ITEM 2: Comments by Washington Post reporter David Ignatius, excerpts as noted above. (My transcription)
So except for a passing swipe at Ahmadinejad, Ignatius presumes, as do most liberals, that if we would just essentially do what Ahmedinejad wants, acknowledge and recognize what a great nation they are, tell them how much we admire what they've done with their revolution, show them respect, give them assurances - then everything will be fine.
It's my view that Igantius perhaps spent just a little too much time in Iran. And that seems to be the prevailing wisdom in the liberal view.
I've never heard any educated person who has visited the country claim that the regime is even remotely popular. Even the leftists like Nicholas Kristof of NY Times and Thomas Friedman acknowledged that Iran is vastly pro-American and anti-Islamic Republic.
Who is this idiot?
The Washington Post laid off how many employees in the past year?
For what its worth: Rudy Baktiar (that very pretty FOX correspondent) was reporting from Iran just two days ago. She has been doing man on the street interviews and says that that the majority of Iranians are proud of their nuclear program. She also said that they also believe it is for peaceful purposes because Khamenei, the supreme religious leader issued a fatwa saying that the Koran says that Muslims may never use a nuclear weapon. They believe this fatwa and that it is binding. As I said...for what its worth.
(From Drudge Headline) quoted from Ahmedinejad's U.N. speech:
'The time for world empires has ended'...
Ahmedinejad means EXCEPT for the projected Muslim/Islamic world empire!!!
Just when I thought the left couldn't get any lower.