...does not rule Iran. I guess he'd be a real trip if he did. But he doesn't.

but to call the guy he loves a "Brazilian house-boy" is too insulting even for me. why? since i called him a faggot jewish lefty, or something equally infuriating and i would have no objection to your saying that in iran, "you and your kind would be hanging from the lampposts". is because people can take insults to themselves better than they can take insults to the people they love (and brazilian house boy, while evocative, is evocative only of the richly sleazy). so don't do it anymore, ok?

And on what basis is one to believe that Iran led by Ahmadinejad wants to militarily invade and then rule over the world (or at least the Middle East)?

To call him "Hitler" is to play right into Bush/Cheney's hand. Do New Yorkers really want to do this?

Repressive, yes, dictatorial, yes, but so are leaders in many many parts of the world...

I don't understand the reaction of NYC people to Ahmadiinejad...how can he be compared to Hitler (even if he denies the Holocaust (or believes it to be exaggerated)?

How many people has he sent to concentration camps? How many concentration camps has he set up (that weren't there before)?

Yes, Glenn's body would be swinging along with his Brazilian house-boys were they apprehended in Iran for that odious aberration for which young men are routinely hanged in Iran.

Glenn's kind of place, I guess, and I wonder when he's going to apply for a visa? But I'd YouTube the latest hanging videos there first.

most were complimentary (as well as the usual, highly intelligent and insightful). however SOMEONE noticed, you, so i still write. it *is* funny. though i won't do this again, that is, go through all the letters writing my impressions as i go. instead i'll just come in at the end, like everyone else does. it's just TOO MUCH to see seven david sugarman posts in a row. i can understand how only the truly and totally blase would read them. hey! if i didn't before, thanks.

Yeah. Those Iranian elections were SOOOO fair. Remember when the Guardian Council disqualified thousands of reform candidates? And remember how Ahmadinejad only garnered 20% of the vote in the first election before the runoff, in which he got 60%? I smell mandate! The Guardian Council effectively dismantled any reform movement through candidate disqualification, so quite a few moderates boycotted the process entirely.

Need I remind everybody here that Ahmadinejad, regardless of his power over the military (and I don't want to go to war with Iran, mind you), is the mouthpiece for a government that:

--executes more children than any other country in the world

you might want to come up with some actual evidence before you yammer on about things. according to amnesty international we (the US)are at the top of the game in executing child offenders.

http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-children-eng

additionally run off elections are arguably more democratic than multi party elections as they narrow the popular vote between the most populist canidates, therefore no one can "spoil" an election by getting a very small percentage of the vote.

You say that moderates boycotted, but with well over 60% of the eligible voters voting, they still beat turnout for most US elections.

As to disqualifying canidates, what about our own system, where the press disqualifies canidates simply by ignoring them. For instance: how many articles do you see about Dodd condemning the Move on vote as compared to hillary the mighty?

Get a grip on reality, there really is only one.

Jiminey, and the moon isn't even full yet. Ease back, Dave. If you had any sympathizers, I'm pretty sure there are now in the seriously worried mode. Then again, they may have just moved on, hence your unheeded ramblings??

it is just as i feared - all that was left when i got to the top, was ME. yuk yuk. yes, Karen M, you can call me a post hogger with justification now. i hope the people i wrote to enjoyed that somebody was reading them. there's nothing to say but ta ta. what a laugh on me! talking to the ocean.

what is she mourning? a boyfriend killed in a war or just her past youth? (do you know?) i like marigolds too, i like their smell when crushed. too bad it kills them, but you can't make an aroma without crushing marigolds. see? i'm like a chameleon, if i hung around you too long i'd get to sound like you. but what's with this pumpkin shit? like that watermelon sugar thing? that sucked too. (i never knew why it was praised so highly - and don't tell me if you know). grinding my way onward, i remain,

or learned to read your piffle. "O, what the defenders of Land were observing when monster face painted whirlybird-choppers, Cobra assault air-gunships, and BOOM!" liked that. (my only fear is, when i finally get to NOW, no one will be here but me - and my innumerable posts)

is that they were there for 2800 years. and 25,000 is not a great number considering that (iran has 65,000,000 people so that makes the jews .03% of the population)

"I am more concerned with tyranny in my own country" and there is a question of *style* - once you start with "of course i don't condone..." no one is going to listen further. in the first of my innumerable posts here, i said something about Passion and Reason, the first owning the world, the latter getting letters to the editor. once you start by seeming reasonable, you lose. the arabs know that and that's why they aren't and try to show that they love death (they might hate jews, they might hate americans, they might love killing them, but unless they are an alien species, they don't love death). and they discovered another thing people here don't seem to realize - if you aren't willing to kill and die, people don't take you seriously. they might allow you to talk in front of a committee, but they won't do what you want. that means change. and change means lose. destruction of *things* has some effect, but only destruction of *lives* has real effect. what, you say, about martin luther king? MLK had an important ally - the north. if he had tried to change the north, he wouldn't have had that ally. you say the black panthers certainly didn't change anything. yes, they didn't - and it hasn't. not for the general run of black americans. (mine, of course are different, they're black *jews*!)