It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran's President To Visit UN!

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
2PacSide, stop the trolling, it's ridiculous. Seriously. Iran's president is a terrorist because Bush said it! Iraq had WMD because Bush said it!

Even if all the rhetoric wasn't rhetoric, I mean, with bases to stand on, like REAL nuclear weapons, they wouldn't be able to wipe out USA. It's just plain ignorant.

And they should move the UN headquarters elsewhere... and Bush/Ahmadinejad should have a real debate, it would be great.

[edit on 13-9-2006 by Vitchilo]


Sorry I didn't know I had a pole in the water with this topic. The rhetoric part is not the point. . .

By his own words he wants to wipe out Israel.
He doesn't listen to the UN, or comply with it's demands.
He's dragging his feet, yet he wants everybody to keep listening to him.
He threatens to quit the same group that he wants to speak in front of.
He was already there last year, and if anything it seems the situation has digressed if anything.

They may not have operational weapons at this point in time, but they will. This is the most opportune time to reel him in. Not after. He's already stated that they are ready to spread nuclear technology to other Islamic countries.

The UN's european HQ is in Geneva. I agree, why can't he speak with Bush there on neutral ground.

Thanx for the input Vitchilo-




posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Under the Patriot act -- who knows for sure? Maybe he won't be allowed into the United States?

Dallas



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dallas
Under the Patriot act -- who knows for sure? Maybe he won't be allowed into the United States?

Dallas


Thanx Dallas- This is exactly what I'm talking about. I fully understand all the responsibilities of being the UN's host. I just question that in some instances, this one included, do we have the right to supercede these obligations because of
these extenuating circumstances? Ultimately we should reserve the final approval for anyone to enter our country. Host country or not.

Plus- Like I stated before. He doesn't even do what the UN requests him to do, yet he still wants everybody to listen to him!



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2PacSade

Originally posted by Dallas
Under the Patriot act -- who knows for sure? Maybe he won't be allowed into the United States?

Dallas


Thanx Dallas- This is exactly what I'm talking about. I fully understand all the responsibilities of being the UN's host. I just question that in some instances, this one included, do we have the right to supercede these obligations because of
these extenuating circumstances? Ultimately we should reserve the final approval for anyone to enter our country. Host country or not.

Plus- Like I stated before. He doesn't even do what the UN requests him to do, yet he still wants everybody to listen to him!


I think Iran's still on the US books as a terrorist state. If so - no go for entry into the US. Shxt if the US can stop Cat Stevens from entering -- well then who's this guy wearing the light wind breaker without a tie and semi-shaven?

Dallas



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:44 AM
link   
The problem with him is he Reads the Koran too much, why would he hate Isreal and need nuclear technology. Why is he so one way minded because that is how his beliefs are also written. Its not PC stuff its true, you are not born to hate but are brainwashed into it by multiple ani-Jewish verses from his belief system, what do you expect and what do you expect from the rest of the Middle east and its brainwashed people that can not be allowed to think outside Islam and its a crime.

It's quite sad for mankind that people are stuck in tribal mentality but as nations.

Let him speak as war happens when people don't speak. Let him actaully make a fool of him self let him been seen for the extreamist mentality he is. That way not just the US but the UN can finally put a lid on him.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2PacSade
Who would want to own it! (LOL) I agree with all these reasons, and the theory behind them. I question with what's going on right now, and the fact that he speaks of a world without Israel & the west, why we should let him in our country for any reason. He could do his business with the UN without coming here. He just wants a stage, which I think will be used as a tool to unite terrorist groups. Plus- He's gonna be a couple of streets over from a big hole in the ground that 5 years ago, had some buildings standing there. . . I just don't think it's right.


Well, gosh... this whole thread is becoming a monument to truthiness.

Which is weird, because you kind of imply that your government is known to lie. I mean, I know you put quote marks around "fables" (which is as good a word as any other than "outright lies" - accurate but tactless)... but in this paragraph...


He didn't "let" him go, he was specifically "sent" because of his credibility. I think the prez thought that those "fables" would be much more believable coming from him. I think he was so embarrassed it caused him to quietly ride off into the sunset. Too bad- I thought he was gonna run for the presidency.


... you seem to acknowledge that all that stuff you were fed about Saddam being a threat to everyone and having weapons of mass destruction was a bunch of BS.

There's not, however, any idea that you might be being sold the same bunch of BS all over again about Iran! Ahmedinejad, as I tried to demonstrate in this thread, was deliberately mistranslated by a Zionist think-tank, and the Israeli and US governments are currently trying to whip up public support for military action in Iran.

And just as happened with Saddam, people are getting confused... you just don't want him a few blocks away from a big hole in the ground. Why? What did he have to do with that?

It's that kind of sloppy thinking that allows people like Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld to get away with plundering other countries while persuading their citizens that they're sticking up for freedom and democracy.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 09:24 AM
link   

By his own words he wants to wipe out Israel.
No. It's a mistranslation from the western medias, as I should remind you, run by Rupert Murdoch. He said that the zionist regime should be wipe out, and I agree with him. Zionism and how is applied is racist, it's like South Africa Apartheid.

He doesn't listen to the UN, or comply with it's demands.
He did for 2 years and UN never found any weapons program.


He's dragging his feet, yet he wants everybody to keep listening to him.
Iran's leaders always did that, rhetoric. And Bush is good at this also. Terrorist bla bla bla ben laden bla bla bla freedom bla bla bla.

He threatens to quit the same group that he wants to speak in front of.
The Mullahs threatenned to quit the NPT, not Ahmanenijad.

He was already there last year, and if anything it seems the situation has digressed if anything.
It ``seems`` to you. Because it didn't changed, aside from the Israëli invasion of Lebanon.


They may not have operational weapons at this point in time, but they will. This is the most opportune time to reel him in. Not after. He's already stated that they are ready to spread nuclear technology to other Islamic countries.
Nuclear technologies, not nuclear weapons. Also, even if they would have one, they wouldn't use it, they would use it only in self-defense, unlike the USA and Israël who threatenned to nuke Iran's nuclear facilities with the mini-nukes... and they are still on the agenda.


The UN's european HQ is in Geneva. I agree, why can't he speak with Bush there on neutral ground.
European HQ. But everybody is in the UN HQ. That's why. And with the Iraq invasion, Guantanamo, ingerence everywhere on the planet, UN headquarters should be move from USA.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 01:01 PM
link   
So u r saying if I kidnapped ur 2 daughters and kept them prisoner in my home. You would come and destroy my entire neighbourhood. and also blow up the rest of the city. in which thousands of children also die. thats very good reasoning.

Btw. this issue is far mroe than that. 2 soldiers....ya rite.....what abt the amount of ppl israelis kill everyday.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Look, if you don't mind me stating it quick. This Guy's a mind game operative of Iran's Muslim beliefs.
Normaly I would suggest that's not all that much to worry or concern yourself about. But their sitting on plutonium advancement into weapons grade material, ie WMD meaning potential future WMD.

Iranian WMD weapons could oops slip out the hands of their nuclear experts and into the suitcase of a delivery terrorist, knowing he's already contaminated and will die. So where does it have to go and how does he get there? Detination's the last step. Under present conditions, I feel Iran is about to become a danger to the western world. As Rice said a Mushroom Cloud and not knowing who delivered it.

Dallas



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by half_minded
So u r saying if I kidnapped ur 2 daughters and kept them prisoner in my home. You would come and destroy my entire neighbourhood. and also blow up the rest of the city. in which thousands of children also die. thats very good reasoning.

Btw. this issue is far mroe than that. 2 soldiers....ya rite.....what abt the amount of ppl israelis kill everyday.


Yes I would hunt you down to the ends of the earth until I got my daughters back.

No I wouldn't destroy your entire neighborhood because I know that they're being held at your house. Hezzbollah doesn't have a house. Lebanon is letting them live in their neighborhood/city. They could easily avoid this if they would rid themselves of Hezzbollah.

No I don't think it's good reasoning to just arbitrarily blow up the whole neighborhood, or city, or kill 1000's of children. But as I stated before, I would hunt you down until I got my daughters back. I don't know what kind of damage that would entail, but I do know one thing. Your neighborhood & city would have you to blame, not me. They should kick you out so things like that wouldn't happen.

I agree that the Israelis have made mistakes that have led the deaths of innocent people. I don't know if there's a country out there that can say they haven't, including the USA. I guess the most important this is to learn from them & pick a different response next time around.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 01:36 PM
link   
This administration put us into this mess on purpose. Believe me this was no accident.
Mark my words, the trumpet to war will be this.
"The only way to get out of Iraq is to deal with Iran. Iran is a threat to the whole region."

As to letting him into the UN in NY.
I say its only fair. Afterall didn't Iran invite Bush to come to Iran for a debate?
We should only return the favor as the good nation we are.



[edit on 14-9-2006 by Techsnow]



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 03:29 PM
link   
2PacSade and everybody that believe the neo-con crap about Iran nuclear program...

Read this

And please review you're biaised opinions.



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Nice citation, Vitchilo.


As I said before, people fell for this rubbish about Iraq, and now they're falling for it AGAIN over Iran. For those people too lazy to click on a link, I'll just cite one relevant passage from the article, which is saying that the IAEA don't think Iran is anywhere near a bomb and their enrichment programme is designed to produce power station fuel not weapons.


Yesterday's letter, a copy of which was provided to The Washington Post, was the first time the IAEA has publicly disputed U.S. allegations about its Iran investigation. The agency noted five major errors in the committee's 29-page report, which said Iran's nuclear capabilities are more advanced than either the IAEA or U.S. intelligence has shown.

Among the committee's assertions is that Iran is producing weapons-grade uranium at its facility in the town of Natanz. The IAEA called that "incorrect," noting that weapons-grade uranium is enriched to a level of 90 percent or more. Iran has enriched uranium to 3.5 percent under IAEA monitoring.


I'd just like everybody who thinks that Iran is the Greatest Evil power on the planet to actually check the evidence when the US government says something about Iran. If it's on the news, just see if there's any actual evidence offered for any claim made against Iran. (Note: Statements beginning "US officials say" do NOT count as evidence, nor does anything coming from Israel: these are the countries who want to wage war against Iran, so take everything they say with a hefty pinch of salt.)



posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
2PacSade and everybody that believe the neo-con crap about Iran nuclear program...

Read this

And please review you're biaised opinions.


I have a point of view on this yes, but I don't think it's been proven to be totally biased if you look at a compilation of my posts on this thread. I have stated previously I understand the obligations of a UN host. That every government makes mistakes, including our own, That Israel has been extreme with some of its warfare. . . But I have also brought up a lot of points that, if you won't even listen to, then aren't you just as biased?

I have read the article, and thank you for the input. That's the only real way we can constantly revise our thoughts & execute rational action. . . It's to really listen to each other. . .

I think hands down that the Bush administration sent Mr. Powell to the UN because he was probably the only high ranking US official that would even be remotely believed by the rest of the world that there were WMD in Iraq. Doesn't mean it's true in this case, but I'm willing to believe that they would do it again.

Doesn't mean I have any more faith in the other guy now either though. . .

How's that Vitchilo for an attempt to sever my biased outlook?



posted on Sep, 19 2006 @ 09:45 PM
link   
So what did we get out of this?


www.cnn.com...


1) The president of France says he thinks diplomacy vs sanctions should be pursued BUT;


Chirac, however, expressed concern over the Iranian president's denial that the Holocaust happened and his assertion that Israel should be "wiped off the map."


2) They still won't comply with the UN's demands. . .

YES- He had the right to speak there. ( He states with clenched jaw. . . )

YES- Nothing got accomplished.

YES- I'm afraid It's probably gonna get a lot worse before it gets better.

YES- I wish they would move the UN'S HQ. How bout IRAN? (LOL)


I know this post was specific to whether he should be allowed to enter our country vs his right to speak at the UN/They are member/We are host nation, but the fact remains. It didn't do anything except verify that negotiations are at a stand still, if not digressing. Thanx for all who posted. I don't know if there's anything else needs to be said here. . . But thanx again



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join