Katie Couric Doesn't Challenge Theme of Iran’s 'Holocaust Conference’

I'm all for talking with them, but in secret diplomatic venues. I'm sure that's done all the time. What the libs want is open meetings where America can be put on trial.

BTW I believe 72 is the magic number. Athough its a big lie anyway.

I also support secret diplomatic venues. Like leveling their nuclear research sites

With little Adolf there on an inspection tour would be a nice bonus
 
Miised our chance. I would have made a deal with some "families" in NY. Get rid of them and some indictments aganist your friends would disapper as well
 
You don't REALLY believe the truth would ever get past the doors of the conference, do you? You can only "beat them at their own game" on a level playing field.

Didn't and didn't, Ahmadinejad's two-day conference consisted of "Holocaust? WHAT Holocaust?" rhetoric as well as the obligatory scrap-Israel idea.

Some anti-Zionist rabbis were in attendence, all from this sad group:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neturei_Karta

And David Duke, as well. The attendees claimed they needed a forum in a safe place to examine (discredit) the Holocaust, since this revisionism is considered a "hate crime" in much of Europe. But IRAN???

Ahmadinejad's on the ropes, it's Election Day in Iran:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,1973017,00.html

and he'll probably make it. Just one last thing, from the conference:

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday told delegates at an international conference questioning the Holocaust that Israel's days were numbered.

Ahmadinejad, who has sparked international outcry by referring to the killing of six million Jews in World War Two as a "myth" and calling for Israel to be "wiped off the map", launched another verbal attack on the Jewish state.

http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...TRUKOC_0_US-IRAN-HOLOCAUST.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

That was the other point of it all.
 
Jews are the most persecuted group of people in the history of man

But what are the chances that every group of people to have ever been blessed with their presence has hated them irrationally? Wouldn't the Occam's Razor here be that they are, in fact, hate-able?

The alternative, if you think about it, is a slur on everyone else. If Jews are so universally disliked, and they themselves have done nothing to invite this, then the rest of us are crazy, ignorant, evil, or all all three.

Are we? Every single society that ever was, from Egypt to Rome to Europe to Russia to the U.S.? Just happened to all be nuts, in the same way, all across the span of time and space?

There isn't the slightest possibility that Jews themselves had ANYTHING to do with it?

No?

OK, then. Just asking. What do you expect from a hate-filled, ranting, raving, anti-Semitic crazy person? I tell ya.
 
Didn't and didn't, Ahmadinejad's two-day conference consisted of "Holocaust? WHAT Holocaust?" rhetoric as well as the obligatory scrap-Israel idea.

Some anti-Zionist rabbis were in attendence, all from this sad group:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neturei_Karta

And David Duke, as well. The attendees claimed they needed a forum in a safe place to examine (discredit) the Holocaust, since this revisionism is considered a "hate crime" in much of Europe. But IRAN???

Ahmadinejad's on the ropes, it's Election Day in Iran:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,1973017,00.html

and he'll probably make it. Just one last thing, from the conference:



http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...TRUKOC_0_US-IRAN-HOLOCAUST.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

That was the other point of it all.

Interestingly enough, they showed Bill O'Reilly's interview of David Duke a couple of nights ago. I thought O'Reilly made a big ass out of himself by not letting Duke explain a thing. He did what some people on this board do ... cried "hate speech" and dismissed, interrrupted and talked over anything the other person is trying to say the second the word "race" came up.

Why is it perfectly okay to do exactly what they are doing by hating them, but it isn't okay for them to hate?
 
Interestingly enough, they showed Bill O'Reilly's interview of David Duke a couple of nights ago. I thought O'Reilly made a big ass out of himself by not letting Duke explain a thing. He did what some people on this board do ... cried "hate speech" and dismissed, interrrupted and talked over anything the other person is trying to say the second the word "race" came up.

Why is it perfectly okay to do exactly what they are doing by hating them, but it isn't okay for them to hate?

Because there's a difference between being hateful and hating hatred and intolerance.... just is. That said, O'Reilly's a jerk who doesn't let anyone talk anyway. Not that there's any legitimate explanation for Duke's kind of hatred. I still find it amazing that Duke has any kind of legitimacy at all.
 
Because there's a difference between being hateful and hating hatred and intolerance.... just is. That said, O'Reilly's a jerk who doesn't let anyone talk anyway. Not that there's any legitimate explanation for Duke's kind of hatred. I still find it amazing that Duke has any kind of legitimacy at all.

There is no difference. Both are intolerant and hateful.

I disagree on O'Reilly. In most instances, he allows others to present their cases. He's nowhere near as bad as you lefties make him out to be. Y'all are just intolerant of opposing political viewpoints. The people/organizations he usually goes after usually deserve it in common sense and logical manner that has nothing to do with political bias.

I don't always agree with O'Reilly. Such as now. Obviously though, YOU do.
 
There is no difference. Both are intolerant and hateful.

I disagree on O'Reilly. In most instances, he allows others to present their cases. He's nowhere near as bad as you lefties make him out to be. Y'all are just intolerant of opposing political viewpoints. The people/organizations he usually goes after usually deserve it in common sense and logical manner that has nothing to do with political bias.

I don't always agree with O'Reilly. Such as now. Obviously though, YOU do.

I think it's ok to hate Hitler and anyone who agrees with him. I think it's okay to hate hatred and be intolerant of intolerance.

As for O'Reilly... nah... I don't agree with him. I said I think he's a jerk. But David Duke is an evil thang... so I guess he's right on that. Had to happen sometime.
 
I think it's ok to hate Hitler and anyone who agrees with him. I think it's okay to hate hatred and be intolerant of intolerance.

As for O'Reilly... nah... I don't agree with him. I said I think he's a jerk. But David Duke is an evil thang... so I guess he's right on that. Had to happen sometime.

Hating hatred and and being intolerant of intolerance makes you become the thing you hate. Hatred is a powerful weapon that never leads to anything good.
 
Because there's a difference between being hateful and hating hatred and intolerance.... just is.

There just is-----:rofl: ----that's pretty close to " having to do things just because someone said so".

It's all starting to break down on ya, Jilly.
 
Always fueled by self-righteousness, ya know.

Interestingly enough, they showed Bill O'Reilly's interview of David Duke a couple of nights ago. I thought O'Reilly made a big ass out of himself by not letting Duke explain a thing. He did what some people on this board do ... cried "hate speech" and dismissed, interrrupted and talked over anything the other person is trying to say the second the word "race" came up.

Heh, sounds like a Bill O'Reilly interview. Never saw the Duke one, here's an old one where Duke's defending Ward Churchill's free speech rights:

Former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke, who is now living and teaching in the Ukraine, joined The Factor to discuss radical leftist professor Ward Churchill. Duke attempted to distance himself from his past racist statements. "I was in the KKK thirty years ago, and that's not what I'm about today. As far as Ward Churchill is concerned, we should allow his viewpoints to be heard. I don't agree with one iota of what Ward Churchill says, except that we wouldn't have had 9/11 if we had minded our own business. But people have a right to make statements." The Factor told Duke that he and Ward Churchill are in effect opposite sides of the same coin: "Free speech has consequences--both you and Churchill, on opposite ends of the spectrum, have brought personal pain to Americans."

http://www.billoreilly.com/show?action=viewTVShow&showID=152#5

He's right about free speech, but they're both wrong about 9-11. Did I just committ hate speech - i.e., dissent?

Why is it perfectly okay to do exactly what they are doing by hating them, but it isn't okay for them to hate?

Another pitfall of moral relativism, self-inflicted blindness. The worst way to try to eliminate hate speech is to suppress it, Europe's going to pay for making Holocaust denial illegal and at the same time preaching "tolerance" and pushing "multiculturalism", Mein Kampf is the bestseller in Iran for a reason.
 

Forum List

Back
Top