like the writer’s ending:

    In the New York Times’s account of the breakfast, reporter Neil MacFarquhar—who asked an opaque question about Cyrus the Great and was roundly mocked for it by Ahmadinejad—described the president’s remarks as “standard talking points” plus “a little fresh bluster.” Perhaps I haven’t achieved the appropriate degree of jadedness, but my own impression of Ahmadinejad was that he was easily the smartest guy in the room. He mocked us in a way we scarcely had the wit to recognize. We belittle him at our peril.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    And if Ahmadinejad is demented, then surely so are the approximately 25% of Americans who believe their own government in some way deliberately participated in the 9/11 atrocity?

    Maybe they should all be deported to Iran so they can be bombed to bits when the inevitable attack is launched?

    Inky the red, MNIJ and reid have all made sensible contributions and I congratulate them. Of course, they will quickly find they are in the minority on this site where groupthink rules.

    Reid, I would point out that Israel is a red herring in this debate about Iran’s nuclear programme. Israel never signed up to the NPT and this is the framework Iran must stay within. And unlike North Korea, which pulled out of the NPT to pursue a nuclear weaponry project, Iran is hanging in there. I suspect, though, that if Iran did withdraw, bombs would quickly start falling.

    The so-called factual statement made by DPF that Iran is developing nuclear weapons is actually completely unproven. The bar set by the western warmongers is that Iran must prove it is not. That’s a well recognised logical impossibility. The fatwa against nuclear weapons has never been revoked, Iran is on record as denying it is intending to develop nuclear weapons, and Iran is insisting only on its rights under the NPT, which permits it to develop uranium to the low level required for energy. This is a right the West wishes to deny Iran, because it implies the ability to then continue the process to weapons grade. So the (western) world shakes with fear…

    I wonder how sure DPF was that Saddam was armed to the teeth with non-existent WMDs?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. bhudson (4,720 comments) says:

    Thank you for sharing your myopic version of wisdom as always Luc.

    However, from your own post yesterday you must now acknowledge that the president of Iran is intellectually bankrupt. How can that be good for Iran or the rest of the world?

    Your words Luc – your judgement. Don’t try to weasel out of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “So the (western) world shakes with fear…”

    Or at least those people who for some reason can’t distinguish propaganda from fact when it’s coming from “their side,” shake with fear.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    jebus reid, now you’re gunna wake up redbaiter and this thread will be over… :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    Think that’s crazy?

    People here think that Barack Obama is a Muslim and faked his birth certificate!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. tom hunter (3,999 comments) says:

    And if Ahmadinejad is demented, then surely so are the approximately 25% of Americans who believe their own government in some way deliberately participated in the 9/11 atrocity?

    It should be noted that when Luc needs to “prove” how demented the US population is he’ll quote some poll showing that 25% believe in alien landings.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Pauleastbay (5,030 comments) says:

    Luc
    And if Ahmadinejad is demented, then surely so are the approximately 25% of Americans who believe their own government in some way deliberately participated in the 9/11 atrocity?

    —-

    Well about 25% of Americans believe in “the rapture” as well , so there is no argument that a portion of the population is demented but that still leaves 75 % who don’t think there was any conspiracy, so even with my poor maths thats the winner.

    and Tom Hunter

    …..Ahmadinejad was that he was easily the smartest guy in the room. He mocked us in a way we scarcely had the wit to recognize. We belittle him at our peril. …

    Well, mocking a NYT Journalist (or any journalist) is pretty bloody easy , bearing in mind this is the NYT this could be a story may have been fabricated completely,… they have form for this.

    Good to see any semblance of rationality is totally lacking today Luc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Jimbob (639 comments) says:

    I knew that we had some flaky people in New Zealand, with some of the comments here, I think there could be more than I thought.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. CraigM (692 comments) says:

    Inky the LIAR – “Actually Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has never claimed the Holocaust was faked”

    Ahmadinejad in 2005 – “They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets,” he said

    “On December 11 and 12, 2006, the Iranian regime hosted a conference dedicated to Holocaust denial, called the “International Conference on Review of the Holocaust: Global Vision.”

    It is staggering to me that I live in a country that is also occupied by people like MNIJ, Reid, Luc etc..what happened to you people that you became so full of hate. When did you completely lose your sense of right and wrong? Rhetorical question.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. eszett (2,264 comments) says:

    The so-called factual statement made by DPF that Iran is developing nuclear weapons is actually completely unproven. The bar set by the western warmongers is that Iran must prove it is not. That’s a well recognised logical impossibility.

    Well, not quite. They could prove that the enrichment of Uranium is merely used for peaceful purposes. If not to the US to other more neutral observers.

    It is quite plausible that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons, given that it is quite a dominant regional power seeking to fortify and expand that power. Israel nuclear weapons is another incentive.

    Furthermore the accumulation of technology that can be used for developing nuclear weapons is an indication for such a move.

    On a side note, there was this interesting article about a possible cyber attack on Iran’s nuclear plants.

    Stuxnet worm ‘targeted high-value Iranian assets’

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11388018

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “They could prove that the enrichment of Uranium is merely used for peaceful purposes. If not to the US to other more neutral observers.”

    Which they already have, via the Russian agreement to dispose of the used fuel, which was put in place before the reactor was fired up last month.

    So what about that, don’t some people understand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Ross Nixon (599 comments) says:

    Deep-cover MI6 agents who found the previously secret underground uranium enrichment plant near the Iranian holy city of Qom have discovered a staggering five more similar plants.

    They, like the Qom facility, are buried deep inside the mountains of north Iran and are guarded by divisions of Revolutionary Guards.

    The details have been sent this weekend to some officials attending the G20 summit in Pittsburgh when the Qom facility was revealed to the world.

    The MI6 agents have established that, like Qom, the new plants are staffed by nuclear scientists from Iran’s main weaponization program. It is known by the acronym Metfaz, and is headquartered at 180 Western Avenue in the Pars district of eastern Tehran.

    Details of the MI6 discovery were hand-couriered to Meir Dagan, the head of Mossad over the weekend by Sir John Scarlett. They contained a detailed picture of what was being built at the five new plants.

    A senior intelligence source said the data came from “an Iranian nuclear scientist’s smuggled laptop, defectors and satellite imagery.”

    The highly unusual indication of the source material is seen as a deliberate attempt by Western intelligence to rattle the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that a further vital part of his nuclear plan has been discovered.
    Gordon Thomas, London, September 28, 2009

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. MyNameIsJack (2,415 comments) says:

    What reid said – plus, why should Iran have to answer to anyone else’s demands? Which other countries are being asked this question? What happened to India, China, Israel, Pakistan, et al when they developed a nuclear weapon?

    Why the different treatment for Iran? Because we must always have a current enemy (Afghanistan) and one in reserve (Iran).

    Ocenaia has always been at war with Eurasia. Ocenia has always been at peace with Eeastasia.

    Ocenia has always been at war with Eastasia. Ocennia has always been at peace with Eurasia.

    Repeat ad infinitum

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    scrubone at 11:18 am
    “First you ask for incontrovertible evidence of something that would by it’s nature be well hidden.”

    That’s what the world asked of the US before they invaded Iraq, now you are saying you didn’t expect them to have something like evidence?

    Papers just released show the desire to invade Iraq preceded the trumped up propaganda campaign to “justify” attacking another nation.

    I think Ahmadinejad comes across as bonkers, difficult to know how to deal with someone and a country like that, similarly North Korea. But then I though GWB came across as slightly bonkers at times too, I’m not sure yet about Obama. Blair admits he went a bit bonkers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “…have discovered a staggering five more similar plants.”

    And this makes any difference how?

    Discounting the possibility it’s propaganda bullshit, like Saddam’s WMDs were, why is a nuclear-armed Iran any more or less dangerous than a nuclear-armed North Korea, soon to be led by a young lad about whom no-one knows anything?

    Logically speaking, leaving aside the impassioned hysterical commentary that normally accompanies Israeli regional security analyses, where’s the real threat emanating from, as opposed to the possibly pretend one? Like I said, assume it’s real, I’m not disputing that, even though you could. But let’s just say it’s true, why is Iran automatically going to then blast Israel to smithereens? Why the hell do people think that they will? Where’s your evidence for that? Where? IT’S NOT FUCKING THERE, REPEAT IT’S NOT REPEAT NOT REPEAT NOT FUCKING THERE, AT ALL, IN ANYWAY. MAD APPLIES TO IRAN, NK, CHINA, USA, RUSSIA, INDIA, UK, ISRAEL, PAKISTAN, FRANCE. USE IT, YOU WILL BE DESTROYED. WHAT ABOUT THIS FACT OF LIFE, AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE TOWARD THE EFFICACY OR OTHERWISE OF YOUR ARGUMENT, DON’T SOME OF YOU GET?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. John Gibson (295 comments) says:

    “Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan provided Iran’s nuclear program with “significant assistance,” including the designs for “advanced and efficient” weapons components.” – NY Times

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. bhudson (4,720 comments) says:

    reid,

    The real risk here is not that Iran might launch a nuclear strike at Israel [although I would argue that there is enough obvious base hatred of Israel for them to do just that.]

    The real risk is that if real proof is established of a nuclear weapons capability in Iran, Israel will launch pre-emptive strikes to ensure Iran never has the opportunity to launch a nuclear attack on them first. My personal view is that Israel’s strikes will be non-nuclear and may even be ‘surgical’ special ops attacks, but I believe they will strike first because their belief that Iran and others wish to obliterate them is absolute.

    That will create a regional conflict that no one can walk away from, and which will not be a happy time for any of us. Everyone will have to take sides. I suspect that US and Russia will endeavour to take the same side or, in the case of Russia, stay out of it directly, as any resulting escalation could get out of hand very easily.

    And if that smells like its happening, just wait for the apocalypse doomsayers to start ranting…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    bhudson, thanks for introducing some sensible points.

    Indeed an Israeli strike will have significant regional effects. Not in any particular order:
    a) radioactive fallout now the reactor’s up and running
    b) immediate closure of the Straits of Hormux. Consequent global oil supply crisis, not shortage, crisis.
    c) immediate encirclement of US bases in Iraq, concurrent cutting of all supply lines esp those from Pakistan, 50,000 US P.O.W’s
    d) possible use of Russian Sunburn missiles against US carriers in the gulf. These can sink a carrier through kinetic energy alone, and have advanced terminal maneuver evasion systems, killing 5-6000 sailors and airmen.

    These are quite foreseeable and likely events. What happens next is anyone’s guess. The whole world will become involved. In our region, Indonesia and Malaysia will become immediately unstable. China and the US could come to blows in the China Sea. Russia could become involved with China, based on current treaty arrangements.

    And yet some seem to think it would be a terrific thing indeed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. bhudson (4,720 comments) says:

    reid,

    That is why there is so much attention and action (even if it is not the most well thought out or effective action) to try and prevent Iran gaining nuclear weapons.

    At a geo-political level I think people get what the potential consequences are. Who is right or wrong will become less relevant as the likelihood [or Iranian nukes] becomes more real.

    I can see an “ends justifies the means” action, and subsequent argument, in the relatively near future. We can decry the righteousness or that and the usurption of the role of King of the World, but if we step through the logical possibilities if things progress unchecked, I think we can reach an outcome which is infinitely worse than who is right or wrong right now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    I agree that the more countries that have nukes, the greater the risk. So I’d prefer to see no more countries get them, especially countries like Iran, but I also think that they have as much right as anyone else to develop deterrent capabilities.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “who is right or wrong right now”

    This is what some people don’t seem to get, bhudson. It’s got nothing to do with a moral judgement on who is right and who is wrong. Nothing at all. And all some people seem capable of seeing when they think about Iran is some amorphous beast with fangs. The facts don’t matter, to these people. They’re somehow emotionally involved with the outcome of their analysis.

    The rest of us understand the question as a factual one. There’s no place for fear, or any other emotion that simply serves to cloud one’s judgement.

    What’s very interesting is that they’re universally unaware they are infected. I really wish I knew how to design MSM propaganda that made millions believe complete and utter fantasies like say, Saddam has WMDs. I mean it’s masterful, in a depressing kinda way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. kowtow (6,690 comments) says:

    Isn’t the current UN an absolute crock of shite,giving these looney ravers a platform?

    It wasn’t that long ago that the Libyan looney was there doing something similar.

    What platform do the people of Iran and Libya have.?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    It’s not “United Nations that agree with us and stuff the rest of them”.

    When Colin Powell got up in the UN Security Council and said that the US needed to invade Iraq because they had WMD I’m sure quite a few people thought he was looney, and even more think that now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. HarryGlicken (12 comments) says:

    AhMADine will not approve

    I am truly perplexed that so many of my friends are against a mosque being built near Ground Zero.

    I think it should be the goal of every American to be tolerant. The mosque should be allowed, in an effort to promote tolerance.

    That is why I also propose, that two nightclubs be opened next door to the mosque thereby promoting tolerance within the mosque. We could call one of the clubs (which would be gay) “The Turban Cowboy” and the other being a topless bar “You Mecca Me Hot”.

    Next door should be a butcher shop that specializes in pork and adjacent to that have an open barbeque pork rib restaurant, called something like “Iraq o’ Ribs”?

    Across the street there could be a very daring lingerie store called Victoria Keeps Nothing Secret with sexy mannequins in the window modeling the goods.

    Next door to the lingerie shop, there would be room for an Adult Toy Shop its name -Koranal Knowledge , in flashing neon lights, and on the other side a liquor store, maybe call it “Morehammered”?

    Then the Muslims could be allowed to show their tolerance too. Problem solved. AhMADine

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. MCos (11 comments) says:

    Ahmadinejad is firstly a politician who relies on a level of support back home to maintain his position. I would suggest that much of his bluster is aimed at bolstering that support. Anyone who remembers our former PM Muldoon will recognise the modus opperandi. He knew that no matter how things were going in NZ all he needed to do was get the better of some bemused Australian politician and his popularity went up. Who will forget his response to the underarm incident? In the case of Ahmadinejad his continuing hold on power, I would expect, is relient on the support of the religious hierachy plus the people that voted him in, which I don’t think would have included the Iranian middle classes who are probably just as dismayed as anyone else by his seemingly outrageous comments. Of course it’s dangerous for Iran to have nuclear weapons, but the chances of them being for hostile purposes is no greater than all the other flakey nations who currently have stockpiles. Pakistan, India, Israel, North Korea etc. There’s even people in the US who I have seen on Facebook advocating their use in Afghanistan.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Colin Powell was fooled by cherry-picked intelligence courtesy of Cheney and Rumsfeld and that’s why he didn’t serve a second term. He had integrity, unlike some of the others.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. noskire (797 comments) says:

    I think a link to this article may have been previously posted on KiwiBlog, but seems relevant to the discucssion so I’ll link to it again http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2010/08/05/any-attack-on-iran-would-not-end-well.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. wikiriwhis business (3,276 comments) says:

    Why doesn’t anyone know about the huge oil and gas find Zion oil is drilling now in Israel

    The media is certainly not informing

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Positan (377 comments) says:

    Many questions remain as to the substance of 9/11 and the fault for that lies with the GW Bush administration who maintained almost nonsensical security over both the towers’ rubble and the Pentagon wreckage, right up to the bizarre finalisation of their disposal -thereby preventing any sort of independent analysis for internally-placed explosives or the like.

    Again, the fact of Tower 7′s collapse has never been satisfactorily explained – especially following the live-on-TV comments of the WTC’s chairman or somesuch – “… we made the decision to “pull it.”

    Until these points, together with several ancillary issues, are satisfactorily answered – I suspect most thinking folk will continue to question the WTC’s destruction, and will ponder just who really did have the motive.

    Like JFK – about whose demise tiny snippets over the years have fleshed out a pretty substantial picture; and even the Titanic, of which long withheld information was released only this week – the truth of the WTC, one way or the other, will be eventually substantiated.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. MCos (11 comments) says:

    The comment by Harry Gliken is stupid and a copy of an email that turned up in my junk the other day. Why not advocate abortion clinics next to Catholic church and abattoirs next to the local vegan clubhouse too? May as well offend everyone and then complain when someone turns the stereo up next door.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Hitman (1 comment) says:

    Ok this guy ask the US why they could not come up with a logical plan.
    He argued that the US should have ‘‘designed a logical plan’’ to punish the perpetrators and not occupied two independent states and shed so much blood.

    What like they use to?
    There idea of a logical plan if the did not get they way was to highjack an plane and have it sit on a runway for hours until they got what they want or got shot trying.

    Ok the US did not handle it very well by why is everyone listening to a head of state that by rights in my book has no right at all talking about coming up with peaceful solutions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Put it away (2,888 comments) says:

    MCos you are an idiot. They want a mosque at ground zero purely to be confrontational, insensitive and provocative. HarryGlicken’s comment outlines a perfectly justified and appropriate response to this – give them a taste of their own medicine and be just as confrontational to them. Your nonsensical examples suggest initiating confrontation with someone who hasn’t done anything to start trouble. Too dim to see the difference ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Until these points, together with several ancillary issues, are satisfactorily answered – I suspect most thinking folk will continue to question the WTC’s destruction, and will ponder just who really did have the motive.

    Like JFK – about whose demise tiny snippets over the years have fleshed out a pretty substantial picture; and even the Titanic, of which long withheld information was released only this week – the truth of the WTC, one way or the other, will be eventually substantiated.

    See I’d like to hope you’re right, Positan however I’m not all that confident. Most people still don’t acknowledge the implication of JFK. Instead they acknowledge there are many many open questions but they terminate their thinking about it there. And that’s more than sixty years on.

    The implication of course being that if JFK really wasn’t killed by LHO acting alone then who did it and does that mean something about their own govt?

    It’s the whole cognitive dissonance thing, happening all over again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. MCos (11 comments) says:

    Mr Put it Away – can you please point to evidence that the Islamic Center in NY is being built for the purposes you claim or have you been sucked in by the right wing rhetoric propagated by people who couldn’t believe their luck when this project hit the headlines just as elections were looming up? By the way there are plenty of people not particularly enamored of the Catholic church right now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Sonny Blount (1,829 comments) says:

    I agree that the more countries that have nukes, the greater the risk. So I’d prefer to see no more countries get them, especially countries like Iran, but I also think that they have as much right as anyone else to develop deterrent capabilities.

    Whatever the objective ‘rights’ of the situation. It’s not a good idea. The basis of peace is overwhelming force of arms. Once military might equalizes, conflicts will ensue. And I would like the overwhelming might to be in the hands of Nato and the US, with as little military power elsewhere as possible.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Positan (377 comments) says:

    @reid – “And that’s more than sixty years on.”

    I concur with the substance of what you say, reid – but surely, we must be using different calendars.
    22 November 1963 is almost 47 years ago – not more than 60.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Yes I’m still using the Julian, Positan. The Gregorian sucks. I’ve already retired, and I’m only 29. This is but one of the advantages.

    It doesn’t have daylight saving either. So while the rest of you lose an hour of your lives at 2:00AM tomorrow, I remain stable.

    Another plus.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    Awhile ago I saw a video [possibly on Winds of Jihad ] of an American man who at the time of 9/11 was a student. He was friends with a muslim student. Immediately after 9/11 , pictures were being circulated of New York’s skyline with mosques…domes and minarets everywhere. This man’s friend thought these pictures were funny..The American did not find them funny and I doubt the friendship lasted long after this..These pictures were being circulated by Muslims..This is true to form. When they build a mosque , they consider that land as ”conquered territory.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    When they build a mosque , they consider that land as ”conquered territory.”

    I’m sure they do joana, but so what?

    Do you think the Jews don’t consider Jerusalem “conquered territory?”

    If you agree they possibly do, do you think this is precisely why they refuse to allow the Muslims to make it their capital?

    So if it’s sauce for the goose, then why isn’t it sauce for the gander?

    In other words, lest Jack misunderstand (again), if it’s OK for Jews to hold this attitude, why is it not OK for Muslims to hold it?

    And puhleese don’t tell me that the West don’t agree with that Jewish attitude, because you know we do. So if it’s OK for the whole Judeo-Christian world to want to hold onto the sanctity of our holy land, then why do we, in debates like this, merely condemn and not seek to understand those who want to do precisely the same thing?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Gwilly (154 comments) says:

    I would suggest that if anyone is in any doubt about the true intentions of Islam, they should read this blog: http://www.jihadwatch.org.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. krazykiwi (9,188 comments) says:

    Do you think the Jews don’t consider Jerusalem “conquered territory?”

    reid, that’s just silly. It’s like saying if your house if burgled you have a moral right to burgle as many other houses as you like.

    In other words, lest Jack misunderstand (again), if it’s OK for Jews to hold this attitude, why is it not OK for Muslims to hold it?

    Simple: The Koran demands my death if I do not convert to Islam, and however isolated you want to pretend this is, there is plenty evidence of this. The Tanakh does not demand my death. On that basis I would welcome 100 jewish synagogs in my suburb and push back against every proposed Mosque

    reid your hatred of Jews, cunningly disguised as fair/equal/considered concern is disturbing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. krazykiwi (9,188 comments) says:

    Back to Mahmoud .. firstly, he takes his directions from Luc via TXT. Luc will have his way with those filthy jooos soon. He’s soooo excited.

    Secondly, the progressives (I hate that term… it’s wrong wrong wrong) think it’s ok for their mate Mahmoud to have nukes while I should not have a choice of light-bulbs. I clearly represent a mortal threat to the planet, while crazed people like Mahmoud do not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. MikeNZ (3,234 comments) says:

    It is not disturbing KK, Reid parallels many lefty/progressive/social concerned people.
    really they Hate the Jews deep in their hearts, because their God is the God of all the world.
    These Jews are special as He their God chose them and gave them a bit of Land as their own in the world so designating the rest of the earth His and the fullness there of.

    Moreover their God spawned this Jesus fella from the Jewish nation (whom He blessed and continues to this day), that called all men to himself with no exceptions.
    So deep in their hearts is a hatred of the Jew’s God and this fella Jesus/Yeshua but they have to dress it up as nice talk.
    The truth always out and will on the last day, no exceptions.
    So they wickedly and ever so slightly in a nice way slate the Jews in a roundabout and nice way that is so even and accommodating and fair.

    Disturbing no, it is to type.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. MikeNZ (3,234 comments) says:

    Why doesn’t anyone know about the huge oil and gas find Zion oil is drilling now in Israel

    It has been paraded in the Joos media and on Wnd.com for months now, even a year at least.
    One of the reasons Iran has given anti ship missles to Hizbullah (the real leaders of Lebanon) is to attack the rigs and ships servicing them.
    Many of us have posted links to articles about the rearming of Hizbullah at Kiwiblog.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Hurf Durf (2,860 comments) says:

    On the bright side, Green Party foreign policy now has the advocacy of the leader of a regional power. I don’t think Queef Locke cares if that leader is Mr Armoured Dinner Jacket.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    “So deep in their hearts is a hatred of the Jew’s God and this fella Jesus/Yeshua but they have to dress it up as nice talk.”

    Actually Mike I hate no-one. Never have. Hope never to. Period.

    I simply look at it, dispassionately, like a doctor. What are the facts? Given those facts, what is the best proposition? What is the path toward achieving that? Good news, bad news, setbacks along the way, makes no diff.

    The danger I have seen for a long long time, is that we have no plan, for dealing with the threat. There is no cohesive across the board strategy amongst both Muslim and Western nations for dealing with this. There is no treaty organisation, no international grouping whatsoever, nothing like the G-7, UN, the World Bank, an ad-hoc alliance like the BRIC, nothing significant that bridges both Muslim and Western thoughts and actions. And this to me is a huge worry, for big wars begin with mis-communication. They’re not driven by that, but mis-communication is the trigger. WWI started like that. Do we want a repeat?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Guy Fawkes (702 comments) says:

    Armani Dinner Jacket looks like weasel and talks like a weasel.

    There is no doubt that he stands supported by a bent theocracy.

    Because of World Media intrusion, that whole construct will topple quite soon. It is built of sand. Now as corrupt as he peacock throne.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Short Shriveled and Slightly to the Left (759 comments) says:

    your title is incorrect
    there is nothing more bonkers that Holocaust denial
    except maybe gravity denial……

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. adam2314 (377 comments) says:

    All this talk and bluster building ego’s from all sides..

    What ever happened to the Enhanced Radiation Weapons ( Neutron Bombs ).

    Easier and cheaper to produce.

    Transport. ( Laptop to truck size )

    Less detectable.

    Very effective.

    I know what I will be buying when It is my turn to take over the world.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. adam2314 (377 comments) says:

    The way the world is going at present..

    It will not be long before my Benevolent Dictatorship is requested :-))

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. HarryGlicken (12 comments) says:

    This thread was my choise.

    The plane leaves Heathrow Airport under the control of a Jewish captain. His copilot is Chinese. It’s the first time they’ve flown together and an awkward silence between the two seems to indicate a mutual dislike. Once they reach cruising altitude, the Jewish captain activates the auto-pilot, leans back in his seat, and mutters, ‘I don’t like Chinese..’

    ‘No rike Chinese?’ asks the copilot, … ‘why not?’

    ‘You people bombed Pearl Harbor , that’s why!’

    ‘No, no’, the co-pilot protests, ‘Chinese not bomb Peahl Hahbah ! That Japanese, not Chinese.’

    ‘Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese… .doesn’t matter, you’re all alike!’

    There’s a few minutes of silence..

    ‘I no rike Jews!’ the copilot suddenly announces.

    ‘Oh yeah, why not?’ asks the captain.

    ‘Jews sink Titanic!’ says the co-pilot.

    ‘What? That’s insane! Jews didn’t sink the Titanic!’ exclaims the captain, ‘It was an iceberg!’

    Iceberg, Goldberg, Greenberg, Rosenberg , ….nomattah…all same ! ! !

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Pete George (7,207) Says:
    September 25th, 2010 at 1:22 pm

    I agree that the more countries that have nukes, the greater the risk.

    In fact, Pete, it is proven that the opposite is the case – proliferation actually makes the world safer because of the deterrent. Famously, an Israeli Nobel Prize winner made this very point.

    Then there is eszett:

    They could prove that the enrichment of Uranium is merely used for peaceful purposes.

    Pauleastbay (345) Says:
    September 25th, 2010 at 11:54 am

    Luc
    And if Ahmadinejad is demented, then surely so are the approximately 25% of Americans who believe their own government in some way deliberately participated in the 9/11 atrocity?

    —-

    Well about 25% of Americans believe in “the rapture” as well , so there is no argument that a portion of the population is demented but that still leaves 75 % who don’t think there was any conspiracy, so even with my poor maths thats the winner.

    Paul, I used the conditional quite deliberately, as I don’t think Ahmadinejad is demented. I think he is playing to a certain segment of his home population, just as all politicians do. Your comparison attempt is just a red herring.

    Have I missed anyone?

    You just made that up. It’s not what is being demanded. And it’s just as impossible as proving that one is not developing nuclear weapons.

    This is all just cover for the need for the US to grab more of a diminishing resource – fossil fuels.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. HarryGlicken (12 comments) says:

    DONT OUR DUMB POSTS GO AROUND AND AROUND and umn AROUND DAVID FARRAR LOVES IT, ego gulp LUC HANSEN posted darn piss off

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. bhudson (4,720 comments) says:

    Luc,

    Welcome back! I see your Intellect account is still in deficit.

    “…I don’t think Ahmadinejad is demented…”

    No you don’t Luc. You think he is intellectually bankrupt. You think this because he is a conspiracy theorist and in your own words, people who are conspiracy theorists are intellectually bankrupt. (Which of course also includes you.)

    Incidentally, do you think your foreign friends are going to be at all pleased with you now that you have turned traitor and denounced Ahmadinejad as intellectually bankrupt? I suspect they won’t share your strongly held views on this matter Luc. I suspect they might think you are betraying them and the CAUSE. Will that auger well for your international friendships?

    I congratulate you at least for putting the condemnation of the intellectual bankrupts ahead or your personal relationships. Perhaps a small ember of integrity there Luc. We live in hope

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Jeremy Harris (323 comments) says:

    I always expect Aston Kutcher to jump out halfway through Ahmadinejad’s speeches and yelled,

    “PUNKED..!”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. reid (15,513 comments) says:

    Is this dinner jacket fellow really demented or is he just reported as such and then this image is swallowed whole and unquestioningly by the braying masses?

    Could a braying jackass which this fellow is portrayed as, really keep the confidence of the Ayatollah’s of Iran? For years? Really? These are serious people. Iran is a serious country. A moron doesn’t last long, over there, let alone, as Pres.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Paul G. Buchanan (301 comments) says:

    Although I am a little late to this thread because I have been traveling, my short take on the speech is here: http://www.kiwipolitico.com/2010/09/ahmadinejad-amps-up/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.