ILOTSMYBRAIN Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/08/29/iran.nuclear/index.html Pretty sure the majority of you may have seen this already. I just think its funny, that Bush would never agree to something like this, and in the extremly small chance he would, althought it would say uncensored, it deffinatly would be edited. I'm 100% positive that Ahmadinejad would pretty much destroy this man's image on live television. Man oh man would that be a lovely day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornpone Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 interesting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILOTSMYBRAIN Posted August 30, 2006 Author Share Posted August 30, 2006 "The debate should be uncensored in order for the American people to be able to listen to what we say and they should not restrict the American people from hearing the truth." Thats also a direct quote from the article, when world leaders have to say things like this it just makes me scratch my head and laugh. If you don't understand why, I'm sorry. :o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Pubes Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 i'm sure a guy like ahmadinejad would not lie and only tell the truth. on the other hand, the rhetoric out of washington is nice and bullshitish. instead of a debate, they should enter the ufc octagon and get loose..i hear bush benches 220. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obvious Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Bush is not much of a speaker, so of course he'd lose. This is the same nigga that said: "There's an old saying that goes... ya fool me once... shame on... shame on... you? ... ... ... Fool me -- ya can't get fooled again." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawood Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 ahmadinejad would smash him but Bush lives and a glass and can't afford to throw stones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.0002 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Im not so sure, Ahmadinejad did not directly answer any questions on that 60 minutes interview and was getting pretty frustrated when Mike Wallace gently pushed him to actually answer. And Bush would likely need an ear piece if they wanted to do it without pause to get translations, so he could be fed answers. Its not gonna be too hard to point out the hypocrisy of Ahmadinejad talking about US censorship or people in US prisons, I would say go for it if this wasn’t another step to make the US look like the only nation opposed to their nuclear program and take the UN out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAR Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 ^those are my exact feelings. Thank you for putting it into words for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell jones Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 and remember, this was the same guy that was denying the holocaust a little while back. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4529198.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawood Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 Don't get it twiisted i'm not an Ahmadinejad advocate, I just know what kind of leadership the U.S. has right now. George W. Blunder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WORDISM45 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 shit thats crazy i was thinking about how Iran should openly debate about the nuvclear issue with soemone in authority liek a week ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyHarHar Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 Im not so sure, Ahmadinejad did not directly answer any questions on that 60 minutes interview and was getting pretty frustrated when Mike Wallace gently pushed him to actually answer. And Bush would likely need an ear piece if they wanted to do it without pause to get translations, so he could be fed answers. Its not gonna be too hard to point out the hypocrisy of Ahmadinejad talking about US censorship or people in US prisons, I would say go for it if this wasn’t another step to make the US look like the only nation opposed to their nuclear program and take the UN out of it. From what I heard of it, Mike Wallace basically gave Mahmoud a fluff job. Said things like, "You look great." I would definetly pay to see a Ahmedinijad vs. Bush interview, or even better, drunken chess boxing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 Both of them are shit, both are liars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eye for an eye Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 i dont know... in other counties people have to be smart to be president Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 In this country all you need now is a superb media manipulation team, a great team of speechwriters, an earpiece, and a few really smart guys standing in the shadow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOh Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 theres not too many (or none at all) successful politicians of any stripe that would agree to an uncensored debate. i assume Ahmadinejad challenged Bush knowing that he wouldnt agree to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WORDISM45 Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 bullshit youd best believe live, uncensored, unscripted political debates happen in australia come election season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOh Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 youd best believe live, uncensored, unscripted political debates happen in australia come election season i guess with all my years of being American, ive become cynical. i cannot imagine an actual unscripted or uncensored debate happening. you can bet all your money they dont take place here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyHarHar Posted September 2, 2006 Share Posted September 2, 2006 Yeah, they don't take place here, except in lower offices. Ahmedinijad knew that G Dubya would never agree, he's just showboating, because Iran is now a regional power. I don't think either of these guys is capable of having a debate, because in a debate you listen, answer questions, and argue points, these guys just rail away at imaginary evils, and stir up nationalist sentiments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.0002 Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 Hardy har har, it was a fluff job. Wallace spent a good 5 minutes complimenting Ahmadinejad (the man does know how to wear a wind breaker though.) That’s why it was funny to see him get frustrated. The questions Wallace did ask about the nuclear program, support of the Iraqi insurgency, etc was answered with long diatribes on why Israel should be relocated to Alaska, the faking of the holocaust, and American aggression. Wallace asked him to elaborate or answer a question, gently, maybe twice, and Ahmadinejad would either laugh maniacally or shoot back with “why are you so angry!” But in all fairness, good ole Mahmoud isn’t use to that type of dissent. Wallace would probably be publicly hung if he was Iranian. i dont know... in other counties people have to be smart to be president Yeah, Ahmadinejad/the ayatollah who has final say over everything were both Rhodes Scholars before the revolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawood Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 they should battle freestyling over a live roots drumbeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyHarHar Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 Yeah, I like that idea. So we've had two baby-boomer presidents. What say you, we elect our first hip hop president? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawood Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 or maybe Bin laden can come out of his U.S. Govt. funded MTV crib and say, "ok, guys, Jokes over" then take Dick cheneys job over. oddly enough, that doesn't sound too far fetched to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shai Posted September 6, 2006 Share Posted September 6, 2006 ^Ha ha....yeah, that would be some shit. Thing is, I would trust Bin Laden more than I trust Cheney on one level...since Bin Laden has publicly admitted that he wants to destroy the US. Cheney is being sneaky about it and lying to cover his ass, so what's the difference, really? Both are means to the same end. At least I know where I stand with Bin Laden. I don't like it, but it's better than being lied to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted September 7, 2006 Share Posted September 7, 2006 I would trust neither, it's not a matter of trusting one more than the other. They are both horrible people, hypocritical, and liars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted September 9, 2006 Share Posted September 9, 2006 He didn't survive the debates, he got his ass handed to him. The voting public was just more interested in stopping gay marriage and banning stem cell research and making bombs. That and the election was RIGGED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIVERWURST* Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 ILOTSmybrain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.