Comments on: A Rare Chat With Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Add a Comment
- To Mr. Wallace
"Well, if an atrocity was committed in Germany or Europe, for that matter, why should the Palestinians answer for this?" Ahmadinejad responded.
You must admit, that is a *** good question, Mr. Wallace, You insisted on badgering the man on the subject of Israel, but when he posed this question in reply to yours, you had no answer, and so quickly changing the subject.
You had a decades old reputation as one of the outstanding TV journalists of the generation after Cronkite, yet you choose now to cash in your chips echoing old, unfounded, ill-mannered and extremely subjective neocon agitprop to a head of state.
I hope you were paid a huge sum of money for your reputation. - Reply to this comment
- Mike Wallace asked some tough questions, some were answered, and some remain to be answered. I noted at the end that the interview took place a year ago. What I don't understand is this: We're one world, every President and leader should be able to approach and discuss issues with others in similar positions. Seems US policy is to offer sanctions and to threaten when we don't get our way. If it was a nuclear power plant for more efficient and clean energy supply to be built in Costa Rica, Argentina or France, it would be okay, but not in Iran. Maybe there is sufficient reason for distrust, but if there have been no diplomatic relations with Iran in 27 years, the US is partly to blame too, aren't they? One world: Nations need to get along, or else what?
- Reply to this comment
- Mike Wallace was very rude to a president. He did not act like he was interviewing a president, instead he cut him off, made rude remarks, and asked meaningless questions.
- Reply to this comment
- Mike Wallace referred to President Bush as %u201Ccommander-in-chief of the free world%u201D.
Actually, no US president is commander-in-chief even of the United States, much less the
%u201Cfree world%u201D. They aren%u2019t even commander-in-chief of the government of the United States.
They are not even commander-in-chief of the executive branch of the U.S. government.
Presidents are commander-in-chief ONLY of the army (according to the constitution), and
by reasonable extension, all U.S. armed forces.
To the extent that a president attempts to exercise the functions of commander-in-chief
of anything more than the armed forces, he or she is acting unconstitutionally and should
be impeached.
I understand that the current administration has been trying to expand the powers of the
presidency, but I would hope that intelligent, well-informed, people like you (Mike Wallace)would not fall for this scam. - Reply to this comment
- Mike Wallace was very rude to a president. He did not act like he was interviewing a president, instead he cut him off, made rude remarks, and asked meaningless questions.
- Reply to this comment
- Mike Wallace was very rude to a president. He did not act like he was interviewing a president, instead he cut him off, made rude remarks, and asked meaningless questions.
- Reply to this comment
- Mike Wallace was very rude to a president. He did not act like he was interviewing a president, instead he cut him off, made rude remarks, and asked meaningless questions.
- Reply to this comment
- I really enjoyed the interview with Pres. Ahmadinejad, however I don't understand in our pusuit for peace with Iran why the interview was more aggresive than normal? Simply put you get more bees with honey, we need answers to those good questions. Now we're just wondering. I am not sure what this interview accomplished.
Thank you
M.Q.Walker - Reply to this comment
- Mike Wallace was very rude to a president. He did not act like he was interviewing a president, instead he cut him off, made rude remarks, and asked meaningless questions.
- Reply to this comment
- I found Wallace's interview with The Presidet of Iran appalling-- particularly the long refuted claim that he said anything about Israel being "wiped off the map". Perhaps he should read the work of the many Farsi experts that have done so.
I find it disgusting that man of his stature and resources would continue to propagate such a lie. I'd bet some cursory research would show this has been reported in our otherwise Rightwing dominated MSM--- which he is now either a proud ally of, or serving as a useful ignorant tool. I'm sure they will be proud in any case, to say --- "well, that Bush AWOL charging network aired what?"
If Mr. Wallace has any integrity at all, he'd turn over the complete and unedited interview (like copies of the original tapes, interpreter included) for scrutiny to anyone interested. The pres's answer to this was unbelievable, given he didn't correct the glaring lie the question was.
If this results in any observable increase in the fear, and support for military action against them, then Mr. Wallace can reconcile the blood he has on his hands.
This is exactly the kind of shoddy and dishonest journalism, in fact and by omission, that took us into Iraq.
That he would use his show, watched by millions, to do this at this time, is far more than coincidental to this viewer, and media watcher.
By all means Mikey--- tell me my words are unreasonable. - Reply to this comment
