A Feeling I'm Being Had

I was happy to hear that NYC didn't allow Iranian President Ahmadinejad
to place a wreath at the WTC site. And I was happy that Columbia
University is rescinding the offer to let him speak. If you let a guy like
that express his views, before long the entire world will want freedom
of speech.

I hate Ahmadinejad for all the same reasons you do. For one thing, he
said he wants to "wipe Israel off the map." Scholars tell us the correct
translation is more along the lines of wanting a change in Israel's
government toward something more democratic, with less gerrymandering.
What an ass-muncher!

Ahmadinejad also called the holocaust a "myth." Fuck him! A myth is
something a society uses to frame their understanding of their world, and
act accordingly. It's not as if the world created a whole new country
because of holocaust guilt and gives it a free pass no matter what it
does. That's Iranian crazy talk. Ahmadinejad can blow me. 

Most insulting is the fact that "myth" implies the holocaust didn't
happen. Fuck him for saying that! He also says he won't dispute the
historical claims of European scientists. That is obviously the opposite of
saying the holocaust didn't happen, which I assume is his way of
confusing me. God-damned fucker. 

Furthermore, why does an Iranian guy give a speech in his own language
except for using the English word "myth"? Aren't there any Iranian
words for saying a set of historical facts has achieved an unhealthy level
of influence on a specific set of decisions in the present? He's just
being an asshole.

Ahmadinejad believes his role is to pave the way for the coming of the
Twelfth Imam. That's a primitive apocalyptic belief! I thank Jesus I do
not live in a country led by a man who believes in that sort of
bullshit. Imagine how dangerous that would be, especially if that man had the
launch codes for nuclear weapons. 

The worst of the worst is that Ahmadinejad's country is helping the
Iraqis kill American soldiers. If Iran ever invades Canada, I think we'd
agree the best course of action for the United States is to be
constructive and let things sort themselves out. Otherwise we'd be just as evil
as the Iranians. Those fuckers.

Those Iranians need to learn from the American example. In this
country, if the clear majority of the public opposes the continuation of a war, our
leaders will tell us we're terrorist-humping idiots and do whatever they
damn well please. They might even increase our taxes to do it. That's
called leadership.

If Ahmadinejad thinks he can be our friend by honoring our heroes and
opening a dialog, he underestimates our ability to misinterpret him.
Fucking idiot. I hate him. 

Comments

[dgiles]

Why all the colorful language guys? People can converse without swearing every other word.

[ben]

"Brilliant post Scott!

Your skill with the written word is awesome -- I've no doubt that 75% of your nitwit fans will see it as satire or sarcasm. Fools.

Once the middle east is completely owned and operated by the USA, the world will finally be a safe place. We'll show Ahmadinejad what a holocaust looks like, and see if he thinks that's a myth."

This has to be the best comment out of them all. I only wish this were true.

[ben]

"Scholars tell us the correct
translation is more along the lines of wanting a change in Israel's
government toward something more democratic, with less gerrymandering."

He wants genocide, and he's made it clear many times. When you call for the removal of an entire ethnic group from a territory, its called ethnic cleansing. Now go draw some cartoons, and leave serious issues to people who have experience outside a cubicle.

[asma]

i wann ask you for somethink why you are like that . ahmed maybe did somethink bad lat him god will panish him i think that u are crayz and lonly and bb to say that you will stay alone in your life i wish that for you .

[Gratis SMS]

Thanks for your nice post!

[Stranger]

Good for you!

[El Duder]

You all are all fooled by these sucker politicians. It's a joke to be used as a puppet. Bush, Ahmadi Nejad, whomever are using these nonsense to win the next election.
Bottom line, US is driving the west side redirecting attentions from internal mess; Iran, Russia and China are having their own side to resist. It's all a monkey play.

And one more thing... fuck you scott. Fuck all the fanatic Jews, Muslims and shit. FUCK holocaust. I'm sick of hearing the "SAD" story of fuckin jews that is being told to us by fuckin' Hollywood, books etc. It's enough.. It's part of the history.. Gone.. get a life you bitches. Israel has its finger up US' ass and drives it everywhere they want. You fool dumb shit. I think you are 14 yrs old who has no bloody vision on nothing.

[HAIDAR ALI ZAIDI]

hey
u bloody dog!
wt right u hv to comment on AHMEDINIJAD. AHMEDINIJAD IS BETTER THAN BUSH. HE'S THE BEST. U BLOODY FUCK.
AFTER DEATH, LET'S C WHO GOES TO HEAVEN AND
WHO GOES TO HELL(I WISH HE'LL BE U ONLY).
U BUSTARD!

[Kevin]

I'm posting only to get one more comment...as it is waaayyyy to creepy that this ended at 911 and you discussed 9/11

[Frank]

Holocaust? Do you mean The Crucifixion? Like the Inquisition, you are obliged to yield to the moral thumbscrew of a story of the suffering of a person/people. Same zealots, different dogma.

[Ehsan.d]

hi,
i read ur post,
and i jus wanna say im there with ya,
all iranians hate ahmadi nejad,
i jus wanted to tell u that dont swear at all iranians just becasue their leader's a fuckhead,
i hate him too, and dont belive the scenes u see on tv about parades n' stuff in iran and ahmadi nejad's followers,
that's all make belive and a big fuckin lie,
we're trapped in our country,
iranians r not terroris,
it's our leaders,
our country is led by wrong poeple,
and u know, if anyone protests, they'll execute him!
and i want u to help us instead of swearing at us,
tnx 4 ur time.

[Shawn]

I just realized I didn't thank you for this post.

Thank you.

:-)

[tony]

that is some funny sh*t...i imagine bush is just as funny at times...thanks for the belly laughs and tears

[Jamie]

Soreal,
You've rebutted this comedy with a video declaring, "democracies have to protect themselves". This video goes on to talk about how certain people should not be given a platform to speak. You think people are too stupid to make up their own minds on what is good or bad?
Thanks for the video. Who knew Netanyahu already read "1984"...

[ET]

"I was happy to hear that NYC didn't allow Iranian President Ahmadinejad to place a wreath at the WTC site. And I was happy that Columbia University is rescinding the offer to let him speak. If you let a guy like that express his views, before long the entire world will want freedom of speech."

I know, I know I am supposed to laugh. Why didn't I? Maybe it's because Iran, as much as I actually love the place and its people, which I do, has a government that does not even come close to respecting free speech or the rights of its own minorities (and majorities). I just don't find it funny to defend a populist/facist who is involved in the daily oppression of his citizens.

Maybe I just don't uunderstand sarcasm....

[Jfish]

Bravo!

[Adam Smith]

I appreciate the courage it took to write something that should, in a truly free country, be a part of the daily dialogue. That it is not, that you must stand such withering criticism directed against you simply for having an opinion is in itself the most telling fact about the degree of intellectual torpor in America today and the vehement opposition which those who dissent must face.

I underwent my own awakening, followed closely by my open commentary on my perspective, and thereafter my ruin and disgrace, socially, financially, and in every way possible by a very cohesive and powerful group bent on stifling any discussion of the topic. I survived, and in doing so only proved that what I had discovered was in fact far closer to the truth than I had at first imagined.

Congratulations and thank you for your honesty, courage and sense of humor.

[soreal]

scott... i salute you!

much respect

~t

[davea0511]

Wow. I don't entirely disagree with your sarcasm, Mr. Adams, because indeed free speech and public discourse ought to be championed by those who've most benefited by it. Maybe that's why President Bush didn't condemn Columbia's invitation to Mahmoud.

You have, however, humiliated yourself with your presentation, when compared to Benjamin Netanyahu's approach. For example, if you have to continually resort to expletives and when you intentionally insult a large part of your audience in order to adequately punctuate your dialog with emotion and meaning then that says a lot about both your intelligence and your character.

Conversely, please check out the following rebuttal ... and note how PM Netanyahu addresses his audience. It is by far much more powerful and effective than what your posted here. Here it is: http://whorledview.com/bn1.html

[Jimmy G.]

Scott,

Maybe you could work a new character into your Dilbert strip... Ahmadinejad - or do you think the folks at Homeland Security would come and take you away?

[V N S]

Why is iran the bad guy? they had nothing to do with 9/11. Saudi Arabia did. But the royal family apparently move in and out of the US at will. should you guys not do something about that.incidentally i am from neither the US nor iran nor Saudi .

As solution for the israeli problem i suggest some land be allocated to them in texas (for climatic reasons), in germany (for historic reasons) and in antartica (for future reasons) (as divisions of israel). i am sure it will be acceptable to the palestinians since there wont be as much pressure on land and israel won't need to keep occupied lands.

[hamzad]

Scott:
The post september 29..beginning with " Absolutely brilliant..." is not by me. My very first post on that day got posted twice. Must be my mistake..it was my first time here.

[Jon]

Ah the ignorant irony. How many times must people trot out the old saw that the holocaust created Israel. Zionism (not a religious idea, theocracy my ass but an ideology)was alive and well long before Nazism started its murderous rampage across Europe.

Yes Israel somehow needed international approval to return to their homeland illegally occupied by Arab and Christian alike since before the murderous Crusades. What the Jew haters really despise be they Muslim or Christian is that today there is a country for Jews to call their own where they can defend their right to exist.

Oh and to the naive bleeding hearts wake up and smell the coffee, there is a world war going on and the evil axis is Iran, Syria, North Korea and probably China.

As for Achminajad everyone knows he's really a Mossad agent called Joe Cohen.

Scott I salute you.

[hamzad]

Scott.

Elsewhere your blog & interacts was discussed. This is what I posted.

===========================================================
PM:31

Thanks for posting that piece. The reaction to the Dilbert blog itself is quite an eye-opener. The overwhelming majority of them did not "get it" is really quite a matter of concern and a perhaps a lesson to us who are foolish enough to believe in the supreme intellectual level of those who have volunteered to bring democracy, liberty, and freedom even to those dying & dwindling in numbers due to famine & pestilence & disease.

I wonder if Scott Adams himself might not become history himself. It is not a good sign when "history" could be probed & discussed ( revisited or revised ?) in a literary manner (sarcasm) so obtuse and acute simultaneously that the "message" could be lost on a majority of the "simple" folk.

Are we sure that people like Mr. Masadi, You or even myself
really belong in this age. 'Language' as we knew it, as has been my contention all along, is on its death bed. No one has the "luxury" of time & effort to figure out nuances of a sarcasm, satire, or humor.

If one can let others "see" it, why say it? I think Dilbert should stick to cartoons. It is also safer. It requires a much less attention attention span & one is always geared up to chuckle & smile even before one opens the funnies page.
After thus brightening up one's morning one is always ready to plunge head-first to brighten one's future at the Corporate Headquarters.

[hamzad]

Scott.

Elsewhere your blog & interacts was discussed. This is what I posted.

===========================================================
PM:31

Thanks for posting that piece. The reaction to the Dilbert blog itself is quite an eye-opener. The overwhelming majority of them did not "get it" is really quite a matter of concern and a perhaps a lesson to us who are foolish enough to believe in the supreme intellectual level of those who have volunteered to bring democracy, liberty, and freedom even to those dying & dwindling in numbers due to famine & pestilence & disease.

I wonder if Scott Adams himself might not become history himself. It is not a good sign when "history" could be probed & discussed ( revisited or revised ?) in a literary manner (sarcasm) so obtuse and acute simultaneously that the "message" could be lost on a majority of the "simple" folk.

Are we sure that people like Mr. Masadi, You or even myself
really belong in this age. 'Language' as we knew it, as has been my contention all along, is on its death bed. No one has the "luxury" of time & effort to figure out nuances of a sarcasm, satire, or humor.

If one can let others "see" it, why say it? I think Dilbert should stick to cartoons. It is also safer. It requires a much less attention attention span & one is always geared up to chuckle & smile even before one opens the funnies page.
After thus brightening up one's morning one is always ready to plunge head-first to brighten one's future at the Corporate Headquarters.

[Tim Hughes]

Absolutely brilliant! I'm not some Ahmadinejad fanboy or Antisemite, but we've treated this guy like he's some creature created from bits of Satan, Mengele and Hans Blofeld, and we HAVE given Israel (the NATION, not the PEOPLE) a pass on more than has been justified. Another thing for folks to keep in mind is that Israel, while ostensibly a democracy, is a THEOCRACY, built upon the principles of Zionism. No separation of church and state there, no siree... just like that eeeeevil Iran.

I'm glad you had the guts to post this wonderful piece. Maybe it will open some eyes and cause people to do some investigation of their own on the unfair reporting from the Middle East.

Oh, and don't get me started on the "crime" of denying the Holocaust. Should we be charging people with not believing in the moon landings or the Warren Commission's report on the Kennedy assassination? I say it's thumbscrews and the rack for anyone denouncing man's role in Global Warming!

[Janos]

Scott! Nice rant! And all these double entendres... So much better than those times when you are being your cool reserved intellectual self. Bit less Fiat and a bit more Ferrari please, if at all possible.

I am happy that Mahmud Ahmed or whatshisname (kidding!) was allowed to speak at Columbia. He made a fool of himself a dozen times as fast as you could have.

Also, he said he wants to place a wreath at Ground Zero. Did he ever say if he wants to honor the victims or the pilots? Just wondering...

[loser of guitar picks]

what happened to you when i was away, scott?

[Rich T.]

@Jones:

You didn't get what I meant; apparently I didn't write my last post clearly enough. I actually agree with you, and that was the point I was trying to make: we shouldn't cling so tightly to our "side" that we can't accept truths on *both* sides of the ideological fence. That's why I thought it would be a useful exercise to suspend the hostilities long enough to defend even one position normally associated with the other side. And if we can't even manage that much, then I guess we have to let things take their course - which is what I meant by "proceeding accordingly", which was used in jest. My words applied to people on *both* sides. (And FWIW, my post was not in response to your original post, which I did not have in mind as I composed mine.)

I agree about supporting the facts, but facts only go so far, and it becomes a matter of how people interpret the "facts" they think they know, and how they arrange them within their ideological world view. Some facts seem beyond dispute, while others are flawed to begin with (have you ever seen a newspaper write-up of an event that you personally witnessed?). Facts are either embraced or denied, depending on one's world view. There's some wisdom in the phrase "Everything you know is wrong" - or at least enough doubt that we should not be too sure of ourselves. Mark Twain: "the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt".

You wrote: [There is no "hate" in pointing out others' "hate." There is no "hypocrisy" in pointing out others' "hypocrisy." This only becomes so if those who accuse others of such things display the same characteristics.]

And pretty much everyone does. See the "cognitive dissonance" thread. One person's passion or conviction is another's "hate"; one person's logic and flexibility is another's "hypocrisy". Anyone who is so devoted to one side that he/she denounces the other side without abandon is an excellent candidate for CD. I'm sorry, but I indeed perceive legions of intolerant champions of tolerance, hateful denouncers of "hate", and hypocritical denouncers of hypocrisy. Fresh examples come forth in the media on a weekly basis. And those people don't seem to notice it, or accept it when it's been pointed out. Rationalization reigns supreme.

[Oh, BTW, people who don't get Mr Adams' wonderful piece of sarcasm aren't "intellectually" challenged -- they're just satirically challenged.]

I meant that each side views the other side as intellectually challenged in general, rather than satirically challenged in this instance.

(FWIW, I actually didn't notice many posters who didn't get the sarcasm, and those people can probably be excused for scanning Scott's post too quickly. I mean, it wasn't that hard to get, if you read the post carefully. But satire is not always evident if you're not expecting it, and maybe they don't know that you should always expect satire from Scott.)

[mistermooster]

Nice commentary, but my favorite part is the comments where everyone congratulates themselves on spotting the obvious sarcasm...

[SparklingWiggles]

Did he say he thanked Jesus? Thats strange.I don't care what anyone says.He is still a typical hollywood Jew.Watch your children around him.Jews are known to be pedophiles.Besides,Jews have been persecuted out of a country 79 times!It's about to happen again.

[TiredofthisCountry]

I love the post. Finally, there is atleast one person who is not brainwashed by the mainstream media. This country believes that if you think someone is your enemy, you just have to paint him evil in every possible way.

This is the reason why this country needs Obama. He is atleast willing to listen.

[jones]

Just an observation about Rich T's "general observation":

This quote makes no sense:

"Maybe we all need an exercise in which we support just one view of the opposing side - and not using satire. If we can't even do that much, we know the divide is truly
emotional/ideological/psychological, and not based on fact, and should proceed accordingly..."

Maybe we all need to realize that supporting "sides" is just exactly how we got to this impasse -- following the "facts" doesn't require "supporting" a "side" or any of the views therein. It simply means "supporting" THE facts.

There is no "hate" in pointing out others' "hate." There is no "hypocrisy" in pointing out others' "hypocrisy." This only becomes so if those who accuse others of such things display the same characteristics.

In my comment I pointed out the "hate" -- and I basically called it "kooky" and "zany." In my comment I pointed out the hypocrisy surrounding the Iranian President's visit -- and took NO "side." Those two observations are based on the "facts" common to this thread -- as well as many other discussions regarding this issue.

Oh, BTW, people who don't get Mr Adams' wonderful piece of sarcasm aren't "intellectually" challenged -- they're just satirically challenged.

[RonPaulForPresident]

We believe what we want to believe.

If we believe that the mainstream media which is run by giant corporations doesn't report things out of context to artificially build consensus (and hence ratings) and *always* reports things verbatim so we can make up our own minds, then we will believe them...

[Rich T.]

Just a general observation...

I'm struck by how many commenters seem to fall into the following categories:

- the apparent hypocrites who label others "hypocrites"

- the apparent haters who label others "haters"

- the apparently intellectually challenged who call others intellectually challenged

It all depends which side you take, and facts take a back seat to emotion born of ideology (which itself is born of psychological predisposition and childhood experiences?).

In any case, all I see are "this vs. that" arguments, instead of "this AND that" agreements.

Maybe we all need an exercise in which we support just one view of the opposing side - and not using satire. If we can't even do that much, we know the divide is truly emotional/ideological/psychological, and not based on fact, and should proceed accordingly, i.e. irrational disputes that one day could escalate to further wars (including civil war).

[S@ns S@nity]

I love the "try living in [insert random third world country]if you are not happy with USA" people. Just because some place is in a worse condition doesn't mean you shouldn't strive to improve your homes butt-holes. I hope you will be happy when the standard of living in USA stays the same, or becomes slightly worse and countries of Western Europe, Eastern Europe, Advanced APAC and even China and India all overtake you.

[jones]

Bravo Mr. Adams!

I actually believe that this post is the most intelligent piece that I've read regarding President Ahmadinejad's visit and the sheer hypocrisy that has been associated with it. I began reading the comments but stopped after I realized that many of them were written by people who really aren't the sharpest pencils in the case.

I will say though that the Zionists sure picked up on this one. You know that these wacky Zionist groups actually have software made in Israel that is designed to direct them to hot topics regarding Israel on the web. The users are given talking points and they just go crazy with their "we are the victims" and "saying you want justice in Palestine is just code for your hidden anti-semitism" whine, whine, blah, blah.

The real meaning of your post just goes way over their kooky heads. They don't even realize that the more they whine, hate, and fabricate, the more they substantiate your satire that illustrates the hypocrisy surrounding this whole issue.

Thanks man, not only was this bit very bright, but it was also very brave. Truth To Power!

[Kara X]

All you Jorj Boch luvers.....screw him with all of you..... and screw all of you with him! America can do without all these ass jockeys! Hearz to u FUCKERS!!!

[Grinder]

Too iranic and sotiricol for 90% of the reader's to understand. However, I personally enjoyed it immensely.

[liam]

I am amazed by two things. The amount of Hillel/ADL shills spewing their zionist hate on the comments, as well as your "former fans" who can't grasp the irony. I strongly suggest people read the experiences of a European student of Columbia Law School. A law school which by the way hands out 1/2 of it's scholarships to Israeli's. Israel has a population of 5 million in a world of 6 billion.

"Columbia Unbecoming"
http://www.counterpunch.org/robert03262005.html

[HA!]

Hamid, clearly you're debating skills are far superior. Please, excuse me.

If you're Iranian and so upset about a totalitarian regime in your former country, then it is up to you (if you so choose) and other Iranians living there to take matters into your own hands and take the course of action you see fit to remedy the situation, just as we Americans should be vigilant that our government doesn't abuse power over here and trample all over OUR rights. Further, it is not the obligation of hard-working Americans to sacrifice themselves and finance the overthrow of every tin-pot dictator in the whole world. If we Americans believed that, we would find ourselves enslaved to an impossible to achieve ideal that would ultimately leave us broke and penniless as well as beholden to a home-grown totalitarianism---except, that is, for the Halliburtons, the Boeings, the Carlyle Groups and the rest of the politically privileged corporatist death merchants who benefit from this endless orgy of self-sacrifice that we Americans are supposedly morally obligated to uphold.

That is not to say that I don't empathize with people living in unfree conditions, it's just that we're only human, not divinely empowered to wipe all evil off the face of the earth forever, as our reality-challenged president seems to think. We can show the way of freedom by example, but to force it upon other nations by force is both immoral and defeats the objective of freedom supposedly sought. As I pointed out before, dropping bombs and missiles on an oppressed people doesn't "liberate" them---it KILLS them. Is that your idea of freedom? Liberty through death?

And I don't know if you've noticed, but our own gov't isn't exactly virtuous when it comes to human rights. We have several million people in jails and prisons in this country, many of them for victimless crimes. The PATRIOT Act and Homeland Security has reduced us to herded sheep, even as we're told it's supposed to protect our freedom. Our gov't is abducting people all over the world under flimsy pretenses and torturing them in secret prisons in Arab countries that have governments friendly to ours.

And BTW, I live where I choose to live, provided that I respect the rights of others and that I make my living through voluntary exchanges and not coercion and force. And I would never convert to a religion that promised only 72 free virgins. I require AT LEAST 150---72 just don't satisfy, y'know?

[Hamid Reza]

Dear Vierotchka - if you were not so clueless, you would have noticed that I spelled Ahmaqihitler with a 'q' - "Ahmaqi" meaning 'idiocy'. Furthermore your low level of "savâd" (comprehension) is so obvious because you cannot figure out who the author of my piece is and wrongly attribute it to Alle - (dear Adam, this is a deficiency of your comment section and something you should fix to improve the quality of discourse). Vierotchka, you are making a literal translation and in Farsi, "safheye ruzegâr mahv šavad" does not mean "vanish from pages of time" because this is a western concept - it means "remove from existence" where safheye ruzegâr is an existential concept. So Imam Khomeini (may he be sodomized by his favorite camel in hell) is saying "Israel MUST be obliterated from existence".

This much of a Farsi lesson for you anti-Iranian traitors who have destroyed Iran with your fascistic religion of peace - May your Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) the assassin bandit and child molestor get sodomized along with your favorite dictator Imam Khomeini.

Killing 100,000 intellectuals by the religious secret police in Iran since 1980 is not enough for you and now you defend this pathetic police state?

Not only I am Iranian, I am a proud Muslim apostate and there is not a rat's behind that you can do about it on the internet. May your xodâ, allâh, or parvardegar get shafted by the šeytân zalim martikeye or zanike'ye qoromsâq. No secret police here, so boro goh boxor va bemir mâdar qahbeh naneh jendeh az Tâzi koon xor.

@HA! -- so you could not join the discussion without attacking the poster? You post-colonial reactionary leftists have no clue what it takes to have a debate, do you? Get out of America and go and live in Qom or Gaza and enjoy the human rights over there and attack the non-existant posters over there, idiot. Convert to Islam while there and get your 72 virgins for free.

[joseph]

If one reads this one piece in isolation, you can't really figure out what the author's position is on the issues, only his purpose, which is to cleverly force the reader to consider several different perspectives on issues which he might feel very strongly about, but not have exhaustively explored due to the strength of his feeling.

By the way, WWJB? Who would Jesus bomb?

[marg]

Wow so its just fine that he kills and blows up American soldiers in Iraq? Geez.

[John]

Thank you for posting this, Scott. The knee-jerk reaction people are having to Ahmadinejad being "allowed" to speak is frankly sickening. Specifics about his speech aside, where the hell do we live anymore? Isn't this the United States of America? Don't we have a right to say (and to hear) anything we want, from anyone we want?

We allow demostrations by the KKK, neo-nazis, Nation of Islam, Rush Limbaugh, Lyndon LaRouche, the American Socialist Party, Communists, Anarchists, and pretty much any other nutbag who wants to open his/her mouth. Why? Because it helps to protect our rights to open our mouths and spout any crap we want to!

You want to bash this guy, people? Fine. Attack his arguments. Posit your own views about why his views are flawed and wrong. Condemn the things he says. But attacking the fact that he is "allowed" (or even *gasp* "invited"!?!?) to speak is just stupid.

You want the government to restrict who can say what? You want whoever is in charge at the time to decide who may speak? All you conservatives want to reconsider your "yes" answer to this question in 2008 when a liberal is in the white house AND they control congress? Sound like fun??

Scott. Keep speaking. I may not agree with everything you say, but thank you very much for saying it.

And don't let the idiots get you down.

[eli]

[Democracy gets where Iran wants to go if Israel incorporates the occupied territories, demographics continue as they have, and everyone gets a vote. I believe that is Iran's proposal. -- Scott]

I see, so you think the one state solution is the right way to go? I thought we already agreed that Jews have a right to control their own destiny. Are you renegging on this?

99% of Jews are against the one state solution as the emerging state will not be a Jewish state. A large majority of Israelis as well as the current government are for a two state solution in which most of the territories occupied by Israel will become part of the Palestinian state.

In addition, don't you see how infantile and disingenious the one state solution is? The Chechs and Slovaks could not live in one country. The Wallons and Flemish are on the verge of breaking up Belgium. These are nations that "get along". I am not even talking about what happened in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Lebanon where the groups can't get along.

So the Iranian proposal is to put in one country the Jews and Palestinians in equal numbers. Two communnities that have been at war for 100 years and hate each other's guts. In addition the Jews are about ten times richer than the Palestinians. Isn't it clear that the one state solution will lead directly to civil war and the trashing of Israel? The Arabs cannot stand each other in Lebanon, Iraq etc. but the Jews and Palestinians will get along just fine?

Why can't you see through the cheap Iranian rhetoric and understand that Iran is advocating the annihilation of the Jewish state and the death of an untold number of Jews?

[HA!]

Congratulations, Adams, you drew all the drooling, pro-war nutjobs out of their dark little caves and got them beating their chests and grunting like gorillas.

My question to all you lunatics who think Iran should be attacked because their leader is so god-awful is this: How does dropping American bombs and missiles on the heads of ordinary Iranian men, women and children help them against tyranny? The only way such an attack could help them is if you view death as a kind of "liberation," I suppose.

And another question: Why does an argument against attacking another country have to necessarily prove that the head of state in that country is a saint?

We're talking about an action that would most likely kill thousands of human beings. Christ, you people scare me a hell of a lot more than any Iranian politician.

[eli]

[Has the current leadership of Iran ever expressed an interest in killing all Jews? I've only heard expressions like "wiped off the map," which sounds to me more about literally getting rid of the concept of Israel as a country and replacing the form of government with something more pro-Islam. Otherwise, why say "map" when you mean "earth"? -- Scott]

For the sake of argument, let's suppose your "charitable" interpretation holds. The "Zionist regime" that needs to be wiped out is the liberal democracy for the 80% of Israelis which are Jews and that strongly support this "regime" and basically ARE the regime. How do you go about doing this without fighting a war against the Jews living in Israel and defeating them? So at the very least, according again to your "charitable" interpretation, Jad is advocating a war against Israel.

As an Israeli I cherish my freedom and am prepared to fight for it. Jad is telling me that I either become a second class citizen in an Islamic state or he will fight me till one of us surrenders.

So no, Iran has not expressed interest in killing all Jews, just those that stand in its way of changing the "regime" in Israel. That is about 6 million of us.

[Democracy gets where Iran wants to go if Israel incorporates the occupied territories, demographics continue as they have, and everyone gets a vote. I believe that is Iran's proposal. -- Scott]

[eli]

Vierotchka,

Have you no shame? Who was responsible for the "wrong" translation? This is the explanation given in the link YOU pasted:
"The inflammatory "wiped off the map" quote was first disseminated not by Iran's enemies, but by Iran itself. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Time magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring to the source. "

IRNA is fully controlled and is under the thumb of the Iranian regime. They knew EXACTLY what the meaning of the words were and they translated the sentence to English.

In the end, what does it matter if Jad said it or the official news agency of the Iranian regime said he said it? In fact, that IRNA said it is even worse. And pray, do show us where Jad says IRNA got him wrong.

Of course, people finding excuses for tyrants that stand up to the US are a dime a dozen. Scott Adams, having no full grasp of the facts, supports a tyrant that has clearly stated that he wants to annihilate me and tries to sell the fact that this tyrant has perhaps been misunderstood. Sorry Scott, this is personal. You remind me of the ignorant liberals and appeasers in Europe that tried to put a cheery spin on Mein Kampf (all for the best intentions of course, who needs war, right?).

[Has the current leadership of Iran ever expressed an interest in killing all Jews? I've only heard expressions like "wiped off the map," which sounds to me more about literally getting rid of the concept of Israel as a country and replacing the form of government with something more pro-Islam. Otherwise, why say "map" when you mean "earth"? -- Scott]

[Vierotchka]

Alle (September 26, 2007 at 03:32 AM) wrote:

"You f'ing idiot Adam - I am an Iranian and he says "Israel MUST be wiped off the map" - plainly and clearly. You must have believed the obfuscations put out by that Farsi-illiterate Cole?

"Did you not see the "Down with Esrael" poster in the military parade 2 days ago in Tehran which Ahmaqihitler presided? In Farsi and Arabic right above the English it said "Death to Israel".

"F'ing post-colonial reactionary leftist douchebag who did not love any primitive Islamic petty dictator you did not meet. And Oh BTW, Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) raped a 9 year old girl and assassinated his critics. Now go and apologize for Islam - religion of peace needing a fascist police state to rule."

It is painfully obvious to anyone who knows Parsi (Farsi) that you are not an Iranian. "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad." does NOT translate as "Israel MUST be wiped off the map". Furthermore, the rest of your post also indicates that you are not Iranian. Eeshala tah akhareh ohmret geryeh bokoney.

[Vierotchka]

Yes, you have been had, but not by those you believe have had you. Ahmadinejad never said that Israel should be wiped off the map. The American press and even the world press have been twisting his words and attributing to him statements that he has never made.

What he actually said was "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad." which means "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time", which has nothing to do with wiping anything off any map.

See http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4527

[Vijay Prozak]

Sacred taboos always breed indignant responses, until the people are trained otherwise. We are trained well by our mass media.

As a frequent Dilbert reader, I enjoy its sense of realism about the tedium of American offices. Here's another realism: we have seven billion humans and most of them are abject morons. The way we're doing things so far is not working out.

A world of a half-billion intelligent, aware people beats this "quantity over quality" approach any day. This includes subtlety-impaired morons, insane religions, demagogues and sacred chows.

[Alle]

Some interesting and concisely expressed opinions. Nice blog!

[Hamid Reza]

You f'ing idiot Adam - I am an Iranian and he says "Israel MUST be wiped off the map" - plainly and clearly. You must have believed the obfuscations put out by that Farsi-illiterate Cole?

Did you not see the "Down with Esrael" poster in the military parade 2 days ago in Tehran which Ahmaqihitler presided? In Farsi and Arabic right above the English it said "Death to Israel".

F'ing post-colonial reactionary leftist douchebag who did not love any primitive Islamic petty dictator you did not meet. And Oh BTW, Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) raped a 9 year old girl and assassinated his critics. Now go and apologize for Islam - religion of peace needing a fascist police state to rule.

[Bob]

A little late, but:

"GOTCHA"

[I'd be in favor of moving Israel to America. Everyone except for you, of course. How's that square with your theory? -- Scott]

[I never suggested moving Israel. I invite you to angrily cut and paste what I did say into your next message and angrily say "gotcha" while demonstrating a low level of reading comprehension. DMD. -- Scott]

I dare see there is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension.

[Chris]

The question of the world's motivation and rationalization for the creation of Israel is absolutely key. I think all commenters here would agree that, even if something like the holocaust happened now, there is no way that modern western governments would entertain the idea of simply taking over a patch of foreign land and declaring it to be a new country, regardless of the wishes of its current inhabitants. The idea would be condemned as the worst possible sort of imperialism, and correctly so. Try to imagine how any Arab would feel, having been treating with such utter contempt by the west for the last fifty years.

On the topic of Ahmadinejad's "wipe Israel off the map" comment, I think it's interesting that people choose to take that literally, but not *too* literally. If taken literally, it should be interpreted as meaning that he would like Israel to be removed as a political entity, ie "removed from the (political) map" - he didn't say "wiped off the face of the Earth", as in "physically destroyed". It all depends on how the original language was translated, of course...

[Joe Berger]

Here are some intersting facts proving the holocaust
At wars end Germany had almost 20 concentration camps. Most were said to have gas chambers. Slowly during the 50's and 60's accusations of gas chambers were withdrwan from all camps captured by the British French and Americans. Only in the 6 camps captured by the Russians did the gas chambers survive. To doubt the holocaust simply on this basis is rediculous. After all, we all know that Stalin was the most honest and reliable of all the ww2 leaders and would never fabricate stories about gas chambers.
2.The Russians, some years after capturing Aushwitz, erected a plaque stating that about 4 million people perished there. In the early 1990's they changed the number to 1.1 million. The revisionists like to cite this figure as proof that the 6 million holocaust victims is wildly exaggerated. We all know that the Poles were a bunch of anti-semetic, Nazi sympathizers and that their figure of 1.1 million simply cannot be trusted.
3 In 1989, the world's leading expert on WW2, David Irving, a man who lectures in four languages and who has written over 30 books on WW2 changed his mind and said he no longer believed that gas chambers existed in any of the camps. This rediculous conlusion only serves to demonstrate how even the brightest, most knowledgable men can come to absurd conclusions. Clearly, questioning the truth can lead people to all kinds of nonsensical ideas.
4.After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Russians released the death book records which they had captured at Auschwitz. Inmate deaths from all causes , including executions are all recorded. The number is about 75,000. Any one trusting German record keeping must be reallly stupid.
Reading revisionist historians is obviously a big waste of time. Is it any wonder that their books are often banned in most Western counties excluding the USA (because of the first amendment)

[Joe Berger]

Here are some intersting facts proving the holocaust
At wars end Germany had almost 20 concentration camps. Most were said to have gas chambers. Slowly during the 50's and 60's accusations of gas chambers were withdrwan from all camps captured by the British French and Americans. Only in the 6 camps captured by the Russians did the gas chambers survive. To doubt the holocaust simply on this basis is rediculous. After all, we all know that Stalin was the most honest and reliable of all the ww2 leaders and would never fabricate stories about gas chambers.
2.The Russians, some years after capturing Aushwitz, erected a plaque stating that about 4 million people perished there. In the early 1990's they changed the number to 1.1 million. The revisionists like to cite this figure as proof that the 6 million holocaust victims is wildly exaggerated. We all know that the Poles were a bunch of anti-semetic, Nazi sympathizers and that their figure of 1.1 million simply cannot be trusted.
3 In 1989, the world's leading expert on WW2, David Irving, a man who lectures in four languages and who has written over 30 books on WW2 changed his mind and said he no longer believed that gas chambers existed in any of the camps. This rediculous conlusion only serves to demonstrate how even the brightest, most knowledgable men can come to absurd conclusions. Clearly, questioning the truth can lead people to all kinds of nonsensical ideas.
4.After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Russians released the death book records which they had captured at Auschwitz. Inmate deaths from all causes , including executions are all recorded. The number is about 75,000. Any one trusting German record keeping must be reallly stupid.
Reading revisionist historians is obviously a big waste of time. Is it any wonder that their books are often banned in most Western counties excluding the USA (because of the first amendment)

[ozz]

Nothing lasts forever young man. I imagined you to be a more intelligent person than this. Think of the Romans, the Aztecs, Mayans. All mighty and glorious civilizations. But they all fell apart. Who knows.

[BB]

wow. holy touched and turned on by your lovely words. i am exhilarated beyond the descriptive. beautiful. i wish I had ur friendship

[Havvy]

Just a note: Islam and Christianity share the same religious link: The Old Testament. The Jews wrote the Old Testament.

[Alice in Wonderland]

The dog and cat holocaust is ongoing.

[Sirk]

Brilliant, Mr. Adams -- and much too cerebral for most to understand. Please keep up the good work. It is nice to know there are like-minded folks out there.

[Trev]

Let me see.

The Holocaust is a poor excuse for Israel.
Ahhmadinejad and Bush are equivalent tyrants.
Columbia was right to allow Ahmadinejad to speak so he could say things like "Iran has no fags" and "Israel deserves to be wiped off the planet" (oh wait you've stated that Ahmadinejad didn't actually say that 'scholars' (what scholars are these Scott?) said that he really wanted a more democratic gov't).

Scott, you're lost. I won't even try to argue with you because it's clear you've closed your mind.

My major emotion after reading this is sadness.

[eli]

"Eli, your argument comes down to saying that, since Christians in Europe killed 6 million Jews in the Holocaust, it is morally right to kick 4 million Arabs (the original refugees and their descendents) out of their homeland in Asia to provide Jews with a homeland. I have a better idea. Let's create a Jewish state in what is now Bavaria. The Nazi party was created in Munich; let's turn Munich into the capital of a new Jewish State. Nuremburg is known for its massive anti-Semitic rallies; let's make it a place for celebrating the exploits of our new Yiddish State's national soccer team. The Nazis wanted Germany to be free of Jews; I can think of no finer tribute to them than making Bavaria, the organization's birthplace, the new Jewish state."

No, my argument has nothing to do with morals. My argument is based on two assertions:
1) The holocuast provides strong support for a Jewish state because it shows that Jews should control their own destiny and cannot trust others for their security.
2) If you think it is reasonable to discuss relocating Israel you are an antisemite and that is why I think both you and Scott are anitsemites.

Would it have been nice if after WWII the Jews were given Bavaria after the Germans there were kicked out? I don't know, maybe, but it was never on the table. As for now, there is no alternative to relocate Israel to and the antisemites that propose this are fully aware of it.

If you know there is no alterantive, what does the discussion amount to except for trying to say that Israel has no right to exist or that the Jews should disperse in Europe and the US and lose their national identity and independence? What is there really to discuss? It is just a veiled attempt to undermine the legality of Israel.

So, saying that discussing the relocation of Israel is reasonable is blatantly antisemitic. No other nation is seen as a candidate for relocation. And since you and Scott think this is worth discussing, you are both antisemites.

As for 48, about 700,000 Palestinians lost their land because the Arabs did not accept a UN resolution and declared war on Israel. At the same time, about the same amount of Jews were expelled from Arab lands. Israel took in those Jews just as the Arabs should have accepted the Palestinians. That is what would have been morally right.

[madman429]

Scott, it almost seems as if you hit the nail on the head before the madcap even spoke. Ahmadinejad is quite clearly insane, and appears quite capable of Orwellian doublethink, particularly in his references to the Holocaust. The man is evidently a very capable speaker who is able to convey his own delusions on a wide scale. This makes him a very dangerous man.
Never once was he visibly shaken. He could probably pass a polygraph while voicing two distinct contradictions of logic consecutively. He never even broke a sweat. He could probably reduce Bush to a sweating, quivering heap in seconds despite his lies. A more cool evil man I have never seen.
Hillary recently referred to Dick Cheney as Darth Vader. Ahmadinejad reminds me of Emperor Palpatine (notice what you could do with "Palpatine", with three syllables, sounding sort of like...oops, better stop here-maybe I mispronounced it...?)...

[Rich T.]

[I'd be in favor of moving Israel to America. Everyone except for you, of course. How's that square with your theory? -- Scott]

[I never suggested moving Israel. I invite you to angrily cut and paste what I did say into your next message and angrily say "gotcha" while demonstrating a low level of reading comprehension. DMD. -- Scott]

Assuming it was actually you who wrote both those comments, Scott, then how do you reconcile them? That you "didn't suggest it", but "would be in favor of it"? Wow, big distinction.

P.S. This whole "DMD" thing is just plain stupid, and takes any serious discussion down a few notches. It's a cop-out.

[Adam]

Scott, previously I found your commentary on evolution to be dreadfully lacking in scientific understanding but now with this blog entry you appear to be way too eager to believe fictions created by the religious-right. Are you really seeking truth or are you trying to make the facts fit your beliefs?

Scholars will tell me that the translation is about changing Israel's government? Do you seriously believe that? The dispute over the translation, from every source I've seen except your blog, is whether he is calling for Israel's destruction or if he is simply stating that he believes it will one day be destroyed.

As for the "Myth" being something society is built-upon, for someone that quibbles over translations you're certainly taking your own liberties here. He clearly means "the Holocaust is fictional", as illustrated by his many other speeches including the one at Columbia which HAS INDEED taken place (Columbia only rescinded their offer LAST YEAR because of SECURITY CONCERNS).

When asked how he could deny Holocaust (and host a 2-day-long International Holocaust Denyer's conference to top it off) when it is the most documented event in human history he avoided the question entirely and simply said that whether or not it occurred, it has no bearing on the plight of the Palestinians.

I believe he should have the right to free speech as well, Scott. And he was given the opportunity to speak, proving once again that our perception of him is founded in a disturbing truth and that your perceptions are either colored by some internal need to rage against the norm or by your own prejudices. I really hope it is the former because I love your cartoon and would be disappointed to say the least if you turned out to be a religious nut.

[Jonathan]

"So is it your view that it is a reasonable demand worth contemplating to move the Jewish homeland from Israel to somewhere else? Is that what you are implying?

So, in your opinion, willing to seriously discuss the relocation of Israel is not an antisemitic position? Which other nation except the Jews are you willing to contemplate such a solution for? How about the Palestinians?"

I can't tell if you're just being argumentative or serious but the mistake here (or perhaps intentional misleading sentiment) is that *everyone* in Israel will always follow the *symbolic* flag of a "Jewish State". That is to say, if the U.N. were to announce tomorrow that the "Jewish State" has been moved to this huge island that nobody has claimed, *every single Jew in Israel* would have to move there.

Just like how when they announced that what is currently Israel was officially the "Jewish State" in 1962, all of the current Jews all popped up there from the previous Jewish State instantaneously.

That's not going to happen. There were Jews in that region long before a Jewish State existed and there will continue to be a great number of Jews there if the Jewish State didn't exist. The *people* there have had their homes there for thousands of years and they weren't "wiped out in mass genocide" like the fear-mongering you're-an-anti-Semite crowd is screaming before Israel existed.

Not that I think Ahmadinejad isn't antisemitic but even an antisemite has to tone down his antisemitism when faced with world politics. And that toned-down, politically corrected view he is now presenting is, dare I say, reasonable. Israel's government *should* be changed such that it isn't a "Jewish State" but simply a "Sovereign State" that does not tie one particular ethnicity/religion to its government. I'm constantly amused how people will harp on about separation of church and state and even more importantly, a racially-blind government, but somehow make an exemption when it comes to the Jewish state because of holocaust guilt and/or fear of being called an antisemite for opposing theocracies.

[I never suggested moving Israel. I invite you to angrily cut and paste what I did say into your next message and angrily say "gotcha" while demonstrating a low level of reading comprehension. DMD. -- Scott]

[David]

[Bad interpretation. Ahmadinejad has expressed no complaint with the Jews having a homeland, as far as I know. His complaint is with the location. -- Scott]

[So is it your view that it is a reasonable demand worth contemplating to move the Jewish homeland from Israel to somewhere else? Is that what you are implying?

So, in your opinion, willing to seriously discuss the relocation of Israel is not an antisemitic position? Which other nation except the Jews are you willing to contemplate such a solution for? How about the Palestinians? - Eli]

In 1900, 95% of all Palestinians were Muslim or Christian; only 5% were Jews. Meanwhile, the largest ethnic group in Vilnius happened to be - the Jews. The Jews in Palestine weren't pushing for a Jewish state; the Zionists were largely European Jews. Based on this, it would make more sense for a Jewish homeland to be in the area around Vilnius than it would be for the homeland to be in the area around Jaffa. If the European Jews, and not the Palestinian Jews, wanted a Jewish state, then the logical place for such a state would be in Europe. (The early Zionists seemed to be ashamed of their Yiddish heritage. Many of them, including David Green, would go on to change their names to something that sounded less "Jewish.")

The goal of Zionism was to move millions of Jews out of Europe - making Europe Judenrein in the process - and moving them to Palestine. In order to accommodate this mass relocation of Jews that Zionists wanted, it was necessary to conduct massive ethnic cleansing in Palestine. About 750,000 non-Jews were forced out of Israel from 1945 to 1948 by Zionists.

(Not all of the refugees were Arabs; some ethnic Armenians who fled Turkey following the Armenian Genocide during WWI and resettled in Palestine were forced out of their houses by the Zionists as well. Albert Aghazarian can tell you how Zionist forces kicked his family out of his house back then. Where did they want those few thousand Armenians to go? There was no Armenian state during the 1940s, and, despite the fact that a Jew in Europe in 1938 had a slightly better chance of surviving the Holocaust than an Armenian in the Ottoman Empire in 1914 had of surviving the Armenian Genocide - 29.4% to 28.6% - the Zionists weren't doing anything to help Armenians get a homeland of their own in the several decades between the end of World War II and the collapse of the Soviet Union.)

Eli, your argument comes down to saying that, since Christians in Europe killed 6 million Jews in the Holocaust, it is morally right to kick 4 million Arabs (the original refugees and their descendents) out of their homeland in Asia to provide Jews with a homeland. I have a better idea. Let's create a Jewish state in what is now Bavaria. The Nazi party was created in Munich; let's turn Munich into the capital of a new Jewish State. Nuremburg is known for its massive anti-Semitic rallies; let's make it a place for celebrating the exploits of our new Yiddish State's national soccer team. The Nazis wanted Germany to be free of Jews; I can think of no finer tribute to them than making Bavaria, the organization's birthplace, the new Jewish state.

Best of all, we don't have to force anybody to leave Israel. Eli can hardly argue with the existence of two Jewish states, and we'll give Jews free choice of whether they want to live in a peaceful state integrated into the European Union, or a state in the desert that is in perpetual war because of the Zionist commitment to making the ethnic cleansing of 1945-1948 permanent. I would bet that most of them would choose to leave Israel for Bavaria. No Gentiles would be involved in moving the Jewish homeland; the Jews would be doing that themselves.

[Lulu]

Love the blog. Love the comments. And, thank God and our forefathers that we do have free speech in the United States (for now). I am very worried that our politicians (Republicans and Democrats) are going to limit that freedom also. If nothing else, your blogs make people think.

[LanceThruster]

Wow! I could not have imagined something like this coming from a mainstream talent such as yourself. It is wickedly funny and accurate, and as such cannot be allowed to go "unchallenged" (read - "unpunished") by those who have a vested interest in perpetuating the official narrative.

I am also thoroughly amazed and impressed with the confident manner (knowledge does that , doesn't it?) that you respond to those who take issue or offense with your piece. I wish I could write something wildy inaccurate or contrarian just to be honored with a personalized correction from you, but I happen to agree with everything you've said (comment replies too). Keep up the great work. See ya in the funny papers!

[Rich T.]

[I'd be in favor of moving Israel to America. Everyone except for you, of course. How's that square with your theory? -- Scott]

Oh you would, would you? And where exactly would that be? In Pleasanton and the surrounding area, after you and your neighbors vacate the premises? And would the "Israel-in-America" be its own country on North American soil, or just another "community" of a displaced people who forms clusters within the United States? If the latter, then the Jews already have the New York City area. And what is the historical link for Jews to accept your newly designated region?

[eli]

[Bad interpretation. Ahmadinejad has expressed no complaint with the Jews having a homeland, as far as I know. His complaint is with the location. -- Scott]

So is it your view that it is a reasonable demand worth contemplating to move the Jewish homeland from Israel to somewhere else? Is that what you are implying?

So, in your opinion, willing to seriously discuss the relocation of Israel is not an antisemitic position? Which other nation except the Jews are you willing to contemplate such a solution for? How about the Palestinians?

[some girl]

Hahahahaha, DAMN you got all the monkeys out to dance, didn't you? Nice pot stirring. I have only read about half the responses and it has kept me amused for a couple hours.

[David]

Please stick to cartoons. You are much better at those.

[Big D]

I've never fully understood the amount of liberty that the Americans enjoy DAILY until I realized if you posted this in some other country, that's the end of you, your wealth, career and freedom.

Thank goodness there's still somewhere in the world where people still understand and enjoy the meaning of freedom. Thank goodness for America.

It's pretty sad that jealous ones are reduced to decrying others' freedom so they are distracted from their own pitifulness...

[eli]

"[I agree with your argument against your hallucination of my point of view. -- Scott]"

Well perhaps you can explain how to interpret:
"Aren't there any Iranian words for saying a set of historical facts has achieved an unhealthy level
of influence on a specific set of decisions in the present?"

The way I interpret this (in the context of your sarcastic article) is that you believe that it is reasonable for Aheminijad to say that the holocaust is not a good reason to grant the Jews a homeland and that it could be argued that supporting the existence of Israel is "unhealthy".

[Bad interpretation. Ahmadinejad has expressed no complaint with the Jews having a homeland, as far as I know. His complaint is with the location. -- Scott]

[strait woman]

Thank you! That was great. Although I am not an ironist (I threw away my iron in the '70s), what you had to say was at once funny and sad and profound. I always read Dilbert but now I'm putting your blog at the top of my list.

[wwz]

hmmm. So, question: If we are at war with Iran, how is it we let their 'Leader' come and go from our shores without at least detaining him for some enhanced Article 3 interrogation?

Ahmadinejad = Hitler, right? I'm so confused.

[mtj]

Paul:

""I know what irony is, is the same as coppery and bronzey and goldy.""

> that is too funny !

[benpreven]

The largest supplier of weapons to the insurgents in Iraq is the US. Not Iran. Well they are our enemies but business is business after all.

[eli]

"Who knew that Scoot Adams was an antisemite?
You can say what you want Scott but when you say the fact that 6 millions Jews were murdered "is given too much influence" because there is 1 single small Jewish state that can stand up to its neigbours then according to my book you are an antisemite.

According to you, the fact that 6 millions Jews were murdered does not make a state, half the size of NJ, where they can control their own destiny a reasonable proposal. As a Jew and an Israeli I view this as pure hatered and the worst form of antisemitism. It is the back handed, subtle and oh so clever form of antisemitism that Jews have endured for centuries from "intellectuals" like you.

[I'd be in favor of moving Israel to America. Everyone except for you, of course. How's that square with your theory? -- Scott]"

What part of "Jews want to control their own destiny" do you not understand? Are you in favor of taking out all the current residents of say Delaware and letting the Jews move in and create an independent state? If not, you are trying to muddle the issue and are still not willing to concede that the fact that 6 million Jews were murdered provides a reasonable argument that Jews should be able to control their destiny. And in my book that makes you an antisemite.

I am extremely grateful for the sacrifices of the people of the US during WWII. But let's face it, if the Japanese would not have bombed Pearl Harbor, there would not have been US soldiers liberating the camps. It is only natural. Just as the Americans would not go to war in Rwanda to stop a genocide, they would not have gone to war just to stop the genocide of the Jews. That's life. And that is why the Jews need an independent state in which they can control their own destiny and not be at the mercy of others. And if you deny this argument, which is as common sensical as they come, you are an antisemite.

[I agree with your argument against your hallucination of my point of view. -- Scott]

[joe Berger]

the tradgedy for Americans is their ignorance of their own criminal behavior. With the possible exception of Joe Stalin they hold most of the world records for indiscriminate slaughterof women and children and for mistreatment of POW's.
1.The deliberately planned "firestorms" designed to kill as many women and children as possible used on Dresden, Tokyo, Hamburg, Phorzheim etc. etc. are unequalled in human barbarity.
2. Hiroshima and Nagasaki ...more of the same. Their message to the Japs was " Our new technology enables us to kill your women and children at will. We will indiscriminately slaughter them by the tens of thousands until such time as you unconditionally surrender." Slaughtering women and children in order to force the enemy soldiers to surrender is the ultimate in human cowardice and barbarity.
3. In May and June of 1945, AFTER the war Americans took away the outer clothing, food and water of captured German soldiers. From one half to 1 million soldiers died from hypothermia, starvation and disease. All planned and deliberate. ref. James Bacque.."Other Losses"
4. Vietnam ..hundreds ofthousands women and children, bombed shot and poisoned (agent orange)
5.Invasion of Iraq...fomenting civil war, destroying the country etc. etc.
6. Murder of Khadafy's daughter and household staff in Tripoli
7. etc etc.
And the ignorant hypocrites lecture Ahmedinejad
Unbelievable!!!

[drzz]

DID you check the new Columbia's website ?

http://leblogdrzz.over-blog.com/article-12596841.html

[chuck]

I think I got it. Kind of like Ahmadinejad telling the folks at Columbia that there are no homosexuals in Iran, that they just don't have that phenomenon there. What an asshole you are .... and you may be smart enough to see whether I am being ironic.

[Rich T.]

[you're all a bunch of idiots who have no inkling of how deluded and wrong you are. Swallowing lies your whole life and regurgitating them at will.]

Thanks for summing up the International Left.

[Rich T.]

[You stupid Americans never cease to amaze. Your hypocrisy, your ignorance, your brainwashed parrot-spew, you're all a bunch of idiots who have no inkling of how deluded and wrong you are. Swallowing lies your whole life and regurgitating them at will.]

What a racist you are!

You are calling our Hispanic, Black, Asian, and Native American populations stupid. I bet you're a white male to make comments like that.

Or are you just assuming America is a white country, white just like you?

Like I said, you're a racist.

[eli]

Who knew that Scoot Adams was an antisemite?
You can say what you want Scott but when you say the fact that 6 millions Jews were murdered "is given too much influence" because there is 1 single small Jewish state that can stand up to its neigbours then according to my book you are an antisemite.

According to you, the fact that 6 millions Jews were murdered does not make a state, half the size of NJ, where they can control their own destiny a reasonable proposal. As a Jew and an Israeli I view this as pure hatered and the worst form of antisemitism. It is the back handed, subtle and oh so clever form of antisemitism that Jews have endured for centuries from "intellectuals" like you.

[I'd be in favor of moving Israel to America. Everyone except for you, of course. How's that square with your theory? -- Scott]

[Rich T.]

Having now watched the replay of Ahminnijabbb "speaking" at Columbia, I am left pitying anyone who clapped at his strange ramblings about science and education. (The clappers sat on their hands during the religious references, of course.)

For those of you who focus on Bollinger as "mean" - what the hell's wrong with you? He asked questions that should be asked, none of which were answered. All Aminjab can do is "answer" a question with another question that attacks the U.S. in a transparent yet non-specific way. Yes, Bollinger rightly castigated Aminajab, given the latter's track record. To their credit, most students applauded. But the hard-core America-bashers, gleefully joined in spirit by many who post here, showed their alliance by clapping to anything they could find to clap at when Amminajob spoke. Pitiful.

And this is what it looked like with America the "oppressor". Imagine it the other way around. Oh, wait, that's easy to do - 21 more executions on September 5, said Amnesty International. Yet AMindiaujob was silent on that, when asked.

[Rich T.]

[Mr. Adams, I love your wit and humor, and your essay is a good example of it. But who would have thought it was such a magnet for rightwing nutjobs?]

I thought it was a magnet for the deluded Left... :-)

[Richard M. Greene '51]

Brian asks: (Sept. 24, 10:57 p.m.} "So what has he (Ahminadinejad) done to be so fervently attacked across the spectrum?"
Ahminadinejad has accepted Chinese Yuans and European Euros for his oil, instead of sticking to the almighty U.S. Dollar. A move which portends the collapse of the dollar and hence of the U.S. economy into Third World status, where it belongs, having long since given away our gold and silver reserves, and hence having no real commodity backing for our currency.

[Santosh Oommen]

"If Ahmadinejad thinks he can be our friend by honoring our heroes and opening a dialog, he underestimates our ability to misinterpret him."

They had to kill the heroes first before wanting to honour them...

[Frank]

The differences in how America would respond were Iran to invade Canada are multitude. We would declare war and send in uniformed troops to fight invaders. We would not be smuggling in arms to people who regularly kill women and children who are, for all intents and purposes, on their own side.

As to the massive amount of antisemitism in your diatribe, I guess what is really lacking here is not just a lack of understanding of current politics, but also a lack of understanding of history.

A brief summary of the history of the Israeli / Palestinian conflict can be found here. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=7856#c0019

I'm sure none of your correct thinkers will bother to read or understand it, but hey, open dialog is important. Maybe one day it will sink in with you.

[Richard M. Greene '51]

Sept. 24, 2007 C.E.

Dear Editors:

I find America's attitude toward alleged nuclear
terrorism on the part of the Islamic Republic of Iran
hypocritical and amusing in the light of the way we
have so flooded the soil and atmosphere of neighboring
Iraq with depleted U238 Uranium-tipped ammunition that
never again will a visitor to Iraq, or downwind Iran
and Afghanistan for that matter, be able to conceive a
child with confidence that the child will not be born
with radioactively induced genetic-mutation defects,
including any U.S. Armed Forces serviceman unfortunate
enough to have been ordered to serve in that region.

Thank you.

Sincerely yours,
Richard M. Greene
P.O. Box 116
270 Browning Avenue
Ignacio, CO 81137-0116
(970) 563-4433

[The Atheist Jew]

Way to go Scott, your post appeals to every radical Muslim and neo Nazi everywhere.
I wouldn't be surprised if David Duke and Rense put this post on their sites.
To compare Iran with the USA is beyond idiotic. You have just crossed over and become a fringe lunatic.
Cheers.

[butwhole]

Wake up folks! Iran has been at war with us since they took our embassy in 1980.Kobar towers,Bierut embassy bombing, Marine barracks bombing,Killing of that navy diver on an airliner in the 80's and the list goes on right up until now!Why do you lefties always call your own country the bad guy?

[Bite Me]

The truly scary part is: so many other people agree with your idiocy. If you're going to let an Islamic madman speak at a university, then why not a branch of the armed services (e.g. the ROTC)? Only the left in this country gets "free speech". And if Canada was invaded because its leader was a dictatorial mass-murdering madman, then I'd expect our government TO HELP the invading force. Oh, and there's a BIG difference between Christianity and Islama-fascism. In case you hadn't noticed, we don't threaten to wipe states off the map because they aren't Christian. Nor does our religion embrace such wonderful actions as teaching our children to become suicide bombs, or stoning our women to death because they showed their face. Fuck You You Fucking Fucks. Go Fuck Yourselves.

[ginny]

I am studing the Koran as a western woman. You are now one of my heros. There goals have not changed since Mohammed took land by force in the late 600's. We either wake up now or they will take our country too.

There are women risking assasination to write the truth of life as a woman in countries ruled by Islam. How long would we last in a burka, ladies?

[Tom]

While you back-slap each other over your "subtle irony", Americans with a true sense of morality are left to deal with the actions behind A'jad's speech

"Here is some of what we now know about Qayis Khaz’ali and his work with Iranian Quds Force operatives.
- The Quds Force goal is to develop the Iraqi Special Groups into a network similar to the Lebanese Hizballah.
- Special Groups would be unable to conduct terrorist attacks in Iraq without Iranian supplied weapons and other support.
- Like Ali Musa Daqduq, Qayis Khazali’s main contact was Hajji Yusif, the Deputy Commander for the Quds Force Department of External Special Operations.
- Funding and training of the Special Groups started in 2004.
-The Quds Force supplies Special Groups with EFPs, machine guns, rockets, sniper rifles, rocket propelled grenades and IEDs.
- Iraqi Special Groups are trained in one of three training camps inside Iran and are operated by the Quds Force and supported by Lebanese Hizballah operatives.
When Qayis Khazali was captured, we found an in-depth planning and lessons-learned document. It was about the attack the Special Groups conducted against the Karbala Provincial Joint Coordination Center on January 20th. This 22-page document provides a unique window into the planning and execution of Special Group operations here in Iraq."

Of course you'll merely dismiss this inconvenient evidence as trumped up lies to support Bushitler's war...how's that for irony.

[iraqvet]

ROTFL - this is a great post! I'll remember it when I'm on my next tour(s) in Iraq, at least somebody gets it. Don't let the haters dissuade you, they're brainwashed lemmings.

[Kerbear]

Scott,
I understand your opinions. I am afraid the thing that you proved mostly with this blog is that illiteracy is rampant in the US. So many readers that didn't understand or didn't bother to read your blog. So sad.

Raebrek

[Boy]

It took me 2 readings to understand what you are saying; the irony was too deep for me to understand the first time. The questions which you have raised are questions which traditional (TV & Newspapers) US media should be raising. But they are too busy discussing OJ Simpson and Paris Hilton. Also, I would love to hear reasosn from the bunch of George W. Bush lovers here, why the great USA of doesn't seem to want to do anything about democacy in Myanmar or Darfur. Guess the lack of oilwells means your Black Hawks and Hummers can't refuel once they land.

[Daniel]

Scott, it seems as though you think your opinion is more interesting than it really is.

[ziggy]

Perfect, I made the exact same point to my friend the other day about Iran invading Canada.

Iran hates Israel, no doubt. Beyond that, I don't see how they've caused many problems, least of all anything approaching the worldwide scale of continuous US meddling/killings/invasions/terrorist funding/etc.

[De Gonia]

Thank you. You are appreciated.
Used to be just a fan of the comic strip. Now consider me a brother.

[Barbara Davis]

This jerk gets freedom of speech but not his people. Other dictatorships will embrace freedom of speech because he only used it to mock Israel and America? Not likely. Maybe they will be able to repeat the lockstep rant but not really have freedom to voice their own thoughts. He says Israel should be destroyed and the non radical Israel hating Muslims are lying about the Holocaust? That alone should make any spew from his mouth irrelevant.

Your tongue in cheek article isn't clever at all. It is ignorant. Maybe it was an interesting opportunity allowing him to speak. However, it should be an education for you ignorant liberals into the real mindset of the Muslim world. You should be shocked and appalled by his stance instead of rejoicing in it.

[brian]

Nice Post scott, but i was a little concerned about this:

'[I was going to delete this, but "chimperor" was too funny to lose. -- Scott'

What about Allahs post did you find offensive?

For your critics, they may not be aware that Ahmadinejad is the president of Iran, maybe hes ceremonial, as has been said, but he is still a visitor and guest. Yet he is treated as if he were Adolf Hitler....So what has he done to be so fervently attacked across the spectrum?

The 'journalists who 'interviewed' him acted as if they were Guantanamo interogators; Bollinger of Columbia, who has shown a tiny bit of courage in letting the iranian president speak, nevertheless, said: 'exhibit[ing] all the signs of a petty and cruel dictator," '

Id like to know what those signs are! Will Bollinger treat the president of Israel in the same way, since Israel has invaded Lebanon twice, and attacked Syria, this week, and has been the lead force behind the US invasion of Iraq:
http://nowarforisrael.com/
and has been the main voice seeking the US to attack Iran.

The idea that he should not have been allowed to even enter the country, because Iran is blamed for Us troop deaths is a doozy...US shouldnt even be IN Iraq, and that illegal invasion and occupation has led to the deaths of More than a million iraqi being killed, mostly by american troops.
You may also be interested in this article by AMSI:
where US and Iraqi collaborators are said to be behind the market bombings:
http://heyetnet.org/en/content/view/490/1/

This trip and his rhetoric lets Ahmadinejad appeal to his domestic and Islamic population. He influences alot of people and in giving him lots of press and protests his people are just going to love him more (I'm not implying everyone in his country loves him, but the many do). Ahmadinejad has come to the US to show his people that he is not scared of the West. Internationally, I believe he just wants to keep in the spot light and to piss