It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Coast to Coast a not so open forum

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 01:57 PM
Last night August 29/30, I was listening to Coast to Coast in Houston on 740 KTRH. During the open line portion the usual UFO and other type calls made the air and got the usual response from the host George Knapp, that was until a lady called and mentioned some pictures she had of Barak Obama in some distinctive Muslim garb; proving he is a Muslim and wanted to destroy the US and the world bringing about Muslim prophesy. To my surprise she was practically laughed of the air and Knapp mentioned that it clearly was a smear call and dismissed the entire call. In fact he referred back to that call throughout the night when mentioning the "guide lines" for the open lines.

This thread is not about what Obama is or is not, and what he will or will not do.
It is only about what you think about the discretion of the host(s) on Coast to Coast.

here is the link to the archive of the show

show archive

posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 03:27 PM
In my opinion, I am glad that he did not allow that. Now I do not condone the way he actually did it. I just believe that the coast to coast show is geared more towards the UFO/Supernatural side of things, and not a political forum. I think he could have done it in a more professional manner, but I am glad that it was not on. If they wanted to get maximum exposure for that kind of thing, they should email the pictures to CNN, or Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh. Those are just my personal thoughts.

posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 03:34 PM
Those pictures have been all over the networks for better than a year now. Its when he went back to his fathers homeland and they gave him the tribal garb of his ancestors and he put it on for the respect of the village elders. I don't like the man as a politician but the pictures are NOT proof of anything but that callers ignorance of the facts!! Obama was just doing what comes natural for the circumstances as they where at that time, nothing more!


posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 10:08 PM
excellent point about Coast to Coast, I could not agree more.

If you take the time to listen to the archive, the lady was talking about supposed different pictures.

posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 09:46 AM
Yes they where differant pictures from the same occasion. Nearly everyone has seen him in total white clothing that is ceremonial in nature.

The other photos she was refering to are from a visit with family members and the clothes are NOT muslim in nature. It is a loose cossack type of dress warn to help with the heat in Africa.

Like I said, I'm not voting for him but this smear, and it is that, is foolish!


posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:30 PM
Like I said in the opening, This is not about Obama. It is about how the host treated a caller and a theory she had.

and by the way, he (the host) said nothing about seeing the pictures previously or tried to explain them away, he basically said she was a nut and should not be making stories up.

now if you can move on past the substance of the pictures and discuss the host's comments about her being a wacko while completely validating the idea that one or two people in a group can see a UFO while others in the group saw absolutely nothing because of the way that the dimension that the UFO is in affects the light which is interpenetrated by individuals eyes (do to uniqueness of each persons eye characteristics).

Then please continue. if you just want to take this opportunity to defend the messiah apollo then I can give you something to debate that has more substance than a politician engaging in a multi-cultural event.

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:37 PM
Obama wearing a hat=apocalypse.

Yeah, let's discuss that until the hat falls off....

[edit on 1-9-2008 by pluckynoonez]

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:41 PM
I am sorry, but I don't understand your point.... I know I know please feel free to poke fun at any number of punch lines possible, I just don't understand?

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 11:29 PM
I heard that live, and while Knapp may have been a teeny bit overboard with his references to the call later on, he was right to hang up on her (IMHO). This was obviously a crackpot with a political agenda, and there are plenty of things to discuss with much more relevance to the show that Obama wearing a silly hat.

George Knapp is not my favorite host of the show, but regardless he did a fine job by simply allowing the woman to call in and say her peace. Try that on Rush Limbaugh's show, Sean Hannity's show, or even Glenn Beck's show. You'll never even get on the air. She got her 15 seconds of fame.


posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 08:07 PM
I agree that she is a crack pot (IMHO), but i just could not believe how he reacted.
My favorite host is George.

So, What comments do you have on how the host(s) react to callers in the same show that have conflicting views on phenomenon such as time travel?
i heard a show once where two callers, practically back to back, had two opposing opinions on time travel; and the host was very well behaved and gave both equal consideration and conversation. He didn't accept one and reject the other.

That was a high point in CTC for me. That's why I was so disappointing by the reaction to this caller.

posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 08:11 PM
He reacted the same way the mods here react. If it is off-topic then it is deleted. She was off-topic and hung up on. Same thing, as far as I am concerned. And, let us not forget that it is a radio show where pictures are completely useless.

posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 09:03 PM
this is an honest question/comment.

i thaught that CTC was also a forum for NWO talk, such as the greys and the reptilians (is that right). So, wouldn't Obama being part of a conspiricy to bring about EOTW type events by the iluminaty and other such suspected NWO groups?

Even if the lady is/was a flake, that type of talk normaly gets traction. I guess claiming an entire party or political system is fair game, but not certain candidates?

9/2 added

hurray 200th post

[edit on 2-9-2008 by irongunner]

posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 09:18 PM

I guess claiming an entire party or political system is fair game, but not certain candidates?

[edit on 2-9-2008 by irongunner]

Perhaps it was the accusation itself? She was claiming that the candidate is of a particular religion. And she had the picture to prove it!

So what? She wasn't claiming to have a picture proving Obama wants to rule the world (I totally called dibs, by the way); she didn't call in boasting about a picture that proved he ate babies and puppies as part of a lizard-worshiping ritual. She called in claiming she could prove he was muslim. Big d--- deal.

P.S. none of my sarcasm was aimed at you, irongunner, but rather at the caller.

posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 09:24 PM
reply to post by Alora

its cool I can take a hint

I would agree that she was putting forth nonsense about the religion thing if that were all she said.

She was claiming that he was a Muslim and "going to blow up the world."

Normally the hosts after hearing that would ask for more of the conspiracy theory and see where the conspiracy leads. He didn't ask why she thought he was going to blow up the world (ie. bring Mohamed back) he only railed that she was crazy.
Even the people that claim that the government aided aliens in abducting and sexually abusing them at least get a follow up question like

"Why do you think they are doing this???"

posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 10:29 PM
reply to post by irongunner

Yeah, but the caller called in and said that Obama was a Muslim who was born out of the USA who wanted to blow the USA up. George had every right to react the way he did. I would have done the same thing.

posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 01:06 AM
Again, people regularly call in claiming that the Illuminati, greys, and others NWO groups are doing all sorts of things... now I dont recall specifically if genocide was one of them, but I know they (the NWO's) have been accused of starting wars and what not.

So, again I say that it must be okay to attack a political system, but not an individual?

What about those people that claim to be that time traveling guy John Titor and they discredit those people all of the time without being out right rude.

posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 01:18 AM
reply to post by irongunner

It's okay to attack an individual-- but George was just saying how that you shouldn't label someone as a terrorist just because they're muslim. There is nothing in the constitution that states that people have to be Christian to run for President. The caller, was doing a character ad hominid attack on Barack Obama without proof.

posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 02:14 AM
I like your post. you start out making great points. But, then you trailed off.

you are spot on about the constitution.

But, the lady did say she had "new" photos. I don't know with certainty if she was wrong about what proof she had or not. Now as I have said before I dont think wearing certain clothes for a function or picture make you anything that you weren't before you posed for the photo.

posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 02:19 AM
Is everyone missing the key point??

Was this not during the "Open Line" segment of the program?

Is it not normal for the "Open Line" discussion segment of the show to be about anything the caller wants to talk about?

I do see the point in not turning the show into a political bashing segment.

But if this occured during the "Open Line" segment..perhaps it could have gone either way. But also perhaps this was an example of selective "Open Line" discussion too.


posted on Sep, 3 2008 @ 03:07 AM
reply to post by irongunner

How did I trail off? I can easily claim that I have pictures of John Mccain worshipping with the Masons and killing innocent Americans and that he wants to nuke Washington DC. Just as that caller claimed that Obama wants to put Shirah law on the USA I could claim that John Mccain wants us under martial law without proof. How did I trail off exactly? How exactly is what the caller did not a ad-hominim attack without proof?

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in