60 Minutes Tonight on CBS at 7pm EST: President of Iran and Stephen Colbert

[Thorgrim]

PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD – Mike Wallace lands an exclusive and rare interview with the president of Iran. In the wide-ranging interview, the Iranian leader comments on President Bush’s foreign policy, the lack of relations between Iran and the U.S., Hezbollah, Lebanon and Iraq. Robert Anderson is the producer. This is a double length segment.

COLBERT REPORT - Morley Safer talks to Stephen Colbert, the "fake news" reporter whose Comedy Central program is making waves. Alden Bourne is the producer.

^^^ Awesome show

[Nonphixion]

Just set the reminder timer

[motivez]

I can't wait to watch this. I think we need to examine this guy from a non-administration-rhetoric perspective to get a more balanced view of where Iran is heading as a nation with him at the helm.

Plus, Colbert kicks ass.

[kinggovernor]

dvr ftw

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

I can't wait to watch this. I think we need to examine this guy from a non-administration-rhetoric perspective to get a more balanced view of where Iran is heading as a nation with him at the helm.

Plus, Colbert kicks ass.

A guy that has repeatedly said he wants to wipe Israel off the map and wants to pursue nuclear weapons for his terrorist state needs to be viewed from a more balanced perspective?

So we can feel bad for him or something? I mean seriously, CNN, Fox, the big 3 news outlets have all covered what a nutjob he is, blaming that on the administration is flat

[motivez]

Yes, we need to view him from a more independent standpoint instead of simply taking the Administration on its word.

Sorry, but they've lost all credibility when it comes to branding foreign leaders as this or that who are in search of nuclear weapons.

I don't want to feel bad for him, and I don't like what he's said, but I'll be damned if I'm going to not learn as much as I can about where he's taking Iran as a nation from a perspective that hasn't been tainted by our massive failure in Iraq.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

Yes, we need to view him from a more independent standpoint instead of simply taking the Administration on its word.

Sorry, but they've lost all credibility when it comes to branding foreign leaders as this or that who are in search of nuclear weapons.

I don't want to feel bad for him, and I don't like what he's said, but I'll be damned if I'm going to not learn as much as I can about where he's taking Iran as a nation from a perspective that hasn't been tainted by our massive failure in Iraq.

So CNN, FOX, NBC, ABC, CBS are all GW Bush coolaid drinkers? riiiiight...the guy's a wackjob. This interview is being done to drum up support for a terrorist, I imagine it'll come with the typical "this guy is a real genious, he's not the wacko killer I thought he was" same type of shit that happened when rather interviewed saddam both times

[Nonphixion]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

So CNN, FOX, NBC, ABC, CBS are all GW Bush coolaid drinkers? riiiiight...the guy's a wackjob. This interview is being done to drum up support for a terrorist, I imagine it'll come with the typical "this guy is a real genious, he's not the wacko killer I thought he was" same type of shit that happened when rather interviewed saddam both times

I'm unimpressed at how naive you seem to be. At a time Saddam was our friend, we installed him there in the middle-east. Motherfucking Donald Rumsefeld himself sat on Saddam's couch in one of his palaces, as they joked with one other! Then shortly after -- we sold him truckloads of bombs and weapons, he must have made some good impression eh?

It's the same with all of our other so-called "evil enemies", we twist their words to support our media sensationalism of any subject such as this. The middle-eastern anti-semetism "extremist" arguement has never been that the holocaust "never happened". It is a much more peaceful truth -- it's the arguement that the middle-eastern region was not involved at all in WW2, so why do they have to "suffer" and have the Jewish peoples take over their land.

So in that effect, they say; "The holocaust never had anything to do with us" ... "Why are we the ones to have our land taken away and not Europe or America?"

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by Nonphixion

I'm unimpressed at how naive you seem to be. At a time Saddam was our friend, we installed him there in the middle-east. Motherfucking Donald Rumsefeld himself sat on Saddam's couch in one of his palaces, as they joked with one other! Then shortly after -- we sold him truckloads of bombs and weapons, he must have made some good impression eh?

It's the same with all of our other so-called "evil enemies", we twist their words to support our media sensationalism of any subject such as this. The middle-eastern anti-semetism "extremist" arguement has never been that the holocaust "never happened". It is a much more peaceful truth -- it's the arguement that the middle-eastern region was not involved at all in WW2, so why do they have to "suffer" and have the Jewish peoples take over their land.

So in that effect, they say; "The holocaust never had anything to do with us" ... "Why are we the ones to have our land taken away and not Europe or America?"

I'm fully aware of Saddam and how he came to power, that has what to do with the interviewing of Irans president by CBS? Oh yeah Nothing.

[Stylerod]

Watching an interview is going to show us the "Real" Ahmadinejad

This guy was a real charmer when you talked to him too

[motivez]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

So CNN, FOX, NBC, ABC, CBS are all GW Bush coolaid drinkers? riiiiight...the guy's a wackjob. This interview is being done to drum up support for a terrorist, I imagine it'll come with the typical "this guy is a real genious, he's not the wacko killer I thought he was" same type of shit that happened when rather interviewed saddam both times

Where did I say anything about "coolaid"? Feel free to leave O'Reilly's attack rhetoric out of this

Perhaps you should try reading my posts before replying with this type of bullshit?

I don't want to feel bad for him, and I don't like what he's said, but I'll be damned if I'm going to not learn as much as I can about where he's taking Iran as a nation

All of our major news agencies have been reporting the Administration's rhetoric about Iran wanting a nuclear weapon. I'm sorry, but they simply have 0 credibility when accusing foreign dictators of trying to aquire WMD as a threat.

The rest of the world is not so convinced.. and neither am I.

I think it's important we take a look at where Iran is heading with him at the helm, maybe you're content to sit in ignorant bliss and just believe everything Bush says about this subject, but after our mistake in Iraq, I'm not.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

Where did I say anything about "coolaid"? Feel free to leave O'Reilly's attack rhetoric out of this

Perhaps you should try reading my posts before replying with this type of bullshit?



All of our major news agencies have been reporting the Administration's rhetoric about Iran wanting a nuclear weapon. I'm sorry, but they simply have 0 credibility when accusing foreign dictators of trying to aquire WMD as a threat.

The rest of the world is not so convinced.. and neither am I.

I think it's important we take a look at where Iran is heading with him at the helm, maybe you're content to sit in ignorant bliss and just believe everything Bush says about this subject, but after our mistake in Iraq, I'm not.

You talk as if the bush administration is controlling the media, I called you on it and it pissed you off. Sorry it pissed you off but to imply that a host of media outlet with reguards to the President of Iran simply makes up rhetoric is downright wrong.
You were are the one trying to twist this into some sort of anti bush thread by claiming its the administrations "rhetoric" thats painting this guy as a bad guy? You have the nerve to call my posts bullshit when no one was talking about the administrations rhetoric, thats something that was brought to this thread by you. I stated that numerous media outlets reported on this guys antics and you didn't like it.

[motivez]

"Don't like it"? What are you talking about? I don't know why I keep having to repeat myself..

I've pointed out twice in this thread that I disagree with and don't like what he's said about Israel. Stop twisting what I've said into somehow defending him or his comments.

They're not controlling the media, but they're certainly influencing what's being broadcast to the American people about Iran with their rhetoric about Iran's nuclear ambitions.. (which is what I'm talking about, not his shit about Israel, which again, let me point out for redundancy incase you've missed it the other three times that I've stated it, I don't agree with it and don't think he should have said.)

If you think that's not the case, you're simply fooling yourself.

I'm sorry you disagree, but this Administration lost ALL credibility when it comes to accusing other nations of persuing this or that with no proof or evidence after their blunder in Iraq.

It's not about being anti-Bush, it's about being pro-American, and wanting to understand as much as I can about where he says he's taking Iran as a nation.

Does that mean I'm going to take everything he says as gospel like some do with Bush? Of course not, so you can do away with the strawman that I'm going to think he's a "real genious" or completely believe everything he says. Likewise though, I'm not going to automatically discount everything he says.

You act like the media has been some kind of check and balance against what the Administration has been suggesting, and have been able to confirm or deny what they've been saying about Iran's nuclear program and ambitions..

Well, the same aggressive reporting that brought us the truth about the Iraqi WMD issue before we made the horrible mistake of invading a nation on bad intelligence has been just as active when it comes to what's going on with Iran.

This is one of the few exceptions that can potentially bring us some insight into the mind of this man. Feel free not to watch it, but I will.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

"Don't like it"? What are you talking about? I don't know why I keep having to repeat myself..

I've pointed out twice in this thread that I disagree with and don't like what he's said about Israel. Stop twisting what I've said into somehow defending him or his comments.

Where did I say you didn't say that? I never once said you wanted this guy put on a pedastal as some kind of an angel. What I did say was your assessment that he's been misconstrued in the media was wrong, more pointendly I singled out your assessment that the bush administration was some how distorting this guy.

I never said you defended him or his comments nor was it implied.

[motivez]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Where did I say you didn't say that? I never once said you wanted this guy put on a pedastal as some kind of an angel. What I did say was your assessment that he's been misconstrued in the media was wrong, more pointendly I singled out your assessment that the bush administration was some how distorting this guy.

I never said you defended him or his comments nor was it implied.

Funny, I just read through my posts and don't see "misconstrued" once? I don't even see a suggestion that he might have been misconstrued?

I don't think he's been misconstrued in the media. This isn't about his comments torwards Israel, which, again, I disagree with.

I'm referring to the Administration's rhetoric on their nuclear program.

I think it's important to get a more balanced view on the situation, and no matter how crazy we think he is, a "balanced" view includes his viewpoint on current events dealing with his country and where he intends to take that nation as its leader.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

I can't wait to watch this. I think we need to examine this guy from a non-administration-rhetoric perspective to get a more balanced view of where Iran is heading as a nation with him at the helm.

Plus, Colbert kicks ass.

So this in no way implies that the administration has taken things out of context and miscontrued what has been said? You're clearly saying that the bush administration has not created a balanced view point for this guy which must mean they've some how misconstrued it, no?

What is there to balance when the guy is clearly batshit insane (to steal one of your terms)? He's said numerous times he wants to pursue nuclear weapons, that he wants to wipe Israel off the map and that christians and jews alike should be killed. So I find it hard to see how this guy has not had "balanced" coverage, the very nature of his actions and words seem to be all the balance that we need.

edit: real quick...on their nuclear program

I can see your concern with the nuclear program and possible rhetoric based on the intel history especially reguarding Iraq, but it seems to me that even if we found out he were more civil with reguards to nuclear power/arms how would that change the overall message this guy sends?

I'm out I'll bbl.

[Concept]

For the record, it's Kool-Aid. Not 'coolaid'.

C'mon, where's your childhood, man?

Anyways.

I get what motivez is saying. He'd like to see what this loser has to say from a non-biased perspective. I don't think the Administration has done anything to directly influence what the major media outlets have been reporting on Iran; the administration's messages simply run through the major media outlets again and again.

I'm a stout believer in bias; whether we are conscience of it or not, our media has an indelible bias against the Middle East. We as a people tend to have a bias against Middle Easterners ever since the tragedy of 9/11. I believe the majority of Americans make some kind of faulty connection between 9/11 and Akmed working at 7-11 (to use a horrible stereotype).

The president of Iran and presenting his case on 60 Minutes isn't going to be a bad thing. Maybe the Adminsitration will be able to pounce on a statement that the president says to reinforce their case against Iran's nuclear program. Depending on what he says, that is. I think it'll be very easy to see through any potential that he may be talking.

But, yeah, I think he's a fucking basket case.

[motivez]

I don't buy the Administration's rhetoric anymore when it comes to accusing nations of this or that dealing with their nuclear ambitions. They forfeitted their credibility in my mind because of Iraq.

The rest of the world feels the same way.

Because of that, I prefer a more independent assessment of the situation (international press, etc).. and I prefer that assessment to be "balanced", so I have no problem listening to what the man says and evaluating it when put in perpsective with what else I know about him and this situation.

Of course it's not "balanced" when you only listen to one point of view. For balance to exist you need equal representation of information.. relying on only their view wouldn't be very 'balanced' would it?

That has nothing to do with his comments about Israel. I'm not sure where you get the idea that it does.

[Concept]

I'm sure he's going to get drilled with questions on his stance on Israel.