Iran leader denied WTC wreath request

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by GePap

As for all the political hyperventalating, If it weren't such a huge mess, I would have no problem with him going there and laying a wreath.

No surprise there.

[Agathon]

Well, I've been watching him on C SPAN. He's giving a good account of himself in the debate, despite a cowardly attack from the university President.

He's obviously a smart guy. I wonder how many of the students will grasp some of the nuances of what he said.

edit: he did spoil it a bit by claiming that there were no homosexuals in Iran.

[Patroklos]

I don't see any problem letting him speak at an academic event, and the college president's Hitler remark was spot on.

It is not very often you get to personally see a person of this sort. If he is really the nutter you think he is, is this not the venue to prove it?

[DinoDoc]

Is he discussing his shall we say unique views on history?

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Agathon
Well, I've been watching him on C SPAN. He's giving a good account of himself in the debate, despite a cowardly attack from the university President.

Did you really think it was cowardly? These are the issues that seem to be at the forefront of the US conflict with Iran. Is this not a good venue to provoke debate on them?

[DinoDoc]

For the benefit of those of us posting from class, what did he say?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Is he discussing his shall we say unique views on history?

Yes. He said that he did not deny the existence of the holocaust, but that he denied that there was no more research to be done, in particular he argued that the question of why Palestinians should pay for the European's holocaust against the Jews needs to be raised over and over again.

He's quite a charismatic guy and got a reasonably good response from the crowd. And he's a skilful debater as well.

[Arrian]

He said that he did not deny the existence of the holocaust, but that he denied that there was no more research to be done, in particular he argued that the question of why Palestinians should pay for the European's holocaust against the Jews needs to be raised over and over again.

Ah, so he's refined that talking point.

-Arrian

[Agathon]

Originally posted by PLATO

Did you really think it was cowardly? These are the issues that seem to be at the forefront of the US conflict with Iran. Is this not a good venue to provoke debate on them?

I thought it was appalling. I've been to some heated discussions and I have never seen a speaker treated like that. It's absolutely fair to ask him hard questions about those things... in the question period... not in some diatribe designed to deflect unjust criticism of the university.

I think it was caused mainly by threats from people who didn't want the debate to occur. Ahdinnerjacket was right to say that it is completely rude.

He didn't dodge that many questions. I think some of them were slightly lost in translation, and some of them he answered, but not in the way that the questioner wanted. For example, when asked whether he wanted to destroy Israel as a Jewish state, he responded that his own desire was for a referendum among all residents of Palestine on the future of the country. I guess that counts as an answer, in that it is the end of Israel as a specifically Jewish state, but it's nothing about nuking the Jews.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Arrian

Ah, so he's refined that talking point.

-Arrian

Or corrected misrepresentations of him in the Western press.

[Wiglaf]

I find it amazing you criticize Western leaders for praising Pinochet but defend a man who has called for the eradication of Israel.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Agathon


Or corrected misrepresentations of him in the Western press.

I doubt even you believe that.

-Arrian

[Patroklos]

The CNN stream is really horrilble today.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
For the benefit of those of us posting from class, what did he say?

A long and oblique speech about the important place of science and knowledge in human life. A lot of quotes from the Koran in support of that. Some interesting Islamic theological epistemology, which I don't know that the crowd picked up on. This led in quite an elegant way into a discussion of proper uses of knowledge, and criticism of other countries at wanting to deny Iran peaceful nuclear technology while engaging in unethical misuses of it themselves (echoing Khomeini's position about nukes, which I think Khomeini was serious about, I don't know if dinnerjacket is).

He said that Iran should not be denied peaceful nuclear technology and can't depend on other countries to supply it. Apparently, they've tried that before and been left holding the can (no idea whether that was true). He was quite adamant about that, but not rude. In fact he was as well-behaved as any other normal speaker.

He did dodge questions about Iranian support of terrorism by accusing the US of supporting a terrorist group (I guess this is MEK) that was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Iranians, including members of parliament and ministers.

He did say that there were no homosexuals in Iran, which provoked laughter from the crowd (and me). He defended Iranian use of the death penalty and brushed aside criticism on women's rights (listing many Iranian politicans and academics who are female – I think this is a good call. There have been 2 women leaders of Islamic countries, and so far the US has never had a female president [note... that's me. He didn't say it]).

I think the whole thing went very well, apart from the ridiculous insults from the University President. Those just made Ahdinnerjacket look good because he objected to the insults and didn't respond in kind. Some callers after the show complained about it as well.

The only bad thing was that it stopped so soon, because many students still had questions to ask, and Ahdinnerjacket was actually answering most of them. I thought the most interesting stuff was the theological account of the place of science, but that's just my own prejudice. If I were there I would have asked him about that.

So in my view... better than the average politician answering questions (i.e. he gave real answers to most of them), but not as good as the average Professor answering questions (i.e. he dodged a couple).

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Arrian


I doubt even you believe that.

-Arrian

I don't really know what the story was with that. I really didn't pay it that much attention at the time.

My own view is that the holocaust conference was a troll in payback for the Mohammed cartoons, since people on our side howled at the moon and said it shouldn't take place because it was so deeply offensive, yet backed the cartoons.