Thursday, September 20, 2007


He'd Never Set Foot Near Ground Zero-Mark Steyn's Take on the Iranian Nutbag

by Mondoreb

Mark Steyn got it exactly right about Ahmadinejad's NYC visit during his weekly interview on the Huge Hewitt show on
MS: I think the correct attitude to these things is a very simple one. Under the agreement by which the United Nations sits in New York City, the United States cannot deny entry to any foreign head of state. That being so, he should land at the airport, he should go directly to the United Nations, and no state or municipal or other officials should offer him these courtesies in any way. This would be a disgusting photo op that he would use to his advantage back home. And the City of New York should not be cooperating with him.
Steyn give Mitt Romney a plug concerning Romney's stand against a previous Iranian President.
MS: That’s right. If he wants to see the results of Islamist terrorism, there are a lot of places he can visit much nearer to home. In fact, Mitt Romney, one of the best things he ever did was to deny the state troopers protection facility to Ahmadinejad’s predecessor when he was invited to speak at Harvard. And Mitt Romney had the right line on this. If Harvard wanted to issue these idiotic invitations, that’s up to them. But the taxpayers of Massachusetts are not going to fund the visit by providing protection for these guys. And in the end, the event was cancelled. And that’s exactly the line that the state of New York should be taking, too.

Ordinary Americans will be shocked to discover there are officials in NYC who see nothing wrong with giving Ahmadinejad a key to the city. It's up to those same ordinary Americans to let New York City know exactly how they feel.

In a world of perfect karma, Ahmadinejad would be captured by American "students" and held hostage for over a year, paraded before TV cameras and threatened almost daily with death.

Other recent Death by 1000 Papercuts' articles:
War with Iran: Iran Wants to Nuke Us
Calling All "Students":Ahmadiniejad to be in US Soon

Mark Steyn on the Corner at NROnline
Conservative Grapevine
Power Line
Small Dead Animals
Snarky Bastards
Politically Uncensored
Kesher Talk
Mark P.
Pajama Pages
Conservative Blogs
Red State Mobile
My Wire
Politcial Blog Hive
Men's New Daily
Thanks to all the above! - Bigger, Better!.
Back to Front Page


  1. There's a solution to all of this:

    1. Throw the U.N. out of this country altogether.

    2. Sell the grounds and building to Donald Trump who can then tear it down and remove the stench, then build a nice revenue producing building on that site.

    Problem solved. No more "diplomats" breaking our laws with impunity. No more massive traffic problems created by those same "diplomats". More revenue stream and property taxes for the City of New York.

    Win-win in my view. Relocate the U.N. to someplace like Albania!

  2. gayle miller ALL of those suggestions are not only great, they are VERY much do-able!

    I particularly liked the first one!
    There will be the usual hand-wringers in the MSM lamenting how "hateful" the country is over this issue. In the words of my dear, long-departed Granny: "Screw 'em!"

  3. In a world of perfect karma Iran would organize a coup against the US's democratically elected leader and replace that leader with a pro-Iranian monarch as the CIA did once in Iran. :-/ But yeah, its better to be ignorant of history as it makes it easier to get worked up into a right righteous latter of rage.

  4. Hey Anonymous, you ignoramus! Do you realize what would happen to you and your liberal friends if that was the case?

    Just another US hating, US citizen. Why don't these morons pick up and and move to socialist utopias like Argentina just to see how long their freedom of expression lasts.


  5. it easier to get worked up into a right righteous latter of rage

    hee hee....

  6. anonymous Ignorant of history? No, I just fail to see the relevance of the CIA event over 50 years old to this particular event of outrage.

    But you did get one thing: people, thankfully, are working themselves "into a righteous latter[sic] of rage."

    Maybe even into a lather, huh?

  7. Is there a comprehensive list of people who shouldn't be allowed to visit ground zero somewhere? I'm just wondering who else would make the list.

  8. Allowing a terrorist to peer into the gaping wound of the WTC is beyone my comprehension. And I am a Canadian living in Canada.

  9. I would be very satisfied, if he was captured, dressed in fishnet stockings and pink cocktail dress with feathers, fed pork chops at gunpoint and released back to the hole he came from after a week in front of a camera.

  10. chenzhenMy oomprehensive list of "people who shouldn't be allowed to view ground zero" would actually consist of two lists: those who came as "private individuals" and those who came as "representitives of countries either officially or unofficially at war with the U.S."

    As a classic liberal, I cannot think of anyone on my first list; there very well may be people on that list, but I cannot think of any.

    My second list however, would not be limited to, but would include Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

    If anyone on the first list acted in a disrespectful way at Ground Zero in the capacity of a private citizen or tourist. That is their right; it is also the right of anyone witnessing such behavior to knock their ass out.

    However, anyone on the 2nd list would be privy to police and, perhaps, Secret Service protection.

    This is not the sum of my objections to Ahmadinejad visiting, but it is as good as any a place to start.

  11. anonymous Well said. I was reading your post to someone and they remarked that it was "moving". I agree wholeheartedly.

  12. anonymousI would be very satisfied, if he was captured, dressed in fishnet stockings and pink cocktail dress with feathers, fed pork chops at gunpoint and released back to the hole he came from after a week in front of a camera.

    And they say there is no creative thinking on rightwing hate sites! If only the Iranian "students" had been so considerate, Jimmy Carter might have had two terms.


Leave your name/nic.
We've changed the comments section to allow non-registered users to comment.
We'll continue like that until it's being abused.
We reserve the right to delete all abusive or otherwise inappropriate comments.