In 1970, we imported 24% of our oil.
Today it's nearly 70% and growing.

As imports grow and world prices rise, the amount of money we send to foreign nations every year is soaring. At current oil prices, we will send $700 billion dollars out of the country this year alone — that's four times the annual cost of the Iraq war.

Projected over the next 10 years the cost will be $10 trillion — it will be the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind.
America uses a lot of oil. Every day 85 million barrels of oil are produced around the world. And 21 million of those are used here in the United States.

That's 25% of the world's oil demand. Used by just 4% of the world's population.

Can't we just produce more oil?

World oil production peaked in 2005. Despite growing demand and an unprecedented increase in prices, oil production has fallen over the last three years. Oil is getting more expensive to produce, harder to find and there just isn't enough of it to keep up with demand.

The simple truth is that cheap and easy oil is gone.

What's the good news?

Child Stabs President Bush to Death and Turns the White House into a Mosque in a Hamas TV Puppet Show - Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas/Gaza) - MEMRITV - March 30, 2008

Click Video to View

Teach the Children - Islam - The Religion of Peace.

Fitna is the video by Dutch politician Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom in the Dutch parliament. The movie offers a critical view of Islam and the Koran. He has not been able to get this film out to the public as it is feared that the film will lead to violent demonstrations by Muslims, as did the Muhammad cartoons that were published in the Danish newspaper 'Jyllands-Posten' in 2005.

After many attempts, he finally succeeded via the internet, and here it is.
UPDATE 3/28/2008: LiveLeak removed the movie due to death threats.

UPDATE 3/31/2008: LiveLeak re-instated the movie.

UPDATE 4/4/2008: LiveLeak removed the movie again.

Here's the original Fitna.

What happened to "the principles of truth and nonviolence?" I was taught they were "as old as the hills."

Apparently Arun Gandhi forgot these basic principles preached by Grandpa Gandhi. Or did the truth get the best of him in a public forum. I think the latter.

Gandhi Grandson Quits After Criticizing Jews

Mahatma Gandhi’s grandson resigned from the peace institute he co-founded after condemnation of his comments that Israel and the Jews are the biggest players in a culture of violence that “is eventually going to destroy humanity.” Arun Gandhi, the fifth grandson of the revered pacifist, said on Friday that his comments, which were posted on an online forum, were meant “to generate a healthy discussion on the proliferation of violence.”

“Instead, unintentionally, my words have resulted in pain, anger, confusion and embarrassment. I deeply regret these consequences,” Gandhi said. He apologized “for my poorly worded post,” saying he should not have implied that Israeli government policies reflected the views of all Jewish people.

Abraham H. Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, called it “shameful that a peace institute would be headed up by a bigot.” The board of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence based at the University of Rochester accepted Gandhi’s offer on Thursday to step down as its president.

Gandhi went on and described Israel as “a nation that believes its survival can only be ensured by weapons and bombs.” He then asked whether it would “not be better to befriend those who hate you?”

“Apparently, in the modern world so determined to live by the bomb, this is an alien concept,” he wrote. “You don’t befriend anyone, you dominate them. We have created a culture of violence (Israel and the Jews are the biggest players) and that Culture of Violence is eventually going to destroy humanity.” He wrote that the Jewish identity “has been locked into the holocaust experience — a German burden that the Jews have not been able to shed. It is a very good example of (how) a community can overplay a historic experience to the point that it begins to repulse friends. “The holocaust was the result of the warped mind of an individual who was able to influence his followers into doing something dreadful ... The world did feel sorry for the episode but when an individual or a nation refuses to forgive and move on, the regret turns into anger.”

WOW! Piling on the Jews at the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence.

 

In a recent, inadvertently released Canadian training manual on "Torture Awareness," Canada has linked the United States and Israel among others like China, Syria and Iran as countries that have prisoner interrogation techniques that include Torture. The manual mistakenly came to light during an investigation of abuse by Canadian soldiers against prisoners in Afghanistan.

Canada puts U.S., Guantanamo and Israel on torture 'watch list'

Canada has put the United States and Israel on a torture watch list, according to CTV. A Canadian government document cites the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and interrogation techniques that include "forced nudity, isolation, and sleep deprivation."
...

A Foreign Affairs Department training manual, titled "Torture Awareness Workshop Reference Materials," provides legal definitions of torture and instructs Canadian consular officials how to detect signs of abuse among detainees held abroad. It lists Guantanamo Bay and the United States, along with Afghanistan, China, Egypt, Iran, Israel, Mexico, Saudi Arabia and Syria.

The manual was inadvertently released to lawyers working on a lawsuit involving abuse of Afghanistan detainees by Canadians, the Canadian Press reported.

One Canadian prisoner at Guantanamo Bay, Omar Khadr, is due before a U.S. military commission in early February. The Pentagon has charged him with "murder by an unprivileged belligerent" for allegedly throwing a grenade that killed U.S. Delta Force soldier Christopher Speer in Afghanistan in 2002. Khadar was 15 at the time.

Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations

Dated Dec. 13, 2007
by 100 prominent Scientists from around the world.
Full Report in PDF Form - Click here
*********************************************

Dec. 13, 2007

His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon

Secretary-General, United Nations

New York, N.Y.

Dear Mr. Secretary-General,

Re: UN climate conference taking the World in entirely the wrong direction

It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions. On top of which, because attempts to cut emissions will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it.

The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the most widely read IPCC reports amongst politicians and non-scientists and are the basis for most climate change policy formulation. Yet these Summaries are prepared by a relatively small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by ­government ­representatives. The great ­majority of IPCC contributors and ­reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other scientists who are qualified to comment on these matters, are not involved in the preparation of these documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented as a consensus view among experts.

Contrary to the impression left by the IPCC Summary reports:

Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability.

The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years.

Leading scientists, including some senior IPCC representatives, acknowledge that today's computer models cannot predict climate. Consistent with this, and despite computer projections of temperature rises, there has been no net global warming since 1998. That the current temperature plateau follows a late 20th-century period of warming is consistent with the continuation today of natural multi-decadal or millennial climate cycling.

In stark contrast to the often repeated assertion that the science of climate change is "settled," significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming. But because IPCC working groups were generally instructed (see http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/docs/wg1_timetable_2006-08-14.pdf) to consider work published only through May, 2005, these important findings are not included in their reports; i.e., the IPCC assessment reports are already materially outdated.

The UN climate conference in Bali has been planned to take the world along a path of severe CO2 restrictions, ignoring the lessons apparent from the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, the chaotic nature of the European CO2 trading market, and the ineffectiveness of other costly initiatives to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Balanced cost/benefit analyses provide no support for the introduction of global measures to cap and reduce energy consumption for the purpose of restricting CO2 emissions. Furthermore, it is irrational to apply the "precautionary principle" because many scientists recognize that both climatic coolings and warmings are realistic possibilities over the medium-term future.

The current UN focus on "fighting climate change," as illustrated in the Nov. 27 UN Development Programme's Human Development Report, is distracting governments from adapting to the threat of inevitable natural climate changes, whatever forms they may take. National and international planning for such changes is needed, with a focus on helping our most vulnerable citizens adapt to conditions that lie ahead. Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity's real and pressing problems.

Yours faithfully,
[List of signatories]

China has made it clear that Christians are NOT welcome in China, especially during the 2008 Olympics. Chinese officials have decided that athletes of the 2008 Olympics are not allowed to have a Bible with them. They are prohibited in the Olympic village.

A Chinese official, speaking to a reporter from Reuters claimed the restrictions on Bibles at the 2008 Olympics was intended "to prevent illegal vendors from driving up prices, which are kept extremely low by government subsidies." ... Are you kidding me?

Scroll down for update

The Bible among objects prohibited at the 2008 Beijing Olympics

Organizes of the 2008 Olympics in Beijing have published a list of “prohibited objects” in the Olympic village where athletes will stay. To the surprise of many, Bibles are among the objects that will not be allowed.

According to the Italian daily La Gazzetta dello Sport, organizers have cited “security reasons” and have prohibited athletes from bearing any kind of religious symbol at Olympic facilities.

Other objects on the list include video cameras and cups.

The Spanish daily La Razon said the rule was one of a number of “signs of censure and intolerance” towards religious objects, particularly those used by Christians in China. Currently in China five bishops and fifteen priests are in prison for opposing the official Church.

Notice: The Qur'an/Koran is NOT on that list of prohibited items. ... of course not. Christians are not welcome... Muslim are.

UPDATE: 11/08/07 - China dismisses Olympics Bible ban as rumors

The Muslim Brotherhood in the United States.
[10/26/07]: An exclusive new report is now available for download from the NEFA Foundation website focusing on "The Muslim Brotherhood in the United States" by NEFA Senior Investigator Douglas Farah, NEFA Director of Research Ron Sandee, and NEFA Senior Analyst Josh Lefkowitz. The report is based upon exhibits from the recent criminal investigation targeting the Holy Land Foundation (HLF). On Oct. 22, 2007, a federal judge in Dallas declared a mistrial on most counts in the federal case against HLF. Despite this outcome, the case still offers an unprecedented inside look into the history of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States, as well as its goals and structure.

Rod Dreher, an editorial columnist with the Dallas Morning News has this spot on observation of the farce we called a trial, of the Holy Land Foundation.

Holy Land trial revealed a covert Islamist agenda

Holy Land Foundation trial was a disaster, but it did reveal a dangerous and covert Islamist agenda behind some Muslim organizations

What an embarrassment the Holy Land Foundation mistrial was. Yes, it was a disappointment for us who wanted to see that Hamas-loving bunch convicted. But no matter which side you were on, the jury's deadlock and post-trial revelations of utter cluelessness made our system look shabby and pathetic.

Trial observers had noted all along that some jury members appeared to be as glazed and placid as a box of Krispy Kremes. At least one repeatedly dozed off. After the trial ended, frustrated juror William Neal, who voted to acquit the defendants, revealed that only a handful bothered to discuss the evidence in deliberations, and that one clod spent her time snacking and napping, as if, in Mr. Neal's words, "this was her vacation."

Think about that. The U.S. government's signature terrorist financing trial – the culmination of 15 years of investigation – depended on people like that woman. The defendants' freedom and their families' welfare depended on people like her. Like I said, an embarrassment.

But the trial – which, don't forget, did not produce an exoneration for most defendants – was by no means a wash. Despite the absence of verdict, what emerged was highly valuable and deeply damaging evidence that the radical Muslim Brotherhood is the guiding light behind the U.S. Muslim community's leadership. It is impossible for any intellectually responsible person to regard as positive or even benign organizations like the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Islamic Society of North America, Islamic Circle of North America, Muslim American Society or others who presume to speak on behalf of all American Muslims.

As Douglas Farah, the former Washington Post reporter who now works as a counterterrorism consultant for the nonprofit Nine Eleven Finding Answers Foundation, put it after the Holy Land verdict, the evidence shows "definitive proof that CAIR, ISNA, ICNA and all the Muslim Brotherhood groups in this country came here with a markedly different purpose from what they claim, and they have gone through decades of deceit to conceal their true identities and purposes."

(For an eye-opening look at government evidence from the Holy Land trial, including the infamous Muslim Brotherhood "general strategic memo" outlining the organization's strategy to use front groups to wage a "civilization-jihad" against the West, see www.nefa foundation.org/hlfdocs.html).

But don't take it from an infidel. Earlier this month in Washington, a handful of prominent Muslims gathered to explain to an American audience why the Muslim Brotherhood was a clear and present danger both to American Muslims and the nation. Naser Khader, a Muslim parliamentarian from Denmark living under death threat for speaking out against Islamic radicals, even called U.S. government officials "useful idiots" for continuing to succor extremists.

The Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928 and dedicated to promoting a worldwide Islamic state, now exists in at least 70 nations. Boston University professor Husain Haqqani told the conference that the Brotherhood established itself in the U.S. when Muslims began coming here in significant numbers to work and study in the 1950s and 1960s. Those immigrants needed mosques and other services. The Brotherhood saw an opportunity – as did the Saudis, who funded its missionary work in America.

One of the most important things the Brotherhood did back then, Mr. Haqqani explained, was translate key radical Islamic texts into a wide range of languages and make them available to mosques and Islamic centers across America. When the foreignness of American life understandably prompted ordinary Muslims to reconnect with their faith, the version of Islam on offer at local Islamic institutions was a radical one.

Read More

The U.S. Judicial system at work again. How pathetic!

1st Lady fights stigma

Laura Bush in Saudi - promoting greater cancer awareness, meeting breast cancer survivors and attending the signing of a memorandum of understanding under which Saudi Arabia will formally join the US-Middle East Partnership for breast cancer awareness and research. Her four-nation tour which began in the United Arab Emirates includes Kuwait and Jordan. It also aims at restoring the 'US image in the Middle East battered by the US-led invasion of Iraq'.
[...]
Breast cancer is the No. 1 killer of women in the United Arab Emirates, but many succumb because the stigma surrounding the disease prevents them from seeking early detection. I sincerely hope she was an inspiration to the women there - in many more ways than one.

How sad is this?

The one on the right will probably be stoned for wearing the "Pink Ribbon."

Where is the liberal MSM? Too depressing to report?

In a not-so-friendly start of talks between the United States and Russia, in the presents of the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Russian President Vladimir Putin threatened to abandon a key nuclear missile treaty while demanding the U.S. back off it's plans to deploy an anti-missile defense system in eastern Europe.

If the U.S. does not, it risks relations with Moscow, Putin said.

Secretary Rice told reporters on Thursday on her flight to Moscow that the United States would go ahead with the missile defense program as planned.

Putin warns U.S. in missile talks

Addressing Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the Russian president appeared to mock the U.S. missile defense plan, which is at the center of a tangle of arms control and diplomatic disputes between the former Cold War adversaries.

"Of course we can sometime in the future decide that some anti-missile defense system should be established somewhere on the moon," Putin said, according to an English translation.

"But before we reach such arrangements we will lose the opportunity for fixing some particular arrangements between us."

Putin also said Russia might feel compelled to pull out of a 20-year-old arms control deal unless it is expanded.

The Russian government sees the U.S. missile defense plan, which Washington describes as a hedge against the threat of missile attack from Iran, as a worrisome step toward weakening Russian security. It has been a longstanding dispute, and Putin's remarks seemed to raise the level of tensions.

Rice and Gates appeared taken aback at the firm tone and forcefulness of Putin's remarks, which were made from notes in the presence of American and Russian news media before they began a closed-door meeting around an oval table in an ornate conference room at his country house outside the capital.

"We will try to find ways to cooperate," Rice said in response. "Even though we have our differences, we have a great deal in common because that which unites us in trying to deal with the threats of terrorism, of proliferation, are much greater than the issues that divide us."

After Putin addressed further comments about U.S.-Russian military cooperation to Gates, the American defense secretary responded by saying the Pentagon was ready to intensify a dialogue on military relations.

"We have an ambitious agenda of security issues that concern both of us, including, as you suggest, development of missile systems by others in the neighborhood -- I would say in particular, Iran," Gates said.

Gates did not directly comment on the missile defense dispute.

After keeping Rice and Gates waiting for 40 minutes, Putin began the session with a lengthy monologue in which he also said that Russia may feel compelled to abandon its obligations under a 1987 missile treaty with the United States if it is not expanded to constrain other missile-armed countries.

Referring to the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty that was negotiated with the United States before the breakup of the Soviet Union, Putin said it must be applied to other countries, including those "located in our near vicinity." He did not mention any by name, but in response, Gates said Washington was interested in limiting missile proliferation in Iran.

Putin said the treaty must be made "universal in nature."

The Russian President appears to be more comfortable playing the adversary role, while flexing his new found "Oil Muscles," than work with the U.S. on these very serious issues.

Stay tuned.

More than 100 fliers, like this one, were posted around George Washington University this past week.

The posters, which read, "Hate Muslims? So Do We!!!," claim to promote Islamo-Fascism Awareness week, a week-long series of events sponsored by the student conservative group, Young America's Foundation.

The YAF openly condemn radical Islam as being evil and reprehensible. They claim these fliers are fakes, and were designed to stir hatred, rather then rationally discuss issues regarding the threat of radical Islam.

It's obvious the posters intent was malicious. The bottom of the flier, reads "Brought to you by Students for Conservativo-Fascism Awareness," and under it, the very last line reads "PS Seriously, do a Google video search for 'The Power of Nightmares'."

"The Power of Nightmares" is a BBC documentary that compares the American neo-conservative movement to the radical Islamist movement. This film attempts to make the argument that the threat of radical Islamism is in fact, a myth perpetrated by politicians world wide, particularly American Neo-Conservatives, in an attempt to unite.
George Washington University President Steven Knapp said in a statement, “There is no place for expressions of hatred on our campus.” He went on and called the posters reprehensible.

Almost 48 hours after the fiasco at Columbia University, it should be crystal-clear to Lee Bollinger that his invitation to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the Ivy League campus was a huge mistake. His personal attacks on the Iranian President during his most craven and unprofessional introduction on Monday, are making a bigger stir then the ridiculous statements made by Ahmadinejad. Go figure.

I think the eye of Columbia University is blackening as we speak.

World reaction so far are quite emphatic.

I find nothing courageous about the Bollinger's insulting introductory remarks. On the contrary, they amount to a monumental cheap shot and pandering to a biased audience. It would have been far more appropriate, and much more in keeping with the presumable spirit that led to the invitation in the first place, to have thanked Ahmadinejad for his willingness to address the audience and to have welcomed a forum for discussion.

David Herlihy, Boston USA

***

Respecting guests _ whoever they are is a universal principle. Either you invite somebody or if you do you have to respect them. Bollinger's violation of this etiquette was nothing but lack of culture in a professor, hopefully not in good people of America.

Farzad, Iran

***

Not very fund of Mr. AhmadiNejad but the introduction by the Univ. President was in accordance with neither of:

a)typical univ dialogue manner
b)accepted treatment of an invited guest
c)diplomacy
d)setting a good example for students

He discredited the Univ. by reading a political statment and insulting the president of Iran. Any other leader of a country with cold relations to the U.S. should be a fool to walk to that podium. It's a shame how media impacts a person of his statue.

Jaami, Toronto

***

Iranian president was a invited guest to Columbia University and was invited by its president Bollinger and should have been treated as such. He was insulted and humiliated which was wrong. In future do not invite anybody to your home and then insult him in your home. It is a disgrace to Columbia University.

Pundalik Shenoy, Parsippany, NJ

***

It is a cruel cruel act to Insult a head of State of any country and that too after inviting him. If it was a street protest that was something else. Mr Bollingers should have not invited him in the first place if his intention was to insult him. He has not only lost a chance of creating peace but has made it even worse.

[ssami80], Toronto, Canada

***

Although Ahmadinejad (AJad) is no saint, he managed to score some very good points. He stayed composed in the face of childish insults from Bolwinkel:),he made some very good points on hypocrisy of US with regards to terrorits & Nuclear issue. As he pointed out, US has designated the MEK as a terrorist organization yet it harbors them in Iraq because they serve its purpose. AJad's speech showed the hypocrisy of the West and media that were trying so hard to discredit him by spinning the outcome!

Bahram, San Jose

***

Mr. Bollinger should not have given the Iranian president the benefit of his anger. Ahmadinejhad knows that the best way for him to gain attention on the world stage is to deny the Holocaust- it shocks people, it makes the news, people listen to him. If any leader had the guts to say, well you have a right to your opinion, I'm interested to know why you think that way sir, I'm sure Ahmadinejad would drop his silly act. Bollinger only made the man looked insulted and himself lowered.

Michelle, Albuquerque

***

This was not an invitation to embrace freedom of speech. It was a propaganda campaign organized by Mr. Bollinger and co. - one which they lost to Ahmadinejad. How can the president of a famous university be so "astonishingly uneducated" as to take it upon himself to dictate to his audience what to think of his guest? Is this freedom of thought, common courtsey?
Rather than insulting a nation by insulting its elected president, Mr. Bollinger should take a look at his own president right at home.

hamid, Toronto

***

Although I strongly disagree with Mr. Ahmadinejad's politics, I believe it was right to allow him to speak at Columbia. To deny him his right to speak freely is to deny him the right in which Americans most strongly believe. We do not need to agree with Mr. Ahmadinejad, but when we are accusatory and insulting, it does no good for the already strained relationship between our country and many others, including Iran. Diplomacy must be tried before all else-mission is definitely not accomplished.

SK, New York City

***

The reactions and actions of American unlearned society and their institutional behaviour at Columbia University shows how arrogant Americans are. American education is geared toward bully rather than the pursuit of knowledge. By insulting Ahmadinejad Americans have shown the world their shallow, hallow cognition. I had predicted this would happen. American politics, civil administration and social institutions are intertwined. You are with us or against us is the thinking. What a dementia hell

Obwota Omwony, Magwi, Sudan

***

Bollinger acted disgracefully, in a way all too typical of loud, obscene Americans. What a poor example to give to the students of the university! Mr Ahmadinejad was invited to express his opinions and should have been welcomed as a guest rather than insulted and ridiculed by a petty uni president.

Anthony Nixon, Dundalk, Ireland

***

So the president of the University called Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a petty and cruel dictator. This is so typical of the ignorance of world affairs by US citizens. How rude can Americans get?

[cunnind], La Chatre, France

***

Mr. Lee was not only rude but also ungentlemanlly. I gather the impression that the Iraninan President was not invited for purely academic reasons as the host would like us the beleive. Rather it was intended to make him a public redicule / spectacle and to emphasise the extent of hate Americans have towards him. such a move in my is a disgrace to modern diplomacy.I wonder if Bush would not receive the same reception in Cameroon.

Kwendi, Buea, Cameroon

***

Mr Lee Bollinger's was not agood Amaricans representative when he presented his rudly speech against Irans president.He showed that what U.S always tell about Iran coming true about it self.Mr.Ahmadinejat defeted the iranians rights logicaly,camly and ofcourse politly.He prove that Iranians want to achieve their rights in this way but the U.S want to privant Iran from it's right in such way Mr Lee Bollinger's talked to him ...illogical and rude.

mitra, Shiraz

***

Ahmadinejad is an elected president of my country. I may not agree with him on many things but I would hate to see him being disrespected by a few idiots who haven't set a foot outside a coutry that doesnt know what culture, etquete and knowledge really is.

Leyli Karima, Tehran, Iran

***

"This was not an invitation to embrace freedom of speech. It was a propaganda campaign organized by Mr. Bollinger and co. - one which they lost to Ahmadinejad. How can the president of a famous university be so "astonishingly uneducated" as to take it upon himself to dictate to his audience what to think of his guest? Is this freedom of thought, common courtesy?"

hamid, toronto

Ugly... but true!

This year Islam and Judaism's holiest holidays overlapped for 10 days. Muslims racked up 397 dead bodies in 94 terror attacks across 10 countries during this time... while Jews worked on their 159th Nobel Prize.

The Iranian president, Mahmod Ahmadinejad, came to the U.S. this week to address the United Nations and to speak, by invitation, at a prestigious U.S. University.

Much has already been written about the Iranian President, so I will refrain from stating the obvious, to which we all know about this dictator of Iran and his feeling about the Holocaust and Israel. I want to speak to the way he was treated as an invited guest to Columbia University.

To begin, I want to say that I personally think the President of Columbia University, Lee Bollinger, made a mistake inviting Ahmadinejad to Columbia at this time, with regard to the current political atmosphere and world events. However he made his decision and stood by it, claiming he would take the leader of Iran to task on many issues like the Holocaust, Human rights, Nuclear war etc. etc.. I respected him for that.

But what I saw from Lee Bollinger in his introduction of the Iranian President, was, to say the least, a surprising and stunning displayed of calculated disrespect and belligerence toward an invited foreign leader.

During his introduction he called the Iranian President a "petty and cruel dictator."

He continued with his harangue and monologue as students listened attentively to his every word, with the suggestion that Ahmadinejad was either "brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated," because of his continued denial of the Holocaust.


Click Video
This was an obviously craven and cowardly capitulation to outside pressures, and unworthy of the academic institution that Bollinger represents. He should have challenged Ahmedinejad’s many ridiculous and absurd statements in a manner that was not abusive or insulting. His behavior was completely inappropriate. It presented to the world, the face of an arrogant and bullying America.

Ahmadinejad was finally introduced and allowed to speak. He was obviously shocked at how he was being treated, before being allowed to speak.

Through an interpretor, he began his speech,

“At the outset I want to complain a bit from the person who read this political statement against me. In Iran tradition requires that when we demand a person to invite to be a speaker we actually respect our students and the professors by allowing them to make their own judgment and we don't think it's necessary before this speech is even given to come in with a series of claims...”

An eruption of applause interrupted the President.

Ahmadinejad continued: “...I think the text read by the dear gentleman here, more than addressing me, was an insult to information and the knowledge of the audience here, present here. In a university environment we must allow people to speak their mind, to allow everyone to talk so that the truth is eventually revealed by all.

Certainly he took more than all the time I was allocated to speak, and that's fine with me. We'll just leave that to add up with the claims of respect for freedom and the freedom of speech that's given to us in this country.

Many parts of his speech, there were many insults and claims that were incorrect, regretfully. .”

In my opinion, this display was just an awkward attempt by Lee Bollinger to redeem his reputation and keep the funds coming in from alumni who said they would withhold contributions to the University in the future because of his decision to have Ahmadinejad on campus.

Unfortunately, this pitiful introduction of Ahmadinejad may eclipse, in the eyes of the world, any of the appalling and horrible things that Ahmadinejad is said to stand for.

It appears, Mr. Bollinger, that Mr. Ahmadinejad may have looked more the statesman and will be shown that way throughout the Arab world.

This says it all.


Iranian madman Mahmoud Ahmadinejad walks among us

Hatemonger Mahmoud Ahmadinejad landed in a hornet's nest of outrage yesterday as Columbia University prepared to welcome him with open arms today and stuck by a dean's outrageous assertion that it would let Adolf Hitler speak, too.

The Holocaust-denying Iranian tyrant jetted into New York as students, faculty and political leaders protested Columbia's decision to roll out the red carpet.

"It's a stain on the university," said sophomore Elizabeth Friess, 20. "You can't have an open debate with someone who wants to wipe out Israel. There is no reasoning with someone like that."

The Fars News Agency is reporting this morning that while the Iranian President is here in New York this week to address the U.N., he is going to meet with the "survivors and bereaved families of the 9-11 incident."


Excuse me!

Ahmadinejad Leaves for New York
"Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad left Tehran on Sunday for his third trip to the United States, saying the visit was a good chance to present Iran's solutions for the problems of the world". (emphasis mine)

During his two-day sojourn in New York, the Iranian president, who will be accompanied by a group of high-ranking officials, is also scheduled to attend bilateral talks with several of his counterparts and meet Iranians residing in the US.

Ahmadinejad is also set to use a speech at a leading US university to challenge George W Bush at a time of high tensions with Washington over his country's pursuit of nuclear technology.

The invitation by New York's Columbia University to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is attracting growing criticism from the US hawks ahead of his arrival on Sunday.

Meetings with the survivors and bereaved families of the 9-11 incident, journalists and critics of the Bush administration are also included in Ahmadinejad's itinerary.

When and where is this suppose to happen? Or is this just a bunch of hype for those sheep he left behind in Iran?

Still waiting on confirmation of this Fars report.

The Islamic Republic News Agency is reporting that Iran complained to New York officials because they are ignoring Iranian sympathy for the families of victims of the 2001 World Trade Center disaster.

Iran protests to New York officials over ignoring Iran sympathy with terror victims

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had offered to lay bouquets of flowers at Ground Zero in New York to express sympathy of Iranian nation to fellow human beings who fell victims to September 11 terrorist attacks.

The offer from the great nation of Iran with ancient civilization indicated extent of humanitarian sympathy in Iranian culture toward the human losses.

It is not the matter of politics. It is expression of peace and friendship from a nation to another.

Really! But, at the same time, Ahmadinejad was ripping into the U.S. during a military parade in Tehran which included military equipment painted with "Down with the U.S." slogans on them.

A day before flying to New York to speak directly to the American people, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad struck a confrontational tone Saturday with a parade of fighter jets and missiles and tough warnings for the United States to stay out of the Mideast.

Three new domestically manufactured warplanes streaked over the capital during the parade marking the 27th anniversary of the Iraqi invasion of Iran, which sparked a 1980-88 war that killed hundreds of thousands of people. The parade also featured the Ghadr missile, which has a range of 1,120 miles, capable of reaching Israel.

Some of the missile trucks were painted with the slogans "Down with the U.S." and "Down with Israel." The parade also featured unmanned aerial surveillance drones, torpedoes, and tanks.

Tensions are high between Washington and Tehran over U.S. accusations that Iran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons and helping Shiite militias in Iraq that target U.S. troops. Iran denies the claims.

Washington has said it is addressing the Iran situation diplomatically, rather than militarily, but U.S. officials also say that all options are open.

He's a perfect fit with those liberals at Columbia University.

While here in the U.S. to address the U.N. next week, the Iranian President has not only decided he'll visit Ground Zero to lay a wreath, but has been invited to speak to our children at the Columbia University in New York.

Columbia University said it does not plan to call off a speech by Iran's president despite pressure from critics including the City Council speaker, who said the Ivy League school was providing a forum for "hate-mongering vitriol."

Columbia University Plans to Host Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is traveling to New York to address the United Nations' General Assembly. He was scheduled to appear Monday at a question-and-answer session with Columbia faculty and students as part of the school's World Leaders Forum.

The State Department calls Iran a state sponsor of terror, and Ahmadinejad has called the Holocaust "a myth" and urged for Israel to be destroyed.

For those who can't make the "Q & A" at Columbia University on Monday, here is a sample of what to expect from him. Just the kind of things our children should be hearing from "World Leaders."


If you would like to join the protests of this event, Michelle Malkin has everything you need to help show this guy how American's really feel about him.

Hear from the Iranian People themselves.

Ahmadinejad MUST BE STOPPED.



And the icing on the cake...

Secret Service Will Protect Ahmadinejad at Ground Zero

UPDATE - Sept. 20, 2007 - 4:22PM EST: Fox News is reporting that Ahmadinejad told 60 Minutes that he is not going to press his luck, and may not go to ground zero.

We'll see!

UPDATE - Sept. 21, 2007 - 2:40PM EST: The Islamic Republic News Agency is reporting that Ahmadinejad IS going to Ground Zero on Monday Sept. 24th, to "pay homage to the victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks in 2001."

The Foundation for Democracy in Iran, in coordination with Citizens United and other groups, is calling on all Americans to come to New York on Monday to defend Ground Zero. They will be chartering buses from Washington DC.