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.

 

Ahmadinejad stresses need for a new world order

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Ahmadinejad stresses need for a new world order


www.presstv.ir

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calls for the creation of a new world order in dealing with the many challenges arising in the international political arena.

"What we need now is a dramatic change in world political thought," said President Ahmadinejad in a Tuesday address to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Moscow.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
english.farsnews.com



[edit on 8-6-2010 by Beefcake]




posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Many are under the impression that Iran is this country that is not under globalist control and that is why they receive such harsh rhetoric and threats from the global community to stop the nuclear program or else.

Ahmadinejad is consistently and needlessly saying provocative things and it just doesn't make sense because if he was just to fly under the radar he wouldn't give the media any ammunition to call him an anti-semite and a trouble maker and he could probably have a full nuke program before anyone even knew about it.

No one believes the global community when they say someone has a nuke anymore, especially after Iraq, so they NEED Ahmadinejad to say provocative things so that they can use that to paint the country as a threat.

At the end of the day Ahmadinejad is under complete elite control and so are all the Elders in that country just as Hitler was under globalist control also. We all know about the global funding that Hitler received one of witch was Prescott Bush and W. Averell Harrimann of the Harriman bank who helped finance Nazi Germany against U.S. law.

The elite must control both sides of a conflict in order to predict the outcome and ensure it favors them. Ahmadinejad is tasked with being the new bad guy and he is playing the part well but even he has to display his allegiance by calling for a New Order.

www.presstv.ir
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 8-6-2010 by Beefcake]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   
I couldn't insert the the quote form the Fars News Agency the edit wasn't working so here it is

english.farsnews.com...


"The conditions we are experiencing today need planning for new orders in the world and (our) cooperation and co-thinking for organizing the conditions," Ahmadinejad told reporters before departing for Istanbul, Turkey to take part in the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA).



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
he dosnt mean the same "NWO" as You do.
Im guessing he talks about time to end western rule over the whole world.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Ahmadinejad is a self publicist with a very big ego and an inflated sense of self worth. Fact is that the "new world order" he wants would somehow exclude things which most people in the developed world take for granted. Like human rights!

In Ahmadinejad's new world order you can kiss goodbye to everything you hold dear. You may whine and cry about how you think the US or Europe is bad and that you are poorly served by your elected officials, but don’t think people like Ahmadinejad would deliver a sun-kissed future with nice smells and love all around.

Ahmadinejad is laughing at you and all this NWO mumbo jumbo is making some people paranoid.

Regards

Edit-to correct a typo

[edit on 8/6/2010 by paraphi]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by reassor
 


You are spot on. He has talked about a "NWO" before as has the Ayatollah. However it is an order under Sharia. If anything Iran has been one of the staunchest opponents AGAINST the corporatist NWO.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
were did he say the words "new world order" ?



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad an Israeli freemason named Mahmoud Saborjhian?

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by danielhanson420
were did he say the words "new world order" ?


It was in the second article from Fars News agency I posted it already. You really should read the the thread especially if there has only been a few posts.

I'll post it again though for you

english.farsnews.com...


"The conditions we are experiencing today need planning for new orders in the world and (our) cooperation and co-thinking for organizing the conditions," Ahmadinejad told reporters before departing for Istanbul, Turkey to take part in the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA).



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 12:00 PM
link   
wtf?? Am i hearing this right?? Some of you are saying a new world order by some is okay against anothers idea of nwo? Are you insane? A new world order under Iran would take away your human rights? I thought the whole idea of nwo under any would be to strip you of your human rights? wtf???



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Beefcake
 



Ahmadinejad is consistently and needlessly saying provocative things and it just doesn't make sense because if he was just to fly under the radar he wouldn't give the media any ammunition to call him an anti-semite and a trouble maker and he could probably have a full nuke program before anyone even knew about it.


Much of that rhetoric that is attributed to him, is actually deliberate miss-quotes and miss-translations. Regardless of whatever he says or doesn't say, he is going to be quoted as using anti-semitic rhetoric.

Take for instance the MSM and US government trying to suggest that
Ahmadinejad called for Israel to be "wiped from the map". This is entirely false and he never suggested such a thing.

What was said?

Farsi: "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

Translation: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".

Word by word: Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad ( More..must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).

Words not used: Israel, wiped off, wipe out, map, world, Earth, face.

The western phrase, 'wiped off' or 'wiped out', were not used in the quote, nor was the "state" of Israel. 'Nagsheh', the word for map was not there either.

I actually sat through a speech by Ahmadinejad at Columbia University, where he talked about this very thing. It was quite interesting and to hear directly from the horses mouth, about how he feels on certain issues, makes a profound difference.

The point here is that you can't really take anything the MSM says at face value. They have their own agenda along with the agenda of those in control which should be at odds with your own agenda and interests.

--airspoon



reply to post by djvexd
 



You are spot on. He has talked about a "NWO" before as has the Ayatollah. However it is an order under Sharia. If anything Iran has been one of the staunchest opponents AGAINST the corporatist NWO.


This is hardly an accurate view. Iran has actually shown its tolerance with other religions, at least as much as any Christian organization. In fact, there is a large population of Jews living in Tehran, with Jews even making up part of the Iranian Parliament, if I remember correctly. Iran has the largest population of Jews in the Middle East, outside of Israel and they are apparently happy there. If Iran was on some mission to destroy infidels, then I'm sure the Jewish population of Iran wouldn't feel so secure.

In fact, I'm sure that Iran wouldn't be doing the things that they are doing or saying the things that they are saying, if we only left them alone, stopped meddling in their affairs and stopped slandering the Iranian nation.

It's just that simple.

--airspoon



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


Whether they are tolerant of other religions is one thing, however please review your view onmy statement. As during more than a few televised speeches by the ayatollah he has discussed the need to bring sharia to entire corrupt world. While he can't crack down fully in his own country because of essentially what would become a very nasty civil disturbance, he still advocates it. While the ayatollah is a hard-line religious leader he is also somewhat of a pragmatist, if not just listening to his IRG advisory board about the consequences. I am not singing praises of this man or his gov't, there is alot more to the political landscape in Iran than jackboots and religious zealots.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by letscit
wtf?? Am i hearing this right?? Some of you are saying a new world order by some is okay against anothers idea of nwo? Are you insane? A new world order under Iran would take away your human rights? I thought the whole idea of nwo under any would be to strip you of your human rights? wtf???


Let us anaylze the meaning of the words spoken: New World Order.



New
Definition: Not before seen or known, although existing before; lately manifested; recently discovered; as, a new metal; a new planet; new scenes.




World
Definition: The earth and the surrounding heavens; the creation; the system of created things; existent creation; the universe.





Order
Definition: Regular arrangement; any methodical or established succession or harmonious relation; method; system


Use of the phrase "New World Order" does not automatically equate to tyranny. Many people who post on this board wish to see a radical change in our current system. You could say they wish to see a "New World Order". The fear of words is irrational.

As for the Iranian President- I don't much like the idea of being forced to wear a veil all day and having to be Islamic. He can keep his NWO.


[edit on 8-6-2010 by antonia]



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by djvexd
 



As during more than a few televised speeches by the ayatollah he has discussed the need to bring sharia to entire corrupt world


Do you have any sources for this? Was he speaking in English or any other language spoken by you? Do you speak Farsi? If the answer to the last two questions is "no", then you are trusting the media for this information.

As stated in my reply to Beefcake, the MSM has their own agenda and that agenda seems to include the slander of Iranian officials. In otherwords, it's propaganda.

Here is why that view doesn't make sense. Sharia refers to the sacred law of Islam. To enforce Sharia on non-Muslims in non-Muslim lands would be forcing others to Islam, which is forbidden according to Islamic traditions. Unlike Christianity, Islam doesn't feel the need to convert others to their religion, though they won't turn someone down who seeks out Islam on their own.

Again, I'll ask where it is you saw the Ayatollah make these comments and what would make you think that this source is accurate, since they seem to deliberately falsify other quotations by Iranian officials in a effort to push their own agenda forward. Sources?

--airspoon



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
There is no difference in "HIS" new world order and the elites. The elite are as we speak eroding the western economy and have been for some time. They want the US to fall because that would create a perfect scenario for a world government to fix everything. Especially with the Euro in trouble also. When the 2 biggest currencies fail what is the only option? Create a new one. A one world currency.

Up until now they have used the US as the military arm of the NWO and that will not change for some time. The society of the US is very threatening because they have a strong nationalistic leaning and that is very bad to a globalist not to mention they have a constitution which has some very pesky elements like the right to bare arms.

He has talked about a new world order before and just as when all the other leaders say it, it is a nod to his masters. A signal just for them to let them know he is on board.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 01:06 PM
link   
IMHO
the war is definitly against the people,
all the people everywhere.
not the nations

it is easy to get control of a handfull of people in the control of a nation as opposed to taking over the people of the nation against their will
just buy them.

give me control of the money...



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Beefcake
 



The society of the US is very threatening because they have a strong nationalistic leaning and that is very bad to a globalist not to mention they have a constitution which has some very pesky elements like the right to bare arms.


Actually, our right to bear arms doesn't mean much because we do not have that right as it was intended. It's intent was for the people to be able to fight back government tyranny. Now, we are only allowed to own hunting rifles and other small-arms that can't compete with the weapons of government. Add this to the fact that not everyone is allowed to bear arms and the 2nd Amendment is basically ineffective.

Sure, it might cause a little concern with TPTB but it shouldn't be a problem. Tell me, how are you going to defeat a drone at 15,000 feet, armed with hellfire missiles if you only have a 30-30 or .22LR? How is your 9mm going to compare to their AA12 Assault Shotgun?



The sad truth of the matter is that they have dwindled down our Constitutional liberties so much that the Constitution no longer really matters and sure as # isn't effective. Some of our "liberties" have been blatantly taken away without so much as a peep from my fellow Americans. No, I don't see our little Constitution as being a problem or even pesky for the tyrants in control.

--airspoon



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Virtually all of the power brokers at the top of the food chain have a common goal--a new global governance structure that will emerge during the course of this century.

The only question is: who will run the show? Will it be the eastern power block, consisting of Russia, China, Iran, and Turkey, or the western power block, consisting of the US, England, and EU? The world is being polarized along these lines for a new world war.

However, this polarization is being engineered to destroy all of the nation states, globally. Politicians and governments were merely pawns in the game. The only institutions that will come out winners in any global conflict will be the central banks, and their supporting institutions (private and public banks), which make profit by financing both sides in all phases.

The goal is to destroy sovereign nation states, which will then be replaced by the RULE OF THE BANKERS. This far reaching goal was clearly outlined by Carrol Quigley (Clinton's mentor at Georgetown University) in the 1960s. TPTB want to create a feudalistic system, run by the central banks, with the International Bank of Settlements in Switzerland, as the supreme arbiter of human destiny.

The coming global war will merely serve to exhaust the resources of the sovereign nations, which will then be finally bankrupt, and at the mercy of their creditors--the big banks. That is when the NWO will finally emerge, the culmination of a plan that has been centuries in the making.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Beefcake
 



There is no difference in "HIS" new world order and the elites.


Sorry, but that's a complete load of paranoid crap, he most likely meant a world order based on islamic oppression. That doesn't suit the casino gambling culture of the NWO set out by the banks in the west. Ahmadi talks of the 13th Immam returning as the Mahdi and saving them from zionism - this is superstitious claptrap.

The term "New World Order" is generalised and can mean whatever you wish. If I said I want a new world order, all you can deduce is I want the ordering of world society to change, but not the specifics. I could mean I want the banks to rule the world and the poor to be slaves to the bank (if I were a banker or politician in the west), or if I were Islamic you could deduce that I want sharia law to rule, or if I were none of those - you may even be able to deduce that I want a world order of peace and prosperity for all future generations, or maybe deduce nothing at all.

A New World Order is when the order of society changes, regardless of whether the outcome is good, bad or indifferent to anyone and everyone.



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
I don't think he means the same NWO as we perceive as being evil here on ATS.

He's right actually, we do need a shift in political though and practice in this world in order to deal with the concerns and issues arrising in our 21st century world.

~Keeper



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join