Posted on 08/14/2006 10:11:51 PM PDT by goldstategop
A little over three years ago, CBS sent Dan Rather to Baghdad to ask meaningless questions to, and provide a propaganda vehicle for, Saddam Hussein. Last night, Communication for Barbarians Service broadcast Mike Wallace's equally meaningless interview with the Islamic Republic of Iran's fanatical leader.
Interviews with evil leaders are meaningless at best and destructive at worst. Few reporters will ask real questions or challenge the propaganda responses of these leaders. These interviews merely offer them invaluable "humanizing" time and ask questions that reconfirm the low state of television news.
Mike Wallace And The Barbarian In Teheran
In this image made available by CBS News, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, right, talks to American reporter Mike Wallace at the Presidential Palace in Tehran Tuesday, Aug. 8, 2006 for a "60 Minutes" report to be broadcast Aug. 13. Twenty-seven years after a chilling sit-down with Ayatollah Khomeini that was one of Wallace's most memorable, the CBS newsman snagged an interview this week with current Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Tehran. (AP Photo/CBS News) Here are some of the tough questions Mike Wallace asked one of the vilest leaders on earth today: What he thinks of President Bush, why he is concerned about how his jacket looks on television and what he does for leisure. Never once did he challenge Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's attacks on America -- such as America's loving war, seeking to be an imperial power or oppressing its own people.
When asked about his statements that the Holocaust is a "myth," Ahmadinejad replied, "What I did say was, if this is a reality, if this is real, where did it take place?" Wallace did not respond to the leader of a country saying "if" the Holocaust "is real" with a single question. But he probably laughed more with Ahmadinejad than any American news reporter has ever laughed on camera with the president of the United States.
If CBS wanted anything more than ratings and Wallace wanted to be more than a "useful idiot" (Lenin's phrase for the Western journalists and academics who supported Soviet Communism), here are some questions he should have asked Ahmadinejad:
In countries with a free press and where history is understood as consisting of verifiable facts, anyone who denies the Holocaust, the systematic murder of approximately 6 million Jews by the Nazis, is regarded as either an anti-Semite or a kook or both. You have repeatedly denied the Holocaust. Why should the world not regard you as either a kook or an anti-Semite? And do you understand why most free societies wish to prevent you from acquiring nuclear weapons?
Given that you have announced that you wish Israel to be erased from the map, why would those countries that do not share your desire to extinguish a country not try to prevent you from acquiring nuclear weapons?
In Iran, under your direction, religious police walk around the country monitoring how much skin a woman reveals. Most of the world considers this primitive and another reason to regard you and your regime as fanatical. On what grounds do you support whipping women who reveal their arms in public? And do you understand why such policies help explain why most free societies wish to prevent you from acquiring nuclear weapons?
Why do you believe that millions of Iranians chant "death to America" and "death to Israel" but no Americans or Israelis chant "death to Iran"? Are people more bored in an Islamic republic than in a free society? Does your brand of Islam promote preoccupation with death rather than life? Or is there simply a lot more hatred in your country than in free societies? And do you understand why all this hatred helps explain why societies in which people do not chant death wishes would like to prevent your society from acquiring nuclear weapons?
In Iran, women determined by Islamic courts to have committed adultery have been stoned to death. According to The Washington Times, "The condemned are wrapped head to foot in white shrouds and buried up to their waists. Then the stoning begins. The stones are specifically chosen so they are large enough to cause pain, but not so large as to kill the condemned immediately. They are guaranteed a slow, torturous death. Sometimes their children are forced to watch." Do you believe that this brings world admiration to Islam? And do you understand why most societies in which women who commit adultery are not stoned wish to prevent you from acquiring nuclear weapons?
Last year, a teenage girl who said she was raped by two young men was not only not believed, she was given 100 lashes by your Islamic republic. Many of us find whipping teenagers for having sex, not to mention for being raped, unimpressive. Does this help to explain why societies that do not whip teenage girls are not excited about your country acquiring nuclear weapons?
Last month, a British newspaper, the Sunday Mirror, reported that in your Islamic republic, "16-year-old Atefeh Rajabi was dragged from her prison cell and taken to be executed. The Iranian judge who had sentenced Atefeh to death was left unmoved as he personally put the noose around her neck and signalled to the crane driver. Kicking and screaming, Atefeh was left dangling for 45 minutes from the arm of the crane . . . Atefeh's crime? Offending public morality. She was found guilty of 'acts incompatible with chastity' by having sex with an unmarried man, even though friends say Atefeh was in such a fragile mental state that she wasn't in a position to say no."
Does this help explain why people who don't support hanging young girls from cranes might be concerned about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons?
As it happens, Mike Wallace and CBS News did what they set out to do -- win in the ratings war Sunday night. But they hurt America and abetted evil in the process. Not deliberately, but knowingly.
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)
I guess Wallace has a right to interview this creep, but Id
feel better if Wallace could experience some kind of painful or withering mis-fortune, soon , to coincide with
his ill-considered scoop/interview with a evil murderer.
It was chilling...and Wallace wasn't easy on Ahmadinnerjacket. In fact, after some of the questions, I thought, uh-oh, he's a dead man now!
What struck me is how ignorant this guy is, not to mention delusional. He knows everything, too. How do you deal with a nut like this? Especially if he gets nuclear weapons?
He said several times that he will "give his answer to the world on August 22nd" regarding UNSC sanctions.
Needless to say, I'm not making any long-range plans at the moment.
Take this Dinosaur out and shoot it. My appologies to Dinosaurs who have a larger brain than Wallace.
Any of those questions would have been the last words uttered from him as they sliced out his tongue.
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Shalom Israel
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)
Mike Wallace Says Ahmadinejad “a Swell Guy”
In an interview with Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mike Wallace of CBS’s “Sixty Minutes” TV show came away quite impressed. "He's a swell guy,” Wallace said. “He really is. He's obviously smart as hell. He’s a college professor, for Christ’s sake. Nobody’s smarter than them."
"Granted he wants to wipe Israel off the map, but I’m a Jew and he didn’t kill me when he had the chance,” Wallace continued. “You’ve got to give him credit for that. I found him an interesting man. He has some intriguing ideas.”
One of the “intriguing ideas cited by Wallace was Ahmadinejad’s suggestion that the Jews of Israel could simply be relocated. “He suggested that a new homeland for the Jews could be established in Alaska, which I find fascinating," Wallace said. “He pointed out that if European Jews had been sent to Madagascar like the Nazis requested, they wouldn’t have had to kill them. You’ve got to admit he has a point there. And who are we to say that the stonings and hangings haven’t been a useful weapon in the battle against immorality?”
read more...
http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens1.htm
Wallace has definitely got the heimers...
CBS' Mike B ...
You can easily tell the difference with one element--laughter. When was the last time you saw one of these hit pieces on an evil corporation in which Wallace laughed with the interviewee in anything but obvious irony? Never--you get that greasy "you're so dumb you don't know that I'm tricking you into exposing your true motives" smile of his.
After reading Mike's gushing praise, I want to have Mahmoud's baby!
Did the Jews all over Europe after the mass conversion just get a huge dose of German national pride and decide just for sh**s and giggles to turn over every last possession they or their family ever owned going back hundreds of years including the gold fillings in their teeth to be stored in swiss bank vaults in order to help out the war movement?Is that what he thinks really?
I watched the interview and to Mike Wallace's credit, he did try to make Ahmadi-Nejad answer the tough questions. But President Oblivious rambled on and refused to answer them. He talked about what he wanted to talk about. Wallace was at times even patronizing and humorous about the complete lack of answering from the Prez, but it seemed that this was a foreseen problem with the Prez. As much as I dislike CBS, I can't really fault Mike Wallace for trying to get Ahmaybe-Bemad to answer the questions. And we got a glimpse into the mind of the Prez, which only reinforced what we knew already.
And then, you ask for prayer?!!
Maybe Wallace thought that he was interviewing this guy.
laura ingraham had the tape. when i heard it, i thought, yeah, ALMOST! what does the word ALMOST mean?
ALMOST means except for the niggling little problems of mass murder, torture and warmongering.
ALMOST INDEED.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.