Hillary Blasts Ahmadinejad Visit
Hillary is endeavoring to make it very clear today that she disapproves of Ahmadinejad's visit to New York. She's just released a statement saying that she's "proud" to join the thousands who gathered in New York today to decry "the hateful and inciteful actions" of the Iranian President.
In it, she reiterated her condemnation of Ahmadinejad's desire to visit Ground Zero and blasted Iran for a whole host of oft-cited reasons. Full statement after the jump.
“As thousands gather today in New York to decry the hateful and inciteful actions of the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, I am proud to join them by adding my voice to their efforts. As we know too well, the President of Iran has made a series of incendiary, outrageous comments, questioning the Holocaust and calling for Israel to be wiped off the map. Israel's right to exist – and exist in safety – must never be put in question. To deny the Holocaust places the President of Iran in company with the most despicable bigots and historical revisionists. These hateful statements are beyond the pale of international discourse and acceptability."His request to visit to Ground Zero, the site of the deadliest terrorist attack on American soil in our nation's history — a request that was properly denied —was unacceptable as Iran continues to refuse to renounce and end its support of terrorism. President Ahmadinejad's outrageous comments and support for terrorism is even more disturbing when viewed in the context of the regime's quest to acquire nuclear weapons; his pro- anti-American, anti-Israeli rhetoric underscores the seriousness of the threat. United States policy in this regard must be clear and unequivocal. We cannot and must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons.
"We can and we must continue to speak up. I commend all of those raising their voices to raise awareness of the Iranian regime's policies and statements during President Ahmadinejad's visit. We must continue to work together to put pressure on Iran until it ends its anti-American and anti-Semitic policies of hate, ends its nuclear weapons program, renounces sponsorship of terrorism, supports Middle East peace, and plays a constructive role in stabilizing Iraq.”
Comments (33)
john mccutchen wrote on September 24, 2007 3:53 PM:How canned, how tiresomely predictable she is.
Obama: Would Meet Iranian as President
“I’m not afraid of losing the PR war to dictators,.I’m not going to hide behind a bunch of rhetoric. I don’t want a continuation with Bush-Cheney. I don’t want Bush-Cheney light. I want a fundamental change.
MarkL wrote on September 24, 2007 3:59 PM:Well, I'm about to give up my support for Hillary. This is just warmongering, given the current circumstances. Not only that, she's repeating a bald-faced lie---about A. wanting to "wipe Israel off the map"---that she undoubtedly knows is false.
Boo Hillary.
I hope Dodd has something sensible to say.
agreed, this is pretty eyebrow-raising
Jeremy wrote on September 24, 2007 4:06 PM:She must be afraid of being used for propaganda.
Michael Caine wrote on September 24, 2007 4:07 PM:Hillary and all should read Scott Adams (aka Dilbert's creator) statement on Ahmadinejad.
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/09/a-feeling-im-be.html
Hillary seems be joining Romney and Guilliani in trying to posture that there is strength in demonizing people you disagree with.
lmichael wrote on September 24, 2007 4:09 PM: I guess when Nov. 2008 comes around,
I'll have to hold my nose and vote for
Hillary, hoping for something better than
the Republicans have to offer, but not expecting much more than a continuation of Bush I...
She's damned no matter what she does in this situation. Republicans can now use her statements to support the drumbeat to conduct airstrikes against Iran (or, at the very least, to talk about doing so). If she publishes anything less than condemnation, she'll get eaten alive by the noise machines masquerading as news outlets.
Jan wrote on September 24, 2007 4:21 PM:I'm a Clinton supporter, but I don't support this. I'm very disappointed in this kind of crap. It's a sad day when our leaders encourage us to put our fingers in our ears and go, "lalalalalala."
I'm even disappointed in the President -- sort of rude to invite the guy and then diss him. (However, I still think Columbia has the best School of Journalism in the world.)
If only she was so passionate about condemning *our* President...
wes2 wrote on September 24, 2007 4:42 PM:...and exactly how are these pander-fest attacks going to goad Iran to play a "constructive role" in cleaning up our mess in Iraq? Do tell, Hill...
You'd think that heading down a trail blazed by none other than the fatuous Mittster would give Hillary (AKA Karl Marx) pause, but no.
NCSteve wrote on September 24, 2007 4:49 PM:Helloooo? All you ther Hillary supporters?
Waiting for your stiring defense of her latest Profile in Triangulation.
Any time now . . .
[sound of crickets chirping . . .]
dajafi wrote on September 24, 2007 4:54 PM:I can't abide Hillary Clinton, and well might not vote for her in the general election (I live in NY; my vote won't matter unless, maybe, it's her vs. Rudy, in which case I would vote for Clinton).
But she's almost completely right in this instance. The visit should be condemned, and Columbia should be criticized for giving this vile person a respectable platform from which to spew his garbage.
Let him exercise his free speech rights at the UN, as he will, appropriately, tomorrow.
DaveW wrote on September 24, 2007 5:01 PM:Obama 1, Hillary less than zero. Are we really doomed to more years of this kind of childish pandering? Haven't we had enough?
I think personally think Ahmadinejad is a complete asshole. But Hillary and all the other cheerleaders are sacrificing international leadership for cheap domestic politics.
Maybe somebody can tell me what the rahrah boys think Ahmadinejad is going to do to the memorial? How would it have helped his propaganda war to be seen paying his respects? Are Bush and Hillary afraid Americans will suddenly see him as our friend? Seems to me the video of him pretending to mourn for the Sept 11 victims would sow exactly the kind of confusion among his followers that will weaken his appeal in the ME. But Bush and Hillary can't let that happen.
Anonymous wrote on September 24, 2007 5:06 PM:Juan Cole
Turning Ahmadinejad into public enemy No. 1
Demonizing the Iranian president and making his visit to New York seem controversial are all part of the neoconservative push for yet another war.
And Hillary plays right along. Learn from her experience folks. She co-sponsored the Iraq Debacle for four years. That is before her experience told her she couldn't win the nomination without a "do-over"
Michael Caine wrote on September 24, 2007 5:26 PM:BTW, why haven't you ran Obama's statement about the Iranian President's visit?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070924/ap_on_el_pr/candidates_ahmadinejad
I would be suprised if Edwards didn't also have a statement. Where are those, so that we can compare and contrast?
Jan wrote on September 24, 2007 5:30 PM:NCSteve wrote on September 24, 2007 4:49 PM: Helloooo? All you ther Hillary supporters? Waiting for your stiring defense of her latest Profile in Triangulation. Any time now . . .
[sound of crickets chirping . . .]
NCSteve -- Since no Clinton supporters are defending it, what are you going to whine about next?
Maybe you can't read:
Jan wrote on September 24, 2007 4:21 PM:
I'm a Clinton supporter, but I don't support this.
Hillary's posturing against Ahmadinejad seems a bit immoderate, considering how vaguely moderate she's attempted to appear in recent months on other issues, as if above the fray. That statement could have come right out of Bush's mouth-- matter of fact it reminds me a bit of Bush's Axis of Evil stand. Great for establishing new relations if she becomes President.
Yep, time for a change.
phil james wrote on September 24, 2007 5:34 PM:What does Hillary's team of 147 crack triangulators do? Do they have a hotel full of focus groups working 24/7 and then run stochastic computer simulations of every possible response to every high profile issue every day based on the 95 percent distribution of focus group responses? Is she a candidate or a huge calculating think-tank? To date I can't figure out what in the hell she actually believes.
chigger wrote on September 24, 2007 5:39 PM:phil james said:
"To date I can't figure out what in the hell she actually believes."
The more I think about Hillary's statement, the more I wonder who the heck her targetted audience is supposed to be.
If this transcript is correct, my favorite line has to be " his pro-anti-American..." WTF??!?!
phil james wrote on September 24, 2007 6:10 PM:Correct me if I am reading her comments wrong, but it seems to me that she is presenting the best case for proceeding immediately to go to war with Iran. It's inflammatory as hell and very persuasive. But is that what she really wants? Why not just have a photo-op with her hand-holding with Dick Cheney while we're at it? Or is she just trying get a few more independent voters to marvel at how tough she is?
NCSteve wrote on September 24, 2007 6:15 PM:Jan,
Well, I did say "ther," which is, of course, Typing Deficient for "other." I appreciate your integrity.
But if you insist on an actual whine, I really miss the nested comments from the old commenting system. And Dunkin Donuts crullers.
dcshungu wrote on September 24, 2007 6:21 PM:I am not sure exactly what many are taking issue with in Clinton's statement. If you think that was bad, check out what Lee Bollinger, president of Columbia University, said to Iranian dictator here.
dcshungu wrote on September 24, 2007 6:36 PM:Oh my! Some are even criticizing Columbia University for inviting Ahmadinejad to speak there...
How does the saying go again? "I disagree with everything that you stand for but I will to fight to the death to protect your right to say it" or something like that...
The not-so-secret of her success wrote on September 24, 2007 7:10 PM:Oh my! Some are even criticizing Columbia University for inviting Ahmadinejad to speak there
Therein the secret of her success, aping Bush, Cheney, Rove et al. by pandering to the lowest common denominators of America's new & revised post-9/11 "character."
LCDs: Jingoism. Goosestepping. Flag-waving. Unaccountability. Intractability. Torture. Hypocrisy. Lawlessness. Selfishness. Indifference. Apathy. Racism. Schadenfreude. Xenophobia. More transparent and just as germane -- AIPAC/Israel/Jewish solicitude at the expense of American credibility, influence and legitimacy to "broker" current/future conflicts, crises and/or ensure America's long term security interests.
Exploiting fear, cowardice & ignorance the current administration gained substantial political capital but in so doing, created the dystopic, dysfunctional bully most perceive as America today.
It's Clinton's job to stay the course/coarse.
You're doing a fine job Hilly. Mission accomplished.
donna wrote on September 24, 2007 8:10 PM:http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/09/22/telecom_immunity/print.html
Former Clinton officials lobby for amnesty for FISA lawbreaking
Read this link. Here's something we should be addressing right now if we aren't too late already!
Defend this Hillary supporters -- I dare you!
markg8 wrote on September 24, 2007 8:16 PM:I guess she's going for Michelle Malkin's vote with this press release. Pathetic.
You couple that with her declaration that Jerusalem
should never be divided and the US should move it's embassy from Tel Aviv there, a position that neither her husband or even George Bush has
supported and it's obvious she's gone off the deep end. What is wrong with her?
Here we go again, another Bush being a bully and in hospitable.
Sure the guy is probably and A--, but all she did was give him ammunition to take home...."See, I told you, they HATE you - we must fight back".
Where is this promise of TALKING to our enemies (with restrictions of course - as she put it)?
No, instead she latches out like a tiger.
Another Bush/Cheney we DO NOT NEED.
della Rovere wrote on September 24, 2007 10:51 PM:with Clinton it's always one step forward by at least two backwards. sum-total = one step back.
della Rovere wrote on September 24, 2007 10:53 PM:CT Voter wrote on September 24, 2007 4:21 PM:
She's damned no matter what she does in this situation. Republicans can now use her statements to support the drumbeat to conduct airstrikes against Iran (or, at the very least, to talk about doing so). If she publishes anything less than condemnation, she'll get eaten alive by the noise machines masquerading as news outlets.
maybe, maybe, the import of no attacks on Iran might lead her, any halfway decent leader, to cool the war-drum language. Not Hillary.
phil james wrote on September 24, 2007 11:21 PM:She reminds me of the character George Costanza on Seinfeld who one day realizes that everything he does is wrong and that's why he's a loser and so he begins doing the opposite of what he believes he would normally do and finds that he wins every time even though its the anti-him that's winning. So was this litle speech given by Hillary or by the anti-Hillary?
john mccutchen wrote on September 25, 2007 8:00 AM:You cain't always get what you want...
This is getting scary. I find myself agreeing with Pat Buchanan almost all the time. I've said this for years now
Of course, I just didn't come up with it out of thin air. Readily available crackpots bring the point home oh so...well - so "pointedly"
Infantile Nation
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Does this generation possess the gravitas to lead the world?
Considering the hysteria that greeted the request of Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to lay a wreath at Ground Zero, the answer is no.
Hillary bellowed and blustered - how predictable. But Obama he promised to tell you what you need not what you want to hear. He reiterated his commitment to meet with Ahmadinejad as President
Watching Hillary on Meet The Press and realizing that she never plans to end the Iraq occupation and then reading her speech on Ahmadinejad I am more convinced than ever that Hillary is not going to be change, but be more of the same. I think Obama had it right when he called Hillary Bush lite. I am an Edwards supporter and I think he would be 1000 times better than Hillary. JRE has never taken lobbyist money ever.
