Ahmadinejad Hangs Himself In Columbia Speech

I truly believe in the old saying, “Give a man enough rope and he’ll hang himself with it.” And that’s what Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did today at Columbia University.

When I first heard of Ahmadinejad’s visit to America, I was outraged, as were many Americans. However, after reading about his rants to audience members at Columbia University, he showed the world what an uninformed, hypocritical and dangerous dictator he really is.

In fact, he made so many outrageous statements it’s hard to decide where to start. How about the 9/11 attacks?

“If the root causes of 9/11 are examined properly -- why it happened, what caused it, what were the conditions that led to it, who truly was involved, who was really involved …” Ahmadinejad said, as reported by CNN.

“Who was really involved.” Interesting choice of words. Ahmadinejad, who in the past claimed that Iran has plenty of freedoms, needs to give more of these elusive freedoms to his country’s state-controlled media.

If he did, Ahmadinejad would know that two weeks ago Osama bin Laden again claimed responsibility for the 9/11 terror attacks and presented a video will made by one of the terrorists on that fateful day. And that’s not even including al-Qaeda members, such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who have confessed to planning the attacks.

Then Ahmadinejad made a statement that Iran has no gays. Considering that the punishment for either consenting man or woman homosexuality is either whippings or death, it’s a safe bet no one is going to come out of the closet any time soon.

Next, Ahmadinejad came to his favorite subject, Israel. In the past, he said that the Jewish State should be wiped off the map. Today, he wouldn’t give a “yes” or “no” answer when asked if he wanted to see the destruction of Israel. Although, it doesn’t take a genius to know what he would like to see.

But instead, the Iranian President said that “people of Palestine” should be the ones to vote on Israel’s status. Besides the fact that this flies in the face of nearly 60 years of established history that Israel is a country, many Palestinians have been “voting” on the Jewish State’s status by use of suicide bombs as ballots.

So in the end, Ahmadinejad hanged himself by saying he is misunderstood but did show that he is a dangerous man that needs to be taken seriously.

What’s The Point Of The Timetable Bill?

I’m sorry but I just don’t get what the House and the Senate have done. As we all know, today the Senate rebelliously passed a bill calling for U.S. combat forces to withdraw from Iraq next year.

Iraq commander Gen. David Petraeus and other senior defense officials went to Capital Hill on the day the House voted on the bill to tell legislators to reconsider the timetable, saying that progress is being made but it will take time. And let’s not forget what many have been saying for a long time now: A withdraw will give the insurgents enough time to regroup and wait for the pullout and then take over Iraq in a bloody battle. And let’s not forget that we will be giving al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups a victory that will inspire them to continue their bloody Jihad against the world.

And the president has already said he will veto the bill, so what is the point of acting defiant? To send a message to the president, America and the world that they want the troops home? Big hairy deal, for years now Democrats and few Republicans have called for troop withdraw. They don’t need a bill to make that point. It’s time to stop playing politics with our troops lives and the safety of this nation and others.

But the Democrats, sadly, have made a good point as to why President Bush won in the last election. They are not showing the foresight that is needed to deal with terrorists and the safety of this country. What do they expect to happen if there is a timetable that would withdraw our troops before Iraq is ready to deal with the insurgents and terrorists? How will this affect the U.S. and Iraq and the rest of the world if Iraq is taken over by people who have vowed to kill those who do not share their views?

Because they are not asking these questions or listening to the consequences that military experts are warning of, they are not showing the interests of this country or Iraq but they are showing a way for them to win the White House in 2008.

And within those four years in office, how will that Democratic president explain to America that we need to go back into Iraq and deal with a war machine bent on supporting terrorism and destroying lives? How will that president, who voted for this bill, look Americans in the eye and tell us that it will be a harder, bloodier war because the enemy had years of preparation, planning and support? And what kind of answer will this future Democratic president give when someone asks: Why didn’t you want to deal with this when it was far more manageable than it is now?

And if it doesn’t seem manageable now, wait until the insurgents take over Iraq, and they provide funds for terrorist black markets, training grounds and attacks. And while this is only speculation but a good educated guess by what has been reported on, Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will get the nuclear weapons/components he is seeking, as a payback for funding the insurgents. (Let’s not forget that there is strong evidence that former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had sent his WMDs to Syria long before the war started. An insurgent-controlled Iraq in four years will certainly have them shipped back.)

It’s not a pretty picture and it’s far from being finished but it is something that supporters of the bill fail to see or consider. Is it a possible scenario? After the 9/11 attacks, we simply can’t afford to see the glass as half full when innocent lives are on the line.