Inside the Middle East
September 24, 2009
Posted: 814 GMT
Share this on:
Jereme Fishel (Los Angeles)   September 24th, 2009 8:38 pm ET

Gadhafi visits at an opportune time. He comes to ask for 7.77 billion for Africa. He points out that the veto power of the UN is unfair. He may be correct in that logic. However, I believe the request for 7.77 billion is a fence or ruse; his compensation request is not because we "colonized" or are unfair, but is actually how much he will get if we do dirty oil deals with him. The media should not glorify this man in the least; the media should make him transparent and advise us of his personal dogma. He is another justification for the US to be oil-free and allocate its resources to alternative fuels.

Kang Jian Dong   September 25th, 2009 12:37 am ET

Sometimes you (CNN) get it right but most often you got it all wrong. What does CNN stand for – Corrupt Nickelodeon News?

Gadhafi is a 70-80 year little boy who is a joke of a leader. The people of Libya deserve much much better.

You make Ahmadinejad had nothing to say to anyone!!!! You aired only the 'peacful', 'nice' and 'good' side (he does not have one) of him. This is just what happened before Hitler invaded Poland. We know the rest of the story. YES...history will...will...repeat it's self. And you have helped.

Netanyahu speaks the truth when he took aim at Ahmadinejad and the "terrorist" Iranian regime, deploring Ahmadinejad's "anti-Semitic rants" and his repeated claims that the "Holocaust is a lie." Ahmadinehjad is another joke...a bad joke that we all will wish was in the same place as Saddam Hussein...hanged.

May God have mercy on their souls....

Itai   September 25th, 2009 7:22 am ET

hell ahrmadinijads speach was kind of boring with his spiritual peace upon jesus christ and mohamed and mose and the whole holy gang

was nice to hear from him that he whishes peace to the jews and palestinians and christian brothers as to the whole world population

his speach was unawaited great! and the childish superior powers did as awaited run away from facts which hurts them as the holy cross the devil in the movie The exorzist

he is explaining much why theyr capitalistic blood sucking way of arogante life dont works in the long therm, he could shorten it ... all thoese who did run away have no idea od diplomaticy! they like to fight him more then to solve problems with words... they need a war thats why they dont wanna listen to him!

i my self think he was very right with his speach but also super boring with his spiritual touch in his speach

i dont care if he is muslim and what he believes or what anyone is believing ... is each ones own bussines but the escence was good "high values", "peace", "fairnes" and so on

sadly cnn it self cant bring a such good speach of him ... it would not fit good in the picture of bad evil guy

instead cnn have to bring up the guy who is still crying about a dark past showing up some plans of concentation camps ... plans which look as his own masterplan for gaza
one who talks as it would be a honour or a thing to be proud of about what he and his corrupt and neo fascistic gang did to palestine
a guy who thinks a holocaust is a excuse for being a mass slaughter

ahrmainijads speach was very honorable not mentoying israel, not denying anything, and peace whishes to christians and jews
and the other guys speach was a shame ... with such a speach he him self turns the holocaust which he is abusing into a joke ... shame upon him

and let us see if we can talk about such a speach or if CNN have to censore it

Itai   September 25th, 2009 11:28 am ET

the speach of Gaddafi was the pure comedy

but this evil did speak the truth!
i hope some super powers did vomit after speach about them self

doing a organization for democrazy and peace in the world ruled by dictature against the rest of the world and them self

he did explain his point of view very well and very clear

and to disagree with him is somehow very hard!

his speach was very demonstrative and he did show what the UN cartell is worth to him very clearly

it gives to think
think about ugly stuff
fox did interrupt him and the translator was maybe thw woerst they could find ... but Gaddafis message did came through! and there are also other translations around ... more clear and the message is not changing in the escence

and somehow as much i try to disagree with him i have to agree with him

he named one of the most woerse terror organizations on earth
and he did speak for the people and not for the capital and that is very honourable

what ever he is doing on earth or in his country or at home ... his speach is a unbreakable rock of truth

sadly many media is only doing jokes and shows only the most little part of his speach ... i guess in his view we can call this now protectionism of the own western cartell which the media must work for to get the bailout

i did thret him totaly wrong i realy thoght he is a disrespectfull ugly bad guy... but after his speach somehow i have to change my mind ... this guy did show balls ... and that is hard to beat

Itai   September 25th, 2009 1:17 pm ET

now i did listen also to nenanyahoo with his well spoken speach

i would like to randomly pick some parts out of it...

first he tells us about his people killed in germany
i strongly feel with him in that case!
it was a dark part of past to many people!
at the end of his speach the tells us about his hometown in israel
... somehow this rises a question up...

is berlin in israel? or is germany israel?
if we see it from the political piont yes germany is a part of israel
angela merkel is allways telling that the germans are slaves to israel because the past
but geograficaly?
the answer is hard to give but clearly no

so if israel is and was and should be the homeland of the jews since ever and for ever...
why his people were in germany and not in israel whyle ww2?

did i miss something?

then he blames everyone who did listen to ahrmadinijad
thats how politics are done thats democraty thats listening to different points of view and as such respectable
so what is wrong with listening to armadinijad?

shall we only listen at netanyahoo and blindly follow him?
but that would mean that we are idiots who follow him as leader blindly

and we are not idiots who are following someone blindly because we did learn from past
why he is trying to bring the dark past now back? in the same thime as he condemns the same past?

then he tells us that iran is ruled by extremism
i let this stand as he told it
but to hear that from a country ruled by extremism makes me laugh
wasent it a guy like lieberman who stated that israel should do the same to gaza as the usa did to nagasaki? ... maybe we can also think about the measure of the offensive to get a more clear picture of extremism ... or about a chies IDF rabbi with his book in which he calls to dny human rights to palestinians
but i guess its not nessesary because extremism is extremism if with a tourban or in a blue suit doesent matters
that was a slight and very well twist of him, it was so well that i realy have to pay him some respect for his camonflauge

(or for his teleprompter guy who did wink him to show him where to use which emotions in his speach.... he was giving him the "speak more slowly, give us a drama" wink ... this guy i also respect for his work ... seems to be a good propagator ... many people could learn from that guy, i am sure!

then comes a part about israels great superior sientist .. clear they are the best ... as they are choosen by god they have to be the best ... menkind will die without them, maybe europe or the usa ... but let us say the whole menkind
(thats why we also must oppress other sintistic talents from countrys which we dont like... else they maybe get also good evil as they are)

then he comes out with a surprising statement
"un human rights council missnamed institution if there ever was one"
that was maybe the main escence of the whole US debate on which everyone can agree

gadaffi did this point
iran did the same point
palestinians did it since long time
as many other members in this misnamed UN institution too

somehow its a joke how all members of an organization can agree about that exactly this organization is nothing worth
great that everyone can agree on at least one point
so we can close now this UN cartell and stop to waste more money on it
(comes to the same point at g20 ... 3 people make dessicions for all of them... sanctions on iran 3 leaders of 20 try to dictate it, thats the pure democrazy)

then netanyahoo turns on weapons in mosque .. a trategy the israelians did use against the brits hiding weapons in synagogues ... a miracle the so calles "apes from the trees" also known as palestinians orsimple as terrorists were able to learn from israel... maybe god did choose now them?

then he comes to the callings on palestinians to tell hem to leave because the bombings
of course he did call them through a deffect and bombed phone line... caling cellphones of people who dont have cellphones
and tell them to leave ... leave to where?
just anywhere but not out of gaza because they dont have a israelian prmission to leave
netanyahoo is a bright guy ... we believe him blindly!... what ells shall we do if we all are cthe cause of ww2... we have all to believe him because ww2 was oure all fault ... also the killed children are responsable for the ww2 they also have to believe him... netanyahoo maybe is a jewish budist believing in reincernation who knows

and then again "iran overthrows the world order"
what a fanatic statement ... we must follow his hype :) ...

else we will be all antisemites ... as he calls armadinijad because ahrmadinijad did whish peace to the jews a day before (as to christians and others too) ... a clear antisemitic statement by armadinijad ... and whe should not be as him and whish peace to someone

else netanyahoo will use his bush mentality and will come up with "are you with israel or the terrorists? ... i must know it now imeadiatly and you should not think twice because only the choosen one should think"

his speach was a real master peace
but as many who did walk away from his speach and maybe thoght that his speach is not interessting, i think his speach was poor victim rethoric, bush mentality in a camonflauge, not new and not so inovative, and a old try to press the tears out of idiots

so until now this whole debate did tell us

UN is a waste if ever existed
ahrmadinijad whishes peace to jews and others
netanyahoo did perfectionice his "i am the victim" speach
most of oure super diplomats dont understand the mainconcept of diplomacy and dont wanna listen to others

and to every clear thinking person it was a eye opener... the UN is a messed up cartel without any value

Hope   September 25th, 2009 10:41 pm ET

Get real for a second. If Bush was allowed to write his own speeches..and was given an hour and half to blur it out on a UN forum, no doubt he too would have join the ranks of Gadhafi's circus buffoon, if not outdo him in performance and intellect!

Filipe   September 26th, 2009 9:46 am ET

Gadhafi steals the show at UN !!!!

Everyone likes to be entertained!

This guy ranks up there with the best in all of recorded history !

ronvan   September 29th, 2009 9:40 am ET

Is this the daily "creep" show? This whack job is in charge of a country? And a terrorist leader at that. Can you tell what color his eyes are? They seem to be closed all the time. And when he talks his mouth doesn't move! He looks like he just got dressed from a street vendor and we wonder why this guy hates everyone.

university rector   October 1st, 2009 5:49 pm ET


you have no right to denigrate Bush

university rector   October 4th, 2009 8:43 pm ET

HOPE leave Bush alone

better think about the anti-Isarel liar Carter:

Jimmy Carter is making more money selling integrity than peanuts. I have known Jimmy Carter for more than 30 years. I first met him in the spring of 1976 ..., he sent me a hand written letter asking for my help in his campaign on issues of crime and justice........

Shortly thereafter, my former student Stuart Eisenstadt brought Carter to Harvard to meet with some faculty members, me among them. I immediately liked Jimmy Carter and saw him as a man of integrity and principle. I signed on to his campaign and worked very hard for his election.

When Newsweek magazine asked his campaign for the names of people on whom Carter relied for advice, my name was among those given out. I continued to work for Carter over the years,.......

Though I disagreed with some of his points, I continued to believe that he was making them out of a deep commitment to principle and to human rights.

Recent disclosures of Carter's extensive financial connections to Arab oil money, particularly from Saudi Arabia, had deeply shaken my belief in his integrity. When I was first told that he received a monetary reward in the name of Shiekh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahayan, and kept the money, even after Harvard returned money from the same source because of its anti-Semitic history, I simply did not believe it. How could a man of such apparent integrity enrich himself with dirty money from so dirty a source?

And let there be no mistake about how dirty the Zayed Foundation is.........

Initially I was reluctant to put pressure on Harvard to turn back money for the Divinity School , but then a student at the Divinity School, Rachael Lea Fish - showed me the facts.

They were staggering. I was amazed that in the 21st century there were still foundations that espoused these views. The Zayed Centre for Coordination and Follow-up – a think-tank funded by the Shiekh and run by his son hosted speakers who called Jews "the enemies of all nations," attributed the assassination of John Kennedy to Israel and the Mossad and the 9/11 attacks to the United States' own military, and stated that the Holocaust was a "fable." (They also hosted a speech by Jimmy Carter.) To its credit, Harvard turned the money back. To his discredit, Carter did not.

Jimmy Carter was, of course, aware of Harvard's decision, since it was highly publicized. Yet he kept the money . Indeed, this is what he said in accepting the funds: "This award has special significance for me because it is named for my personal friend, Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan." Carter's personal friend, it turns out, was an unredeemable anti-Semite and all-around bigot.

In reading Carter's statements, I was reminded of the bad old Harvard of the 1930s, which continued to honor Nazi academics after the anti-Semitic policies of Hitler's government became clear. Harvard of the 1930s was complicit in evil. I sadly concluded that Jimmy Carter of the 21st century has become complicit in evil. The extent of Carter's financial support from, and even dependence on, dirty money is still not fully known.

What we do know is deeply troubling. Carter and his Center have accepted millions of dollars from suspect sources, beginning with the bail-out of the Carter family peanut business in the late 1970s by BCCI, a now-defunct and virulently anti-Israeli bank indirectly controlled by the Saudi Royal family, and among whose principal investors is Carter's friend, Sheikh Zayed. Agha Hasan Abedi, the founder of the bank, gave Carter "$500,000 to help the former president establish his center...[and] more than $10 million to Mr. Carter's different projects."

Carter gladly accepted the money, though Abedi had called his bank-ostensibly the source of his funding-"the best way to fight the evil influence of the Zionists."

BCC isn't the only source: Saudi King Fahd contributed millions to the Carter Center- "in 1993 alone...$7.6 million" as have other members of the Saudi Royal Family. Carter also received a million dollar pledge from the Saudi-based bin Laden family, as well as a personal $500,000 environmental award named for Sheikh Zayed, and paid for by t he Prime Minister of the United Arab Emirates.

It's worth noting that, despite the influx of Saudi money funding the Carter Center, and despite the Saudi Arabian government's myriad human rights abuses, the Carter Center's Human Rights program has no activity whatever in Saudi Arabia. The Saudis have apparently bought his silence for a steep price.

The bought quality of the Center's activities becomes even more clear, however, when reviewing the Center's human rights activities in other countries: essentially no human rights activities in China or in North Korea , or in Iran , Iraq, the Sudan, or Syria, but activity regarding Israel and its alleged abuses, according to the Center's website.


No reasonable person can dispute therefore that Jimmy Carter has been and remains dependent on Arab Saudi Arabia .

Does this mean that Carter has necessarily been influenced in his thinking about the Middle East by receipt of such enormous amounts of money? Ask Carter. The entire premise of his criticism of Jewish influence on American foreign policy is that money talks.

It is Carter – not me – who has made the point that if politicians receive money from Jewish sources, then they are not free to decide issues regarding the Middle East for themselves.

It is Carter, not me, who has argued that distinguished reporters cannot honestly report on the Middle East because they are being paid by Jewish money. So, by Carter's own standards, it would be almost economically "suicidal" for Carter "to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine."

By Carter's own standards, therefore, his views on the Middle East must be discounted . It is certainly possible that he now believes them. Money, particularly large amounts of money, has a way of persuading people to a particular position.


If money determines political and public views – as Carter insists "Jewish money" does – then Carter's views on the Middle East must be deemed to have been influenced by the vast sums of Arab money he has received. If he who pays the piper calls the tune, then Carter's off-key tunes have been called by his Saudi Arabian paymasters. It pains me to say this, but I now believe that there is no person in American public life today who has a lower ratio of real [integrity] to apparent integrity than Jimmy Carter.

The public perception of his integrity is extraordinarily high. His real integrity, it now turns out, is extraordinarily low. He is no better than so many former American politicians who, after leaving public life, sell themselves to the highest bidder and become lobbyists for despicable causes.

That is now Jimmy Carter's sad legacy.

Hope   October 6th, 2009 3:42 am ET

So this is what's eating you up!!... Jimmy Carter a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize..becomes according to (university rector) a person of no integrity, for "shamefully" associating himself with Arab humanitarian foundations, and so becomes a threat to your Jewishness!!

Your beloved illiterate Bush receives a SHOE! for his Catastrophic war decisions, and you are what? Let me guess, not too happy!. What a miserable state of mind you seem to be floating in. Wake up, this is not the 30's..anti Semitism is something of the past..and only seems to replay itself through your delusional heads..yours, miriam, filipe...Get over it, and move on with the times. Btw, isn't it Bush who is swimming in oil profits, sucking up (strolling while holding hands in his Texas Ranch) with the Saudi Royals...And, YES zionism is Evil..To you, it is a romantic word for jewish nationalism. To the rest of the world, it is a symbol of hate, racism, wars and living hells. One only need to look at your accomplished war resume through-out the modern history of the Middle East to understand it...Maaan, you make Gadhafi look sane!

One more thing rector perman...
Carter's Legacy: "Although Carter's presidency received mixed reviews from some historians, his all-around peace keeping and humanitarian efforts since he left office have led him to be widely renowned as one of the most successful ex-presidents in US history"

Hope   October 6th, 2009 3:12 pm ET

university rector

More...If you are going to cut and past article written by a crazed fanatic racist entity like; Alan M. least have the decency to use quotes and give him credit....don't make it sound it is you who is the author!. I believe it is called stealing.

Filipe   October 7th, 2009 7:37 pm ET

Jimmy Carter should be banished to live out the rest of his delusional days on the peanut farm. Just like he was forced to do during the entire presidential campaign. The Democrats were scared to death he'd open his mouth an act is normal self at some point an blow the entire election based upon sheer ignorance and stupidity.

But there's nothing anyone can say to dispute the facts as laid out by Alan Dershowitz--as biased as he may be-- facts are facts !!!

university rector   October 7th, 2009 9:09 pm ET


the only crazy racists here are you and john A

you can only dream of having a stature like dershovitz

miriam   October 8th, 2009 6:02 am ET


Denying anti-semitism is anti-semitism.

It is alive and well due to people like you.

Modern Zionism is the movement for self-determination of the Jewish people in their homeland.
However, zionism preceeds the modern era and is an integral part of Jewish belief and practice.

Describing zionism as evil and denying the right of Jews to self-determination in their homeland is anti-semitism, as defined by the EU.

The hate shown by the world that you describe is based on disinformation and anti-semitism, derived from the Muslim world's desire to rule from India to Spain and denial of Jewish historical fact on which much of Islam is based.

Hope   October 8th, 2009 5:13 pm ET

Denying Palestinians their land back, and continue the building of settlements on a piece of real estate that is NOT yours, is Anti Peace on behave of Israel.

There is no Anti-semitism anymore. The German word (antisemitisch), is a prejudicial term of an ugly European past...Middle-easterners don't use it, nor practice it..since they are Semitics as well.

If.. it is alive and well, it is not because of me.

The illusion of Anti-semitism is kept alive and well, by Israel (specially here in the western hemisphere political arenas)...It serves them validate their continuous hostility towards the justifiable. Be it social, legal, or political discrimination..It is a convenient arguemental word (an excuse) to portray Palestinians as aggressors. Therefore, justifying an undeserving collective punishment, falsified as self defense.

And finally, the term anti-semitism "suites" Israel's long term goal, that is distancing, displacing and destroying the Palestinians for good.

Filipe   October 10th, 2009 11:47 am ET


No one needs to portray the radical Palestinians as the aggressors. Their actions speak clearly for themselves. It is evident and reported daily. You simply refuse to accept for what it is.

Can you say "denial" ???

Your continued rantings and gibberish about "and continue the building of settlements on a piece of real estate that is NOT yours, is Anti Peace on behave of Israel"-- is quite hypocritical--coming from someone who parks their a$$ on land that was stolen from the Native Americans.

What a joke !!!

miriam   October 11th, 2009 1:49 pm ET

Only anti-semites deny anti-semitism.

Claims of settlement building on Arab land are derived from Arab anti-semitism, ie false Arab claims of Palestinian land-ownership in order to delegitimise Jewish historical and religious connection to the land.

Article 6 of the League of Nations permitted Jewish settlement purchase in all areas of former Ottoman lands under the British Mandate, apart from land that became Jordan.
In 1948/9, Jordan threw out the Jews from those lands and after 1967,the current settlements were built or re-built on those same lands.
They were never Palestinian "real-estate".

university rector   October 11th, 2009 9:41 pm ET


your whining and raving impress nobody

thank you for confirming that the palestinians are not the original inhabitants, as you have proven with your kind link, they migrated from the arab peninsula.

which means of course that there is nothing to give back to invadres from outside the area, don't you agree, Hope?

university rector   October 12th, 2009 7:56 pm ET


There is no Anti-semitism anymore.


New antisemitism is the concept that a new form of antisemitism has developed in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, emanating simultaneously from the left, the right, and fundamentalist Islam, and tending to manifest itself as opposition to Zionism and the State of Israel.

The concept generally posits that much of what purports to be criticism of Israel by various individuals and world bodies, is, in fact, tantamount to demonization, and that, together with an international resurgence of attacks on Jews and Jewish symbols, and an increased acceptance of antisemitic beliefs in public discourse, such demonization represents an evolution in the appearance of antisemitic beliefs.[citation needed]

Proponents of the concept argue that anti-Zionism, anti-Americanism, anti-globalization, third worldism, and demonization of Israel, or double standards applied to its conduct, may be linked to antisemitism, or constitute disguised antisemitism.[1].

Critics of the concept argue that it conflates anti-Zionism with antisemitism, defines legitimate criticism of Israel too narrowly and demonization too broadly, trivializes the meaning of antisemitism, and exploits antisemitism in order to silence debate.[2]


Hope   October 13th, 2009 1:37 pm ET

The ugly anti-Semitism sentiment of the past is being kept alive by you and your kind of people. Yesterday is yesterday, now is now. One can not deny something that is extinct. Therefore, there is no such a thing as anti Semitism. There is however the poor victimized phantom, who MUST be kept alive in the public eyes, publications, (WIKIPEDIA), in order to justify greed, land grabbing and war crimes. As you pride yourselves on democracy, the words of Gandhi echoes..(well, cut & pasted) "Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes"....As long as Israel refuses to admit to its mistakes, it is a faked democracy. That is my opinion, you're entitled to yours. Now beat it.

M Ariely   October 13th, 2009 4:54 pm ET

Gafhafi steals the show to the west.
However to the Arabs his show are the real one.

His real show was on the return of Nic Robertson the Lockerbie bomber to Libya

To the Arab the TV show message is that the bomber is of a hero returning home. Libya government worked for his foredoom.
Terrorist are heroes.
the west is ready to give away moral values for economical benefit

The show to the west meadia was humanitarian reasons for someone due to die soon.

Filipe   October 13th, 2009 7:07 pm ET


So just exactly what to you call your ugly rantings such as :

1)"the pasty white round faced babushkas should be sent back to their homes in Russia, they don't belong in Israel".

2) " The white faced Jews from Europe have no right to live in Palestine."

Should I go on???

What exactly is the correct name, according to you, for the hatred you spew???

Do you have a more current and modern name for it?? Since you claim that Anti-Semitism is no longer alive ???

University rector   October 14th, 2009 7:19 am ET


you argument is with wikipedia, which defines antisemitism

but the shoe fits, doesn't it?

subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

Welcome to the Inside the Middle East blog where CNN's journalists post news, views and video from across the region. This is also a place where you can start the discussion so please keep your comments coming. We highlight not only current news stories but also anecdotes and issues that don't always make the top of the headlines.

Read more about CNN's special reports policy

Watch the show

Inside the Middle East airs the first week of every month on the following days and times:

Wednesday: 0930, 1630,
Saturday: 0430, 1830,
Sunday: 1130

(All times GMT)