Wow! Thanks for the play-by-play.
Perhaps you didn't intend to, but your own post has exposed the rightwing lies and propaganda directed at this man.
First of all he has never "called for Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth."
He has never "denied the Holocaust."
Iran has not invaded or attacked any country, unlike the US. His predecessor, Khoumeini, did take hostages but they were all released unharmed! Can WE say the same thing about Iraq and Afghanistan???
Why don't you try to relieve yourself of your relentless brainwashing and do some research that does not involve pamphlets from Sean Hannity and AIPAC?
He has never denied the Holocaust?
Let me quote him for you:
"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."
Just in case you don't understand, a myth means it didn't happen. What part of that statement do you not get? All of it apparently.
source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middl...ast/
4527142.stm
As for the other quote. Here it is:
"There is no doubt that the new wave [of attacks] in Palestine will wipe off this stigma [Israel] from the face of the Islamic world." Recalling the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of Iran's Islamic revolution, he said: "As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."
source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/
s...1601413,00.html
I think it is you, jgmurphy, that needs to do some research.
I'm not a fan of this guy...but I'm not sure providing commentary on his speech serves your purpose very well. He has done and said some pretty crazy things.
"He is now slamming Bush, but not by name, by saying those who "don't respect the privacy of it's own people" by wiretapping ect. Apparently we are misusing research and science."
In my mind this guy is the middle east's version of Bush.
Bush does say that the jury is still out on evolution. which is almost as crazy as saying that the holocost didn't occur.
I don't see what it could hurt to listen to what he has to say or perhaps debate him.
In my mind this guy is the middle east's version of Bush.
Yes, I know this is the kos talking point of the day.
Would you mind showing me the quote where Bush says the jury is still out on evolution?
jgmurphy: Also, Iran is currently sending troops into Iraq to attack American and Iraqi forces, and has funded and provided advisors and troops for Hiz'b'allah, a terrorist organization that continues to attack Israel on a daily basis.
In other words, literally every assertion you have made is wrong. That kind of achievement doesn't happen by accident.
As to Monkeyjihad's questions:
1) The Holocaust is among the most studied and documented events of all times, and the Monkey's lying.
2) If the Palestinians stopped killing people, they would magically discover that people stop trying to kill them right back.
For any further questions regarding "Palestine," I reccommend googling "Nekema's Troll Hammer."
Mind you, the kind of people who need that information won't go look for it anyway...
I started looking for the Bush quote on evolution. I found a ton of sites referencing it but no link to the actual quotation. I even found it on Wikipedia here (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) but there is no source cited, just a description. Where's the source?
jgmurphy and Cory sure were quick to trot out the Kos talking points.
RWS, it sure got quiet when you started hurling those darned facts at those idiots. Amazing how that works.
Bush's attempts at PR have divided the country and stained our reputation around the world, despite a huge moral advantage on our part. How did that happen? No doubt it's all the fault of the crazy lefties. That's the comfortable answer.
But now we get to see our enemies take a stab at it, and what do we find? No gays? World's happiest women underneath those veils? Thanks for expressing your dirty mind in the form of crazy, good sir, and please, do go on. I know a transgender woman, as far to the left as you can get, a Buddhist no less, who after she hears this, will want to drop the bombs herself.
Let the man speak, as many times as he wants, safe in our country, where we believe in giving everyone, no matter what planet they come from, a chance to speak. Far from weaving a spell, he's tying another knot in the noose...
Seems like you have the Soilent Green crowd here Sparkle. You were right about thequote of the day.
Please don't make the mistake of buying Cory's lame statement that to question evolution "is almost as crazy as saying that the holocost didn't occur."
Regarding the Holocost, there are kilometers of original video, thousands (still) of surviving eyewitnesses, mass graves, etc, all of which provide ample evidence of the historicity of the holocost. There is no disconfirming evidence. Not "scientific" proof mind you, but the scientific method cannot be used to prove a historical event. It's the kind of evidentiary method as used in a court of law.
As far as evolution is concerned, there is an abundance of disconfirming evidence. If you've ever studied cosmology, you know that things like inflation (not expansion), non-baryonic dark matter and dark energy are all "fudge factors" required to make the cosmological models "work". Regarding biological evolution, the fossil record provides no support - this is why a competing model called punctuated equillibrium has been offered against the neo-darwinistic model of phylatic gradualism. Furthermore, Michael Behe's argument from "irreducible complexity", especially on a microbiological level renders absured the notion that increasing biological complexity emerged as a result of the accumulation of "favorable" micromutational changes.
But the bottom line is this: trying to prove evolution is beyond the reach of the scientific method. Period! Evolution is a statement about origins. It is a claim to know history, but no event of history can be proven using the scientific method. That is because you cannot recreate history in a controlled environment and make observations and analyze data to prove a hypothesis. At best you may show that something could have happened, but it is an enormous leap to proving that it did happen. For example, you cannot prove scientifically that Abraham Lincoln was president. You may use the evidentiary method as with the Holocost, but you cannot prove it using the scientific method. You may produce evidence such as letterhead from the office of the president with Abraham Lincoln's sognature on it, or you gather written testimony of eyewitnesses, but you cannot recreate history and through experimentation and observation gather data to prove this historical event.
The scientific method works by formulating scientific hypotheses then trying to falsify them through experimental observation. A hypothesis that successfully withstands repeated attempts at falsification may be considered a theory. But if a hypothesis cannot be stated in a way that permits it to be subjected to efforts at falsification, it will never gain the observational support that could qualify it to be a theory. But guess what. It is not possible to formulate the "evolution hypothesis" in a falsifiable way. That's because evolution is a statement about history. Thus it can never qualify as a scientific theory! At best, evolution can be described as a model of origi
Columbia University claims they are America’s best and brightest?
Did you see the way they applauded Ahmadenijad?
They are just a bunch of filthy Little Eichmanns.
It is too bad that Cho Seung-hui didn’t go to Columbia University!
Commenting by HaloScan
