Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Monday, October 24, 2016

Washington (AFP) – U.S. President Barack Obama and Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani spoke by phone on Friday in the historic first direct contact between leaders of their two nations since the Islamic revolution of 1979.

The call, which came after the two leaders failed to have meet at the UN General Assembly in New York, provided dramatic evidence of an unprecedented opening in relations between the Islamic Republic and a foe it has reviled as the “Great Satan.”

“Just now, I spoke on the phone with President Rouhani of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Obama said in a televised statement.

“The two of us discussed our ongoing efforts to reach an agreement over Iran’s nuclear program,” Obama said.

“We’re mindful of all the challenges ahead. The very fact that this was the first communication between an American and Iranian president since 1979 underscores the deep mistrust between our countries, but it also indicates the prospect of moving beyond that difficult history. I do believe that there is a basis for a resolution.”

Obama said he told Rouhani that he believed a “resolution” was possible to the dispute over Iran’s uranium enrichment program, which the West believes is a covert effort to produce nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran denies.

Washington and Israel have both warned of the possibility of military action if diplomacy fails to assuage their concerns over the nuclear program.

The Iranian presidency confirmed the telephone call between Obama and Rouhani.

“The two insisted on political will for quick resolution to the nuclear issue, as well as paving the ground for resolving other issues and cooperation in regional issues,” the presidency said on its website.

A Twitter account run by Rouhani’s office also gave details of the call.

“In phone convo, President Rouhani and President @BarackObama expressed their mutual political will to rapidly solve the nuclear issue,” one tweet said.

Another tweet paraphrasing Rouhani read: “I express my gratitude for your #hospitality and your phone call. Have a good day Mr President.”

Obama meanwhile even apologized for the traffic in New York, according to a Rouhani tweet, in a startling sign of the new tone in relations between the two longtime enemies.

The call took place after pathbreaking bilateral talks Thursday between Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif at the UN, on the sidelines of wider discussions on the nuclear program between Iran and major world powers.

Rouhani earlier continued his charm offensive in New York, a trip which set the next high level talks on the nuclear program next month.

He said in a press conference that Iran would present a plan at the talks in Geneva to resolve concerns over its nuclear program and vowed never to deviate from promises to the West.

“Iran will prepare that plan and will present it in Geneva. We hope it will serve as an even more effective step to settle the nuclear issue,” Rouhani said.

Rouhani said he hoped to resolve the nuclear row in a “short period of time,” a day after his foreign minister said that major powers had set a goal of a deal within one year.

The soft-spoken cleric swept to power in June, succeeding the firebrand Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on promises to ease tensions over Iran’s nuclear program, which has triggered a crippling U.S.-led campaign of sanctions on Iran.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who meets Obama on Monday at the White House, has branded Rouhani a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

Israeli officials frequently cite Rouhani’s past remark that Iran moved ahead with work on a uranium enrichment site in Isfahan while he served as nuclear negotiator a decade ago.

Rouhani rejected the allegations of duplicity, saying he had openly told European officials that Iran would complete the Isfahan facility and had cooperated with the UN atomic agency.

“We have never chosen deceit as a path. We have never chosen secrecy,” Rouhani told the news conference.

AFP Photo/Brendan Smialowski

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2013 The National Memo
  • docb

    This is a wonderful step..The first time in 34 years…let us hope it reaps rewards. Thank you President. Obama and SoS Kerry and ll that have been working for the US and the World instead of against it!

    • CPAinNewYork

      I agree completely. It looks as if we elected the right guy for the job. Can you seriously imagine John McCain doing what Obama’s doing?

  • idamag

    This is great! A civilization can be completely destroyed by perpetual war. And we cannot be completely free of killing innocents when bombs are dropped. Obama has shown wisdom and maturity that seems to be lacking in todays society.

  • whict19

    W­hat Ju­lia respon­ded i a­m sh­ock th­at an­ybody can mak­e ­$­7854 p­er mo­nth ­o­n ­t­he inter­ne­t.. Tips her­e.­ BIG44.­c­o­m

  • itsfun

    I wonder how many times he apologized for the evil United States of America and how much taxpayer money he promised them? Is it possible to bow down on the phone?

    • idamag

      If you are so bent on war, put your money where your mouth is and enlist or join the mercenaries that are fighting in the Mideast. Don’t be in such a hurry to send other people’s children to die, be maimed or suffer PTSD. A Chinese proverb says,”The man is brave while he is still a mile away from the tiger.” Don’t advocate war unless you are willing to go to the front line.

      • itsfun

        nobody wants war. already did my time been on the front lines sir or I guess I should say been up and close on the river. How about you? Probably one of the protesters living on ashbury.

        • CPAinNewYork

          Unfortunately, some people DO want war, e.g. John McCain and Benjamin Netanyahu.

          • itsfun

            There is nothing good or fun about way. John McCain needs to retire immediately. You would think that a former prisoner of way would be against all wars.

            I just don’t trust anybody from Iran. When the goal is to kill all infidels, I can’t trust them.

          • CPAinNewYork

            I don’t trust any Muslim and I think that Congress needs to pass a law outlawing the Muslim religion in America, just as it outlawed the Communist Party in 1954.

            The Muslim religion is a clear and present danger to America’s citizens and is actively seeking to overthrow the United States government by violent means.

          • ralphkr

            Actually, the thing that shut down the Communist Party in the US was not any law but when the FBI stopped paying the dues for all their people who had joined the Communist Party in order to spy on the Commies. In fell swoop the Commies lost over half their membership and went bankrupt.

          • CPAinNewYork

            You are truly an ignorant ass.

          • ralphkr

            And yet, CPA, I evidently score at least 60 points higher than you on IQ and knowledge. I have known more than one person who was a FBI agent and a member of the Communist Party and each the told me that is was really strange when they went to the meetings and look around to realize the majority of people at the meeting were either agents or paid informants of the FBI. When the FBI stopped paying the dues for their agents and informants the Communist Party was suddenly bankrupt.

        • RobertCHastings

          Your service is irrelevant if all it has taught you is that the only good is war.

          • itsfun

            Who put you in charge of what is and what is not relevant?

          • RobertCHastings

            Truth hurts, doesn’t it? I am sure you are one of those fast boaters who decried Kerry’s run for the presidency,but he, too, did his time on the river, and earned his right to protest his government’s actions. If all you have learned from your service, for which I humbly and gratefully thank you, is that you are the only one with a say in the issue simply because you have served, then, once again, your service is irrelevant.

          • itsfun

            Once again: Who are you to decide what is relevant and what is not? I have nothing against John Kerry. A big reason I read the National Memo and other such sites is to see different opinions and why people have certain opinions on different issues. The only way to make educated decisions is know both sides of an issue. I have no idea why you would think I am the only one to have a “say” as you put it on a issue. Actually none of us common people have a “say” as to what is going on in this country. Our politicians couldn’t care less about what we think and prove it every day. They just do what the party leaders tell them to do and get rich and powerful.

          • Independent1

            You’re comment about politicians (in general reference) couldn’t care less about what we think, is a moronic generality (typically spewed by right-wing extremists). I’ll guarantee you that there are many representatives and senators in Congress who are very conscientious and care a great deal about what their constituents think and need!! I can assure you that all three of the legislators that represent my state, Maine, care a great deal about what I think; and do a great job in representing Maine and its residents.

            It is unfortunate, however, that a number of key legislators (especially those in the GOP today) have become more interested in fulfilling their own ambitions than doing what’s right for their constituents; and to order fulfill those ambitions have pirated the Republican party and even Congress itself.

          • itsfun

            You know how us morons are. We see people calling their selves independents then these independents show their true feeling of liberalism. And then us morons get tired of hearing their crap of being holier than thou. Why do you hide behind the independent label when you are clearly a liberal? Next you will be telling me how the obamacaretax is really a conservative plan and a duplicate of Romneycare. Funny how not 1 Republican voted for this conservative plan. Are the libs so sure the obamacaretax will fail, they are already looking for someone to blame.

          • Independent1

            I guess you don’t understand the term INDEPENDENT. An Independent can be a liberal when he/she thinks that’s the mode needed to get done what’s really needed for the country to get going again; while at other times, an Independent can support a conseravative agenda (a true conservative agenda, not today’s fake GOP conservativee agenda). But, you’re right to think that at the moment I’m pushing a liberal agenda, I cannot align myself with a self-centered, hypocrital, bigoted party that is trying to destroy America. And I’m not alone as an Independent – much of the rhetoric these days from the Senate’s two Independent Senators – Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Angus King of Maine – is every bit as critical of the GOP as I am.

            PS: Having placed my first vote in a presidential election for Eisenhower, and then having voted later for Nixon (1st term), then Ford and Bush Sr. I may have voted more times for a Republican presidential candidate than you have (I actually have several appreciation medals from the Bush Sr. campaign for all the support I gave him).

          • Independent1

            Just in case you’re looking for why an Independent may be acting like a liberal – take a look at these absolutely horrendous statistics that show just how badly the GOP is destroying many of America’s state’s that they’ve misguidedly been given the right to govern:

            I- Why is it that if the GOP run states are supposed to be run so well, that more than 75% of food stamp recipients live in GOP run states? (6 of the top 10 food stamp using states are GOP run states and beyond that the greatest food stamp using states are the sparsely populated red states.) 456 counties in America use more than 90% of all food stamps and of those counties, 421 went for Romney in the
            2012 election.

            – Why is it that 21 of the 23 states that have more than 15% of their population struggling with incomes below the poverty level that ALL OF THEM ARE RUN BY THE GOP? While in contrast for 2013, the 8 states with the highest average incomes, including the 3 with the highest minimum wage standard, are all Blue States.

            – Why is it that 12 of the 15 states with the highest rates of homicide are also run by the GOP? With Louisiana
            being by far the murder capital of America with Mississippi #2??.

            – Why is it that South Carolina, Tennessee, Nevada, Louisiana and Florida – all GOP run states lead the nation in violent crime??

            – Why is it that of the 25 states in the nation with the highest highway fatality rates – ARE ALL RUN BY THE GOP??

            – Why is it that of the 15 states that have the highest infant mortality rates in the nation ALL OF THEM ARE RUN BY THE

            – Why is it that of the 15 states with the lowest life expectancy in the U.S. ALL OF THEM ARE RUN BY THE GOP??
            And there’s a fairly large disparity between living to 75 in Miss., W. Va., Ala. LA. and other red states and living to 81 or close to it in N.Y., Mass., Calif., CT, Minn. and Hawaii!!

            – Why is it that all 20 of the states with the highest firearms mortality rates ARE ALL RUN BY THE GOP?? And not only
            that, but all 20 of the states with the highest gun ownership are also GOP RUN STATES?? Which shows that despite the NRA’s lies, very few of homicides are justifiable as self-defense (less than 3% out of 11,000/yr)??

            – Why is it that the red state which most Republicans probably look to as a shining light for the GOP, Texas, which is the second largest economy in America behind California, is nothing more than the cesspool of America?? – it ranks in the bottom 5 in almost EVERY SUBJECTIVE MEASURE when compared to other American states! Even though the GOP has had well over 15 years to turn it into something other than a job creation machine that lures unsuspecting job applicants to the WORST STATE IN AMERICA!!!!!

            – And why is it, if GOP governance is so great, that only 3 of the 17 states that get back less tax dollars in federal aid than they send to Washington in tax revenues, are GOP run states (only 3 of 17)?? While all 10 of the states that get the least
            federal aid for the taxes they pay ARE BLUE STATES????

          • itsfun

            Why is Detroit bankrupt, Cincinnati going bankrupt, could it be because of 50 years of Democratic control. Your stats don’t show who put these states in trouble. Are you saying all these states have had Republican governors, and Republican controlled House and Senates? Your stats mean absolutely nothing.

          • itsfun

            Some of the wonderful benefits of the obamacaretax.

            President Barack Obama famously promised, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” He later got even more specific.

            “If you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already
            have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the
            VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change
            the coverage or the doctor you have,” Obama said.

            But as Obamacare’s rollout approaches, we have learned this is not true. Here are the ten states where consumers may like their health care plans, but they won’t be able to keep them.

            1) California: 58,000
            will lose their plans under Obamacare. The first bomb dropped in
            California with a mass exodus from the most populated state’s Obamacare
            exchange. Aetna, the country’s largest insurer, left first in July and
            was closely followed by UnitedHealth. Anthem Blue Cross pulled out of California’s Obamacare exchange for small businesses as well.

            Fifty-four percent of Californians expect to lose their coverage, according to an August poll.

            2) Missouri: Patients of the state’s largest hospital system — which spans 13 hospitals including the St. Louis Children’s Hospital — will not be covered
            by the largest insurer on Obamacare exchanges, Anthem BlueCross
            BlueShield. Anthem covers 79,000 patients in Missouri who may seek
            subsidies on Obamacare exchanges, but won’t be able to see any doctors
            in the BJC HealthCare system.

            3) Connecticut: Aetna, the third largest insurer in the nation, won’t offer insurance on the Obamacare exchange in its own home
            state, where it was founded in 1850. The reason? “We believe the
            modification to the rates filed by Aetna will not allow us to collect
            enough premiums to cover the cost of the plans and meet the service
            expectations of our customers,” said Aetna spokesman Susan Millerick.

            4) Maryland: 13,000 individuals covered by Aetna and its recently-purchased Coventry Health
            Care won’t be able to keep their insurance plans if they want Obamacare
            subsidies on the exchanges. Aetna and Coventry canceled plans to offer
            insurance in the exchange when state officials wouldn’t allow them to
            charge premiums high enough to cover costs.

            5) South Carolina: 28,000 people
            were insured by Medical Mutual of Ohio, SC’s second-largest insurance
            company, until it decided to leave the state entirely in July due to
            Obamacare’s “vast and quite complex” new regulations. Company spokesman
            Ed Byers said Medical Mutual’s patients would be switched over to United
            Healthcare plans instead.

            6) New York: Aetna pulled out
            of New York’s exchange in late August in an effort to keep their plans
            “financially viable,” said Aetna spokeswoman Cynthia Michener.

            7) New Jersey: 1.1 million Aetna customers are at risk in New Jersey,
            where the leading insurer also won’t be a part of the exchange. Just
            2,600 patients purchase individual plans with the company, but any
            looking to take advantage of subsidies on the exchange for unaffordable
            employer-based insurance won’t be able to do with Aetna.

            8) Iowa: Wellmark Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Iowa’s largest health insurer, decided not to offer plans in the Obamacare exchange. It sells 86 percent of Iowa’s individual health insurance plans.

            9) Wisconsin: Two of the three largest insurers in the state won’t offer plans
            on the exchange. United Healthcare and Humana patients will have to get
            a new health insurer to buy insurance on Obamacare exchanges.

            10) Georgia: Just five insurers are participating in Georgia’s Obamacare exchange. Medical Mutual of Ohio left Georgia and Indiana as well as South Carolina, due to Obamacare regulations. Aetna, along with Coventry, also decided against participating in the George health exchange.

            Written by Sarah Hurtubise

          • awakenaustin

            Sarah Hurtubise? Really? A source equivalent to offering FOX News as your reliable source. A writer for the Daily Caller. At best you have offered a secondary source. An opinion piece by a writer who works for a very conservative e-mag. It would be like me offering one of the writer’s for National Memo as reference source. I am sure you would accept that as reliable.

            So her article and your complaint seems to be, that after trying to make this as profitable as it could be for insurance companies, it just isn’t profitable enough to suit them and they are threatening to take their ball and go home. Essentially holding their insured hostage. Most of your supposed problems are predictions about the future and not outcomes which have occurred. I understand that for you a prediction, whether accurate or not, which fits your preexisting bias is has the same status as a known fact.

            There is a reason why you can’t go to the Congressional Budget Office and other independent reliable sources for your claims. I will leave you to guess the reason.

          • itsfun

            You must be another expert that has decided you have the power to decide who is and who is not reliable. People like you are going to believe whatever you want to and tell everyone that doesn’t agree they don’t matter or are unreliable or not credible or some other horse crap thing.

          • awakenaustin

            Instead of defending the source you launch some comical attack on me, hoping others will not realize you have not tried to rebut her obvious lack of credibility on the issue. She is a secondary source at best. She is predicting the future.

            People who might expect to lose their coverage do so because the fear-mongers in your party are at work distorting and lying about the Affordable Care Act. Instead of realistic criticism of parts of the program with an eye to improving it or moving us to a place where nearly all or all Americans healthcare needs are addressed, you offer us “death panels” and “government bureaucrats between you and your doctor.” Both of which on their face are simply outrageous lies. (Insurance companies bureaucrats have been able to maintain their position squarely between me and my doctor.) Based on your willingness to push forward those outright lies, I am supposed to trust or recommend your “well, she might be telling the truth this time” song and dance?

            Yes, I can make decisions on who is reliable based on who writes the checks. Neither you nor she are reliable sources of information on this topic and that is a fact.

            As far as I can tell this is the deal. The President could break wind in public and comment on how badly it smelled and you and your friends on the right would feel compelled to write articles on how wrong he was and that it actually smelled good.
            (It would be expert “who,” not “that.”)

          • itsfun

            She is as reliable a source as you are. You talk about outright lies. What about the lies You will be able to keep your current plan. What about the lies You will be able to keep your doctor. Want some more, how about giving 5 different time frames on Benghazi. I don’t see you giving any proof of any lies, you just say outright lies prove it.

          • awakenaustin

            Really? Given your opinion of me that makes her a pretty unreliable source. Or, maybe given your view I am a very reliable source. You are clearly as deluded about the Affordable Care Act as you are about Benghazi. There isn’t any there, there in either case.
            If you are so sure of what is down the road, why don’t you just lean back in your chair and wait for the disaster and the disillusion to strike. Then, you will be able to crow all about how right you were and how the rest of us poor fools couldn’t extract our heads from our bottoms. I am willing to wager,however, if it turns out you are wrong, you won’t be mannin’ up and admitting it.

          • RobertCHastings

            Sounds like you are, basically, just seeking to muddy the waters, so to speak. Throw something out there and see what it attracts.

            ALL things we do in life are for a reason. We either learn or we teach by what we do and experience. Such things as combat experiences SHOULD teach us some things which we could have learned in no other manner. If all you have learned from your combat experience is that there is good in war (or even necessary evil), then do you feel you have learned the “right” lessons? Have you applied that knowledge to other experiences (carryover) in ways that are relevant?

          • itsfun

            You are so typical of a leftist. You only read what you want, then spin it anyway you want. I have said over and over and over, war is terrible. Do you think its fun to get shot at? Do you think it is fun to see your friends shot at and hit? You have no idea what you are talking about. I still wonder who or what gives you the right to decide what is relevant?

          • RobertCHastings

            Are you upset about being called irrelevant? Let me phrase it differently so you don’t feel offended by all of us on the National Memo. To me, personally, your opinions about war are irrelevant. Is that more palatable?
            You insult the president who is, by the way, your commander in chief,because he is not yet at war with Syria, or Iran, or whoever it is you think he should be going after. Yet you would rail against him for pursuing such a course without Congressional approval or UN backing. Why don’t you cry to your conservative congressmen who can’t make up their own minds about whether to hate Muslims or Obama.

          • itsfun

            What is your problem? I don’t want war with Syria, Iran or any country. I want us out of those places. You just keep reading what you want into my comments. No, I am not offended by the folks on the National Memo. Why should I be? Whether you or anybody else likes it or not, freedom of speech is a good thing, and I like to see all sides of issues. What can be gained or accomplished by only reading or talking with people that agree with you? Whether you think I am relevant or not, makes no difference to me. When you start buying my food or clothes or housing or car then I will consider what you think is relevant. Until then, I couldn’t care less.

          • RobertCHastings

            What can be gained or accomplished by insulting or belittling those with whom you disagree, which is what you have been doing. If you want honest discussion, at least honor valid dissent.

          • itsfun

            Didn’t I say I have no problems with the folks on the National Memo? If you think me saying I don’t care if you think I am relevant is belittling or insulting to you, where does that put you after calling me irrelevant?

          • RobertCHastings

            You sure must have had a problem with semantics and syntax.

          • itsfun

            Ohhh, that really hurts. gee whiz, how much meaner can you gt?

          • CPAinNewYork

            This is an open forum. Anyone is entitled to say what they want.

          • itsfun

            I agree.

    • Allan Richardson

      There is one thing the United States did to Iran that DESERVES an apology, and a nation that is HONORABLE ought to apologize for, and in fact ought not to have done. In 1953 the Iranian Parliament, elected by the Iranian people, wanted to charge British Petroleum more than they had been paying when Iran was part of the British “Protectorate” that followed World War I. The British called President Eisenhower, who sent Kermit Roosevelt (yes, FDR’s nephew) and his CIA assets to overthrow the Iranian government (remember, this is when we were condemning the Soviet Union for replacing democratically elected governments in what became the Warsaw pact with Soviet puppet rulers, and we were the “good guys” because we didn’t do that). The CIA installed the Shah, who had NOT been elected by the people of Iran, and propped up his regime for 26 years, helping him train his SAVAK secret police and keep them up to date with the latest torture methods.

      After learning of this “unsung” history of our nation (and not the only time; the coup in South Vietnam during the Vietnam war; the assassination of Chile’s elected president, Salvador Allende, and replacement by a military coup led by the dictator, General Augusto Pinochet; the attempt to overthrow the elected president of Nicaragua with the illegally funded Contras, for a few examples), would our Jingoists STILL insist that “America doesn’t apologize?” As I said, an HONORABLE person, corporation, church, or nation will apologize for things they did wrong and attempt to make amends.

  • FT66

    Well done Mr. President. You are working on the Nobel Peace Prize you got in advance. No one can solve anything if they do not talk at all. Good to have leaders like you, who are well educated and understand that any discussion good or bad will take someone, somewhere.

    • CPAinNewYork

      Winston Churchill put it well when he said “Jaw, jaw,jaw is better than war, war, war.”

  • howa4x

    Iran is truly a case of the ugly American. We were the ones acting on behalf of the ethnocentric British in 1953, that staged a coup through our CIA that over turned a freely elected president because he wanted to nationalize what would later become BP to get a better deal for his country. We used the CIA to over turn Central and South American elections all through the 50,60, 70, and 80s all to get better deals for our corporations. In each case we installed despots that terrorized their populations. Back home we called these freely elected governments Marxists, and socialist to justify our actions. In Iran we installed The Pahlavi family and placed them on the throne to govern. The Iranian revolution that threw him our was born out of rage toward us. But as we just witnessed in Egypt the clerics were in a better position to tap into the volcanic energy unleashed. The Mullahs were hailed as a return to morality. After that instead of seeing this as a foreign policy blunder by us, we still harbored malice and took vengeful acts against Iran. Does Cuba ring a bell here? We gave Saddam the chemical weapons used in the war between Iraq/Iran. This is why Bush thought he still had them.( They were probably moved to Syria) It is us that owes Iran an apology. We need to stop demonizing them, and begin treating them as sovereign nation and not a government from Hell. Also we need the CIA to stop working just on behalf of our corporations and more in the interests of our country. This is why there is so much anti Americanism in the world today.

    • CPAinNewYork

      Excellent posting.

      • howa4x


  • idamag

    The post from Julia about how much you can make at home is a scam. ignore it and let The National Memo know.

    • RobertCHastings

      I have heard it is Google doing it.

  • Dominick Vila

    President Obama’s foreign policy has been a resounding success. It deserves our gratitude and support, which is precisely why the GOP uses every excuse in the book to undermine it and denigrate its successes…and it was all achieved without invading and destroying countries that were not a threat to us or to our interests.

    • CPAinNewYork

      Hopefully, Netanyahu reads this website.

  • First the President prevented the US (and Europe) from committing to another war in the mid-east [Syria] & now he is opening the doors between the US & Iran in a very similar fashion to what Dick (before he dicks you) Nixon pulled off with China.
    AND millions of the nations needy will now have minimum levels of healthcare insurance, quite a feat I’d say.
    AND getting US out of wars in the mid-east, don’t forget that.
    Iran is an awesome place with awesome people whose nation was taken over by crazy people. Not unlike the eight years of DWI Bush who really mucked it up. Now we both have our own problems to unwind.

    • CPAinNewYork

      Your alias shows that you are a low class slob.

      • iamproteus

        Really! Was that comment helpful in any way whatsoever? If so. please enlighten me ’cause I completely missed it! What if people started referring to you as “ZPAIN in New York”?

        • CPAinNewYork

          You really don’t know what “I Zheet M’Drawz” means? It means he, she or it crapped its pants.

          That’s what I meant by “low class slob.”

          • iamproteus

            I am perfectly aware of what his (or her, as the case may be) alias means. But that has nothing to do with my comment. I was referring to the fact that your comment was totally unrelated to the subject and was obviously intended to be an insult rather than a rational response. A person’s choice of a screen name does not necessarily reflect on who or what they are and then again, some do. For example, I SUSPECT that your choice indicates that you are a “CPA in New York”. I further SUSPECT that “I Zheet M’Drawz” was chosen for comedic effect, not to proclaim to the world that the individual had, in fact, crapped his/her pants.To each, their own. I leave it to you to draw whatever conclusion you please as to the reason for my chosen screen name. I sincerely wish you and yours a very nice day!

          • CPAinNewYork

            I Zheet M’Drawz isn’t comedic. It’s low and scatological. It’s an insult to anyone who reads his, her or its posting.

          • iamproteus

            OK, CP. We’ve both wasted enough time on this. What’s in a name? “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” ****grin****

            Once again, I sincerely wish you and yours a very nice day!

      • Yup! Attack the messenger not the message.

  • The Iran population was/is very unhappy on this news Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani on Friday declared his first visit to the United States a success — and it was hard to argue with that assessment, if the measure was the number of important world leaders he met, the speeches he gave and the respectful audience he was given at and on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly. But for Tehran, the measure of success of Rouhani’s outreach will be whether Iran achieves relief from punishing sanctions — and that will depend on the outcome of the tough, detailed bargaining on its nuclear program that gets under way in Geneva next month.

    Still, it’s not hard to see why the Iranian president was pleased with his week’s work.

    “We sought to reconstruct Iran’s regional and global standing,” Rouhani told a packed New York press conference on Friday. “I believe that our success was greater than our expectations.” I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA

    • RobertCHastings

      Rouhani claimed the failure to meet face-to-face with Obama was “complicated”. It is complicated by the fact that, like Ahmadinejad, he is but a figurehead, under the thumb of the ayatollahs and the Red Guard. While he was ELECTED, we must remember that so was Hitler, although I sincerely believe Rouhani is neither like his predecessor OR Hitler. His being greeted by protestors indicates the political climate in Iran, where a reformer cannot act upon his agenda even if he is elected on it. (hm, sounds a little familiar)

    • Allan Richardson

      The news story I read said that on his return, there were very large crowds cheering him, vs about 100 screaming “Death to America” and throwing eggs, rocks and shoes at his car. One extremist imam can get 100 people in is congregation enraged with no trouble, as easily as the “pastor” of the Westboro Baptist Church in this country. And while the WBC in our country has the FREEDOM to act this crazy, the “DTA crowd” has a faction in its government that actually encourages and funds this activity (probably paid for the busfare, signs, eggs, etc.). Given their government’s former behavior, the wonder is that a few thousand felt SAFE in cheering their president on his return. And that is a GOOD sign, albeit only a small one for now.

  • Can you buy happiness love from the shops Bazaars? NO? YES? I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA

  • Nairobi has fought for the independence and the British Government tried to pay the compensations , very small but these proud folks refused these as the amount was not the DREAM but it was an insult The Kenya not Nairobi has many tribes each trying to compare the living with the other tribe hence you see the extimity in the cash flow and this has been since the independence . The dream theory was not there then not now . In ernest all are in the daiiy bread earning for themselves more in the sub Sahara sates as there is huge corruption and you have to live fro self and the officers who take bribes I thank you Firozali A.Mulla DBA