Author Topic: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran  (Read 2342 times)

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« on: September 24, 2006, 12:07:04 AM »
RUSH: Yesterday Bill Clinton got involved in all this by suggesting that we need to talk to terrorists and others. We need to talk to these countries that are threatening us and so forth and so on, and Dean Karayanis up at the website, RushLimbaugh.com, sent me something last night. It's an Amir Taheri piece from March 5, 2005, and let me just read you the excerpts of it, because this falls under the category of just who it is that Democrats look at as the enemy. All this talk about Ahmadinejad and Chavez and so forth, the Democrats are not reacting much at all. Instead they blame Bush for the problems and the evils of the world. Listen to this:

 "Where is the country that Bill Clinton, a former president of the United States, feels ideologically most at home? Before you answer, here is the condition that such a country must fulfill: It must hold several consecutive elections that produce 70 percent majorities for 'liberals and progressives.' Well, if you thought of one of the Scandinavian countries or, perhaps, New Zealand or Canada, you are wrong. Believe it or not, the country Bill Clinton so admires is the Islamic Republic of Iran. Here is what Clinton said at a meeting on the margins of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland [in early 2005]: 'Iran today is, in a sense, the only country where progressive ideas enjoy a vast constituency. It is there that the ideas that I subscribe to are defended by a majority.' And here is what Clinton had to say in a recent television interview with Charlie Rose..."

Again, this op-ed is dated March 5, 2005, so this is a little over a year and a half ago that Clinton said this. On Charlie Rose, he said, quote: "'Iran is the only country in the world that has now had six elections since the first election of President Khatami (in 1997). (It is) the only one with elections, including the United States, including Israel, including you name it, where the liberals, or the progressives, have won two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote in six elections: Two for president; two for the Parliament, the Majlis; two for the mayoralties. In every single election, the guys I identify with got two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote. There is no other country in the world I can say that about, certainly not my own.'" Amir Taheri asks: "[W]ho are 'the guys' Clinton identifies with?

"There is, of course, President Muhammad Khatami who, speaking at a conference of provincial governors last week, called for the whole world to convert to Islam.... Clinton's declaration of love for the mullas shows how ill informed even a US president could be. Didn't anyone tell Clinton, when he was in the White House, that elections in the Islamic Republic were as meaningless as those held in the Soviet Union? Did he not know that all candidates had to be approved by the 'Supreme Guide', and that no one from opposition is allowed to stand? Did he not know that all parties are banned in the Islamic Republic, and that such terms as 'progressive' and 'liberal' are used by the mullas as synonyms for 'apostate', a charge that carries a death sentence? More importantly, does he not know that while there is no democracy without elections there can be elections without democracy?

 "Clinton told his audience in Davos, as well as Charlie Rose, that during his presidency he had 'formally apologized on behalf of the United States' for what he termed 'American crimes against Iran.' But what were those 'crimes'? Clinton summed them thus: 'It's a sad story that really began in the 1950s when the United States deposed Mr. Mossadegh, who was an elected parliamentary democrat, and brought the Shah back and then he was overturned by the Ayatollah Khomeini, driving us into the arms of one Saddam Hussein. We got rid of the parliamentary democracy {there} back in the ‘50s; at least, that is my belief.' Duped by a myth spread by the Blame-America-First coalition, Clinton appears to have done little homework on Iran.

"The truth is that Iran in the 1950s was not a parliamentary democracy but a constitutional monarchy in which the Shah appointed, and dismissed, the prime minister. Mossadegh was named prime minister twice by the Shah and twice dismissed. In what way that meant that the US 'got rid of parliamentary democracy' that did not exist is not clear," and the story goes on. I did not remember any of this, but you have to remember the stuff reported from the World Economic Forum in Davos is highly sanitized, most of it is social and about all the partying that goes on, what rock stars show up to attend and perform, what actresses and models are there to entertain the attendees, and if there are any attacks on the United States, those are reported, such as when Eason Jordan, the former executive at CNN, said that he had evidence that the US had been targeting journalists in wars, particularly in Iraq.

That led even Barney Frank to say, "Prove it." Yeah. Barney Frank was there. This column by Amir Taheri was in the Arab News newspaper. He has a column in the New York Post, but this was at his website, Benador Associates, and I did not know any of this, and I wanted to share it with you because it's all in context here of just exactly what you talk about with Democrats and liberals. You know, Bill Clinton is a whole bunch of different people but he really becomes a different guy when he travels abroad. He really does. Let me rephrase that: "When he goes to another country." He "travels a broad" quite frequently. But when he's in a different country -- he goes to Saudi Arabia, he goes to Dubai, the United Arab Emirates -- he rips this country a new one, comes back and says something entirely different to different audiences. It's dangerous stuff. It really is, and the liberals -- you know, John Kerry has the same type of mind-set, Al Gore, the same thing, and they all blame George W. Bush for the problems of the United States, not our enemies and certainly not themselves.

END TRANSCRIPT

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2006, 12:09:02 AM »
I saw this.  Clinton is such a liar.  He told the reporter that back in 1996, "We didn't even know that AL Quida existed".

I cannot believe he would insult our intelligence like this.

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2006, 12:11:52 AM »
I saw this.  Clinton is such a liar.  He told the reporter that back in 1996, "We didn't even know that AL Quida existed".

I cannot believe he would insult our intelligence like this.

Chris Wallace tears him a new one.......er, I mean interviews him I think tomorrow night on FOX!!

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2006, 12:15:58 AM »
When did Iran threaten the USA?
w

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2006, 12:20:10 AM »

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2006, 12:24:06 AM »
Never.

Iran said Thursday it won't be bullied into abandoning its nuclear program, rejecting its referral to the U.N. Security Council as "unjust."

Both President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and supreme leader Ali Khamenei were defiant in the face of the mounting international pressure on Iran over its nuclear program.

"The people of Iran will not accept coercion and unjust decisions by international organizations," Ahmadinejad said during a visit to Iran's western province of Lorestan, according to Iran's state television. "Enemies cannot force the Iranian people to relinquish their rights."

"The era of bullying and brutality is over," he added.

The television said Khamenei, who has the final say in all state matters, told a group of clerics that Iran would not drop its nuclear program.

"Authorities are obliged to continue toward achieving advanced technology, including nuclear energy. The people and the government will resist any force or conspiracy." He charged that Washington was looking for an excuse to continue what he called a psychological war against his country.

"This time they have used nuclear energy as an excuse. If Iran quits now, the case will not be over. The Americans will find another excuse," he said.

"Our enemies will never succeed in forcing the Iranian nation to step back on its rights over peaceful nuclear technology because it never accepts humiliation," State television quoted Ahmadinejad as saying on Thursday.

"This nation ... Will not allow others to treat it with a bullying attitude, even if those who treat it with a bullying attitude are international bullies," he added.

The statements came a day after Iran threatened the United States with the ability to inflict "harm and pain", as the 35-nation board of the International Atomic Energy Agency ended a three-day meeting in Vienna, Austria, over Iran's nuclear program, formally opening the path to Security Council action.

"They (Western countries) know that they are not capable of inflicting the slightest blow on the Iranian nation because they need the Iranian nation," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying in a speech in western Iran. "They will suffer more and they are vulnerable," he said, without elaborating.

The Security Council, whose action could range from a mild statement urging compliance to sanctions or even military measures, was expected to debate the issue next week.

The IAEA had put the council on alert over the issue last month but delayed any action to give more time for diplomacy under an agreement by the United States, Russia, China, France and Britain - the five permanent Security Council members that wield veto power.

The five countries met in New York on Wednesday to discuss a first response to the crisis.

Washington is seeking harsh measures against Iran, but economic and political sanctions are unlikely because of opposition from Russia and China, which have strategic and commercial ties with Tehran.

U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns suggested Wednesday that America would push for sanctions if appeals and demands failed.

But Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov indicated that Moscow would not support sanctions and he ruled out military action.

Wednesday's IAEA meeting featured an intense debate over a critical report on Iran's nuclear program. Soon after the meeting ended, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said he would send the report to the Security Council within 24 hours.

ElBaradei, however, cast Security Council involvement as a continuation of diplomacy with Iran. He suggested Washington might need to talk to Iran directly if negotiations reach the stage of focusing on security guarantees to Tehran in exchange for concessions on its nuclear program.

ElBaradei's report accused Iran of withholding information, possessing plans linked to nuclear weapons and refusing to freeze uranium enrichment - a possible pathway to nuclear arms.

Tehran's newspapers published news of the decision on their front pages Thursday. The official Persian-language daily Iran called the move "a message of weakness and failure" by the nuclear agency.

A total of 195 Iranian lawmakers, meanwhile, issued a statement Thursday urging authorities to implement a law passed last year requiring the government to block intrusive inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities if the country is referred to the Security Council.

They also asked the government to resume suspended nuclear activities, including uranium enrichment.

Iran claims its nuclear program is peaceful and only aimed at generating electricity, but an increasing number of countries have come to share the U.S. view that Tehran is seeking to develop atomic weapons.

The U.S. and its European allies want Iran to give up uranium enrichment, a technology that can be used to produce nuclear fuel or materials for a nuclear bomb.

Iran has rejected the demand, saying it will never give up its right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel.

AP contributed to this report.

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2006, 12:25:17 AM »
 :o  Liar! If it's on Rush Limbaugh, ...it MUST be true ...no?  :-\
w

Mr. Intenseone

  • Guest
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2006, 12:28:37 AM »
:o  Liar! If it's on Rush Limbaugh, ...it MUST be true ...no?  :-\

It didn't come from Rush's site....it came from AP. And even if it was from Rush's site it would make even more credible!

Time to face reality Jag.....Libs are lying losers and most side with communists and terrorists!!

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2006, 12:35:22 AM »
"They (Western countries) know that they are not capable of inflicting the slightest blow on the Iranian nation because they need the Iranian nation," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying in a speech in western Iran. "They will suffer more and they are vulnerable," he said, without elaborating.

That's the worst he said?   He hates israel.  That's between him and israel.  Where has he threatened the US?  The only thing I've heard is that we don't want him making nukes and we don't want him refusing to see us oil (see: rose garden speech). 

Can you find a speech where he says he'll kill anyone form teh US?  I don't like the guy either, but we can't just bomb people we don't like.

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #9 on: September 24, 2006, 12:39:35 AM »
Why not? The US does it all the time.  :D
w

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #10 on: September 24, 2006, 12:55:27 AM »
Time to face reality Jag.....Libs are lying losers and most side with communists and terrorists!!

Oh no he didn't. Do my eyes deceive me? Did he actually bring up... the red menace.  :o

Eeeeek! {screams like a girl and run out of the room} Oh no, ...not the commies!

You're overcompensating again, ...but for what? Oh ya, ...I forgot, size does matter. Tryin' to make it bigger I see

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozf_FzvyhYs
w

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19466
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #11 on: September 24, 2006, 01:42:56 AM »
Ok.

Lets get some things straight. This article talks about Iranian leadership being Khatami. But...

Khatami has lost the election. He is no longer in charge.

Ahmedinejad is. And here is where the logic of Limbaugh gets unclear.

During Khatami, the secular Iran tried to free itself from its religious leadership. Khatami didn't seek confrontation with the Israelis, or USA.

That doesn't seem so bad, from an US perspective.

Ahmedinejad, is a religious conservative, and he is definitely more cocky.

I don't understand why Limbaugh is pissed off with Khatami?

He was the voice of reason in Iran.

Now, he's gone.

YIP
Zack
As empty as paradise

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #12 on: September 24, 2006, 01:46:42 AM »
{Shhhhhhhhh} you're gonna confuse him with the facts.  :P
w

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #13 on: September 24, 2006, 01:50:23 AM »
Is it an old article?

24KT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24455
  • Gold Savings Account Rep +1 (310) 409-2244
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #14 on: September 24, 2006, 02:00:57 AM »
Would Rush pull an old article and try to spin it as a current affair?
C'mon, ...he's above that sort of thing isn't he?  :-\ It had to be an error, ...afterall, limbaugh and his groupies are still living in the 90's thinking Clinton is still President. It had to account for it.  :P
w

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #15 on: September 24, 2006, 05:46:15 AM »
With 240's quote, I can't find any reference to Clinton saying that back in 1996.  I just wanted to see what context it was said in?   Like was he talking about years before or what then or what?

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #16 on: September 24, 2006, 09:02:39 AM »
With 240's quote, I can't find any reference to Clinton saying that back in 1996.  I just wanted to see what context it was said in?   Like was he talking about years before or what then or what?

I dunno.  Anyone have the full transcript yet? 

I don't care what party the person is from - anyone who said they didn't know that al Q existed in 1996 is lying.

bmacsys

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6074
  • Getbig!
Re: Clinton heaped praise on "Liberal" Iran
« Reply #17 on: September 24, 2006, 09:50:48 AM »
Ok.

Lets get some things straight. This article talks about Iranian leadership being Khatami. But...

Khatami has lost the election. He is no longer in charge.

Ahmedinejad is. And here is where the logic of Limbaugh gets unclear.

During Khatami, the secular Iran tried to free itself from its religious leadership. Khatami didn't seek confrontation with the Israelis, or USA.

That doesn't seem so bad, from an US perspective.

Ahmedinejad, is a religious conservative, and he is definitely more cocky.

I don't understand why Limbaugh is pissed off with Khatami?

He was the voice of reason in Iran.

Now, he's gone.

YIP
Zack

I remember the high hopes the world had for Khatami. He just couldn't throw off the shackles of the ayatollahs.
The House that Ruth built