President of Iran Ahmadinejad brakes larry king on everything nuke isreal and us 2010

Yeah owned is the right word for this. LK was stepping on his own mines left and right.

reply to post by Jakes51


He doesn't need to skirt the issue on his nuclear ambitions for his Country. He is the leader of his Country, he has allowed nuclear inspectors full access & has abided by all terms set in the nuclear treatie ( I can't remember what it's called) What gives America any right to say he Iran cannot use Nuclear power?

Why don't they look at Israel, who have an estimated 5000 nukes? who will not sign the nuke treaty. Is it because a bunch of Zionists run America? Is it because America have given Israel the nukes?

It's always the same old response. He'll wipe Israel of the map, when he said the Zionist leaders of Israel should be wiped from the pages of time, he's a nut job. blah blah bloody blah.

"Iran is a police state, with a horrible human rights record, and run by fanatical theocracy. If one talks about anything other than the official government policy, they are thrown in prison or executed. If anything it was rather amusing watching a lackey spout off about international issues which in all entirety he has no say in what his country does regarding them. "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones."

America is a police state that sells the idea of freedom but infringes most peoples personal freedoms. America executes prisoners on deathrow by leathal injection, firing squad, gassing, hanging & electric chair, depending on the state.

Those who live in glass house's shouldnt throw stones hey?


Oh yeah this is not america bashing, I love the country & one day would like to live there, but some people just dont have a clue

Ahmadinejad is layin the smack down on Larry King's candy ass!

HAHA This is what happens when you ask loaded questions.. Reminds of the kids that did that 9/11 video and i think it was ABC news tried to slip them loaded questions.

Thanks for posting this, Larry is getting wayy too old for his job.. It was hilarious seeing him squirm and be challenged here, I get so tired of his routine. I also learned a few things, and it was nice seeing Ahmadinejad share his unfiltered thoughts- despite the commercial interruptions. His actual political views and personality in the interview in no way reflect how he is portrayed to be on the MSM (especially Fox News). I loved watching him roll his eyes at Larry before answering some of his pointless questions

Originally posted by Cmajor
reply to post by Jakes51

 

It seems parties in the region are concerned about their program? Oh wait, Israel does not can't because President Ahmadenijad can't come out and officially recognize them.

Can you please decipher this part of your rant for me?

Ahmadenijad answered ALL the questions that troll Larry asked.
Then asked afew questions of Larry, which resulted in a quick add break.

Ahmadenijad won the debate, if thats what you call what Larry attempted...

All Larry succeded in doing was opening the US tax payers eyes to the BS they are fed day and night...

To further elaborate on the my remarks. Okay, the US is moving around military equipment and offering defense systems for nations in region. I have seen articles about it. Plus, there are more countries than Saudi Arabia and Israel who are concerned about a potential nuclear bomb having Iran.

U.S. Speeding Up Missile Defenses in Persian Gulf

Military officials said that the countries that accepted the defense systems were Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait. They said the Kuwaitis had agreed to take the defensive weapons to supplement older, less capable models it has had for years. Saudi Arabia and Israel have long had similar equipment of their own.

It seems the so called Arab street are uneasy about Iran's nuclear activities? Why all the defense system if Iran is as benevolent as the President is claiming them to be? As for recognizing the State of Israel, the President's remarks and rhetoric on the subject speaks loud and clear about his position on the matter. We all know the two countries don't get along with each other on a whole range of issues.

It was not a debate between Larry King and the President of Iran. Moreover, it was a simple interview. If some walk away from that as debate, it was more like a guy asking questions and another guy responding with overblown answers. Who is Larry King to respond on international issues and US foreign policy? So, why would the President ask him questions about the matter. Furthermore, Larry is not the subject of the interview, but the President of Iran. If some on the board would like to applaud and bolster the President, Mahmoud Ahmadenijad, then more power to them. However, in my humble opinion, I think of him as a clown.He has not said one thing of any substantial reverence to the major issue at hand, and that is their nuclear activities. He can go on and on about the disparaging incarceration rates or significant poverty levels in United States, and practically everyone knows about that. He has skeletons in his countries closet and everyone knows that. What we don't know is the true intentions for nuclear power? I am unconvinced, as many are on the issue. Thanks for the reply! I hope I was able to clear things up for you?

reply to post by Jakes51


He did though.

He said flat out they do not have any intention of developing nuclear weapons.

I'm not saying whether or not it is true, but I am stating you are wrong in saying that he did not answer the question.

reply to post by knowneedtoknow


I watch all the global leaders closly and he just dont come off as a evil mabey behind the scenes he a sneaky snake but not sure. I mean there could be a big snake game being played on all less ranked peoples and he could be just acting how he was supposed to in the grand sceme of things ( he play the bad guy then switch to good guy when maytria is ready to present and with him talking world peace why we make him look bad they will be tricked into still following the main agenda lol (some real tricksters).

But to hear him talk of all nations working together and how he tries to open discussion to our own back yard issues and then see our SEASONED MEDIA just go at him with sensitive questions makes this country look bad. Larry kept askin him questions about important things that 2 top ranked gov officials should discuss and he would just say YOU CANT CAST STONES IN A GLASS HOUSE-- OR -- HE WHO IS WITHOUT SIN SHALL CAST THE FIRST STONE. Basically speaking on how our population in prison are most for non violent crimes and others for being part of a drug war that is controlled (as if to say WE HAVE TO KEEP SO MANY-slaves- IN PRISON 1% mabey smh @ that) FROM ABOVE REQUEST IT SEEMS. Then he carried into Israel. I dont like any nation being looked at on a consensus level in a negative manner for all nations possess evil within their branches but he kept on saying WHY IS US SO ATTACHED TO ISRAEL and I used to think it was because it was birth place of CHRIST. Now I just dont know.... This world is insane and makes no sense sometimes.

Oh and to add I think E.T. have contacted IRAN, just not the same E.T. who contacted U.S.

star and flagged!

That really made my day.

Hope the public would slowly awaken and realize what really happening around them.

How very annoying that his issue of the G20 protests were completely ignored...Wasn't a coincidence that Larry was trying to interrupt for a break for a good 30 seconds once he knew the issue was coming up...

Originally posted by AndrewJay
He brings up alot of issues that both the mainstream media and the us government flat out refuse to discuss. He is right that in the g20 people were beaten and imprisoned for simply gathering and protesting. Why does the united states defend israel? Because of the holocost?? How many iraqis have been killed again? Why is it ok for the united states to occupy other countries?

These are all questions that shouldve been answered by a reporter with the experience and knowledge that larry king has and it just seems like he dodged every question and instead tried to shift to "iran is bad bla bla bla".

Link to his full speech at the un that wasnt cut off by almost every news channel reporting it:
www.youtube.com...

Watch The US and Israel walk out together.

Unreal. S&F.

edit on 27-9-2010 by AndrewJay because: (no reason given)

I quoted because this was a few pages back.

I saw no where in that speech where Mahmoud directly stated he believed that the 9/11 attacks where orchestrated by the American government. He said it was a viewpoint and he would be correct in stating that. Many Americans even believe it was orchestrated by the US Govt. Why then did they walk out? I could understand if he made direct accusations but he didn't. He said it was simply a "viewpoint".

Did I miss something?

WOW

King got totally owned. He should be embarrassed for even broadcasting that as should CNN. I think it would be a safe bet that next year's interview is taped rather than live

Originally posted by Melbourne_Militia

I wonder how many americans actually sat there and listened to it in entirety?

rant over.

You mean the pajamaman's rant? I'll wager very few.

Reality check to all you "pajamaman-o-philes" and "iran-o-philes".

Most Americans who bothered to watch probably watched a little of the interview and thought, "this is the nut job that wants nuclear weapons and says 9/11 was perpetrated by the U.S. government".

Next action was to pick up the remote and click ...

Perhaps the OP meant to say "breaks" instead of "brakes" - like a car uses?

reply to post by centurion1211


And there in lies the problem.

They change the channel and accept what the MSM provides.

God forbid they ACTUALLY listen to the speeches, or even better, read the OFFICIAL UN transcripts.

Maybe if Joe Average got off his ass and started caring the US government wouldn't have such an easy time creating fictious grounds for engagement.

Ahmadinejad is a foolish ideologue with a large podium to stand behind. He evades directly answering questions by giving half answers and redirecting the subject matter to his ideological enemy, the United States.

An interview is not a debate and therefore shouldn't be judged as such. To the extent that King's questions appear to be loaded, so are Ahmadinejad's attempts to redirect questions to Larry about the US. Even Ahmadinejad should know that Larry King is not smart enough nor qualified to answer any foreign or domestic policy questions on behalf the US.

Other Muslim countries in the area are nervous about him because he is from a different sect of Islam than the majority in the Middle East. Countries Like Saudi are from the other sect and fear he would start war with them as soon as he acquires enough strength. Remember the conflict in Iraq between the Sunni's and Shiite think of that on a larger scale with organized armies. Is was sectarian reasons that Iraq and Iran were at war all those years.

the 1st part of the interview was annoying as hell because King kept asking the same stupid question about the same stupid topic..

part 2 and 3 were awesome. i enjoyed every moment of King getting OWNED by Ahmadinejad...


To say the least, all i gotta say is, i feel like im living in 1934 Nazi Germany..(yes im from the US)

Originally posted by Bun-G
reply to post by Jakes51

 

He doesn't need to skirt the issue on his nuclear ambitions for his Country. He is the leader of his Country, he has allowed nuclear inspectors full access & has abided by all terms set in the nuclear treatie ( I can't remember what it's called) What gives America any right to say he Iran cannot use Nuclear power?

When has the US said Iran is prohibited to have nuclear power? I think the position is they are concerned about what is going on under the guise of nuclear power for energy? They have not allowed full access to their nuclear sites by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Below is the most recent update on the official findings by the IAEA. The quote is found on page 10 from the report.

Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions in the
Islamic Republic of Iran

Iran objected to the designation of two inspectors who had recently conducted inspections in Iran.
The Agency rejects the basis upon which Iran has sought to justify its objection; it is also concerned
that the repeated objection to the designation of experienced inspectors hampers the inspection process
and detracts from the Agency's ability to implement safeguards in Iran.

So, now Iran is dictating to the IAEA about whom can enter the country and whom cannot as inspectors? It seems heck of a lot like obstruction to me? Just to clear things up, Iran has not been completely forthright about their activities, and have not given unfettered access to weapons inspectors.

Originally posted by Bun-G
Why don't they look at Israel, who have an estimated 5000 nukes? who will not sign the nuke treaty. Is it because a bunch of Zionists run America? Is it because America have given Israel the nukes?

The international community has questioned Israel about their nuclear activities. They remain to hold the stance of neither confirming or denying their possession of nuclear weapons. Although, everyone knows they have them after the revelations made by Dimona Reactor employee, Mordecai Vanunu in 1986. No one knows how many nuclear weapons Israel has, but that 5,000 figure you mentioned I think relates to how many nukes the US has at operational capacity. The only information we have on their stockpile of nuclear weapons is from 1986 and Vanunu's estimates and data.

According to Vanunu's data, the solid plutonium spheres for Israel's nuclear weapons weighed 4.4 kilograms. He also said that Israel had produced 100 to 200 advanced fission bombs by 1986, had mastered a thermonuclear design, and appeared to have a number of thermonuclear bombs ready for use.

www.wisconsinproject.org...

Contrary to what everyone believes, it was France who assisted Israel the most in their pursuits for nuclear power and allegedly a nuclear weapon.

Franco-Israeli nuclear cooperation is described in detail in the book "Les Deux Bombes" (1982) by French journalist Pierre Pean, who gained access to the official French files on Dimona. The book revealed that the Dimona's cooling circuits were built two to three times larger than necessary for the 26-megawatt reactor Dimona was supposed to be--proof that it had always been intended to make bomb quantities of plutonium. The book also revealed that French technicians had built a plutonium extraction plant at the same site. According to Pean, French nuclear assistance enabled Israel to produce enough plutonium for one bomb even before the 1967 Six Day War. France also gave Israel nuclear weapon design information.

www.wisconsinproject.org...

So, it was not the US who helped Israel develop nuclear weapons or gave them the technology, but France and in secret. After they had learned about Israel's activities in the 60s, they more or less turned a blind eye to the whole thing. It seems the US was still concerned about the prospect of Israel having nuclear weapons, because through out their development they were being spied on by the Central Intelligence Agency.

CIA reveals: We said in 1974 that Israel had nuclear weapons

The Central Intelligence Agency, backed by bodies including the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research and the Defense Intelligence Agency, determined in August 1974 that Israel had nuclear "weapons in being," a "small number" of which it "produced and stockpiled."

Israel was also suspected of providing nuclear materials, equipment or technology to Iran, South Africa and other then-friendly countries.

Why the US has not been more forceful in pressuring Israel to declare their weapons capabilities is beyond me? However, perhaps political reasons then, and pressure from the Jewish lobby within the US? It seems that during Israel's alleged nuclear weapons program, the US was in silent protest and opposition during the affair. After it was complete, it would have backed the US into a corner politically due to their stance of non-proliferation during the Cold War and even today. So, if Israel publicly declares they have nuclear weapons, what good would come of it? People could spout all day about them being hypocrites, but it does not negate the fact that Israel has nuclear weapons. In the aftermath, the world would have a new arms race in the Middle East, while adding more pressure on Israel as well as the United States.

Originally posted by Bun-G
It's always the same old response. He'll wipe Israel of the map, when he said the Zionist leaders of Israel should be wiped from the pages of time, he's a nut job. blah blah bloody blah.

"Iran is a police state, with a horrible human rights record, and run by fanatical theocracy. If one talks about anything other than the official government policy, they are thrown in prison or executed. If anything it was rather amusing watching a lackey spout off about international issues which in all entirety he has no say in what his country does regarding them. "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones."

America is a police state that sells the idea of freedom but infringes most peoples personal freedoms. America executes prisoners on deathrow by leathal injection, firing squad, gassing, hanging & electric chair, depending on the state.

Those who live in glass house's shouldnt throw stones hey?


Oh yeah this is not america bashing, I love the country & one day would like to live there, but some people just dont have a clue

By his rhetoric and remarks, he has a frosty disposition toward Israel. Every time, he is asked a question, he goes off on one of his tangents instead of getting to the point. He was all over the place during that Larry King interview. Now, does US have internal problems? Yes, and you pointed out some of it. However, what does that have to do with Iran's nuclear activities? Can the US be considered hypocrites on certain policies and decisions? Yes, but what country is perfect or utopian in how it is run? None of them are, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is no exception. Thanks for the reply!

Originally posted by Jakes51

So, it was not the US who helped Israel develop nuclear weapons or gave them the technology, but France and in secret. After they had learned about Israel's activities in the 60s, they more or less turned a blind eye to the whole thing. It seems the US was still concerned about the prospect of Israel having nuclear weapons, because through out their development they were being spied on by the Central Intelligence Agency.

United States has been aiding and abeting a nation (Israel) that is KNOWN to have nuclear weapons, which is in direct violation of NPT.

For my country, Canada should be held responsible for WITHOLDING assistance with Iran's nuclear power ambitions, also via the NPT.

As sad as the truth is, every nation on the NPT treaty has breached said treaty and should be held accountable for it.

If we can't uphold our own treaties and laws, why should we expect others too?

Originally posted by Jakes51
So, it was not the US who helped Israel develop nuclear weapons or gave them the technology, but France and in secret. After they had learned about Israel's activities in the 60s, they more or less turned a blind eye to the whole thing. It seems the US was still concerned about the prospect of Israel having nuclear weapons, because through out their development they were being spied on by the Central Intelligence Agency.

Originally posted by peck420
United States has been aiding and abeting a nation (Israel) that is KNOWN to have nuclear weapons, which is in direct violation of NPT.

I would not go so far as to say the US is aiding and abetting Israel, but they have turned a blind-eye and have remained largely apathetic to the concept of Israel having nukes. It seemed it happened under the nose of Washington when they could have done something about, and when they learned of it; it was already to late. Therefore, they kept it hidden in a dark corner. However, this issue with Iran is opening up a can of worms regarding the US's stance on non-proliferation. Still, I don't see why Iran should be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, if that is indeed what they aspire too; because the US or even Israel is allegedly hypocrites on the matter? It will open the flood-gates for proliferation in the Middle East and other parts of the world.

Originally posted by peck420
As sad as the truth is, every nation on the NPT treaty has breached said treaty and should be held accountable for it.

If we can't uphold our own treaties and laws, why should we expect others too?

You bring up some good points, and I agree with you that many nations have covertly comprised the Non Proliferation Treaty. It is a sad sorry truth! However, because some nations have broke the rules and inherently made the world more dangerous, Iran has the right to potentially make the world even more dangerous? In my personal opinion, I feel the regime in Iran is unhinged and for the sake of security in the Middle East and world peace, the world cannot allow them to develop nuclear weapons. I agree every nation should be held accountable for breaking the treaty, but who will administer justice when the same parties who broke the treaty sit on the international bodies tasked with enforcing it? It is a slippery slope. Thanks for the reply!

reply to post by Jakes51


Im going to quote your quote here:

Military officials said that the countries that accepted the defense systems were Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait.

Speaking from personal knowledge, ALL of these countries have existing United States military bases.......coincidence? Hardly.

reply to post by Jakes51


Here is a simple question Mrs. Jake:

"What would Iran gain from a Nuclear Weapon?"

I'm having this tingly feeling that you believe Iran wants to acquire a nuclear weapon, to nuke Israel lol..

Is that what you believe in?

If not, why else would Iran want a nuke? What did NK gain from acquiring a nuke?

As Ahmadinejad himself said very clearly, that the age of nuke is over, that it is the one of the most ugliest weapons ever invented. That it has no place in the 21st century, and those stockpile them, do it only to bully nations in to submission through terror of being nuked.

And Ayatollah said it is "Haram".

So your logic says Iran wants nukes lol