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.


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

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:37 PM
Only a fool would defend a fool. Not much else to say. At the UN most had the common sense to get up and walk out.

King has never been a good interviewer. Pure milk toast. Why he is still on the air with his abysmal ratings is beyond me.

Ahmadinejad is just a figurehead anyway. The Mullahs are the Dictators behind the phony elected President. He's just there for comic relief.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:38 PM

Originally posted by Jakes51
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.

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.

Can of worms is putting it mildly

I will present to you something I posted in another thread, for it is indeed a slippery slope, but sometimes the best way to correct years of neglect (to the NPT treaty) is with some actions that abide by it.

"There is a very easy solution to this problem.

The western nations should stand up and offer to HELP Iran build their nuclear facilities.

It would give Israel the assurances neccessary to not pre-emptive strike.

It would show the Iranians that the world welcomes you to the world nuclear stage.

And, finally, it gives everybody unmitigated access to the program, thereby making it almost impossible to build weaponry during the process.

After Ahmadinejad called out Obama to a public debate, he would be very hard pressed to refuse help."

We may never know if Iran's ambitions are purely power generation or weaponisation, but we would know if we were there helping.

That, and both of our countries(if you are American) produce some wonderful reactors that serve no function other than power generation,

For Canada, the CANDU, for US, not sure, but they do make them.

This would have allowed us to not only supervise and maintain compliance with NPT, but we could have also made a friend and a little cash.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:39 PM

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by centurion1211

And there in lies the problem.

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.

No, the problem is the message pajamaman puts out and the way he does it that immediately turns people off.

If the message and the delivery are good, people will pay attention and even buy it - even if it really pure BS.

Obama is the proof of that.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:39 PM

Originally posted by Jakes51
It seems the so called Arab street are uneasy about Iran's nuclear activities?

Arab and Persian, ancient foe.

Kuwait was a British Protectorate under Treaty; UAE and Bahrain have, in perpertuity, maritime Treaties with Britain.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:40 PM
reply to post by centurion1211

Lol, touche.

Second line.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 03:52 PM

Originally posted by DaMod

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:

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?

Yes, logical thinking perhaps.

A totally hypothetical thought exercise for you (and those giving you stars for your post).

If someone that says they have nothing against you and even wants to be your friend posts on ATS that they heard that you committed a crime. Would they be correct in stating that it was a viewpoint, so they were OK to say it? What if they came to a meeting or family gathering at your house and said it? Still OK with it? Would you quit reading/listening (walk out, throw them out) at that point? Would you wonder why your family and friends now want nothing to do with that person?

No. Logical, normal people would never do something like that and would want nothing to do with someone who did act like that.

Now try changing the names and places and see if you are still missing something ...

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 04:19 PM
reply to post by oozyism

Did I say they wanted to nuke Israel, but if they did; having a nuclear weapon would leave the option open. If anything, it would leave their neighbors like the Saudis, Jordanians, and the smaller Middle Eastern states at an unfair disadvantage. To bolster their position in response, we could have a proliferated Middle East? Furthermore, it would give Iran more clout to dictate terms to other Middle Eastern countries on regional issues.

As unstable as the Middle East is and has always been, where tempers and hatred often flare into violence; is it in the best interests of the world for a nation like Iran to have nuclear weapons? Personally, I don't think so, but you are entitled to your opinion if you do. If you do? Care to elaborate on why? If the head religious authority as you put it says nuclear weapons are "HARAM," which would imply that possessing nukes is strictly prohibited by Muslims; then why are all the secrecy by their government?

Maybe the Iranians are baking the best chocolate chip cookies in the Middle East, and don't want the Israelis, US, or Western Europe getting their grubby hands on it? Or just maybe, they are working on something else far more serious than a bout of cavities and a dentist's visit from cookies? We shall see if all this nuclear activity is for peaceful purposes or something else? If it is nothing more than supplying efficient power to their cities and citizens, then why all the innuendo and smoking mirrors? Thanks for the reply!

edit on 27-9-2010 by Jakes51 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 04:26 PM
reply to post by Blaine91555

well i would venture that he ones who got up and walked out are one heck of alot of Zionists who would gladly walk out in protest as they niether the patience or the time to listen to anything that does not suit their own political i would say people are not fooled at all...people are waking up and realizing the difference...not eveyone would necessarily agree with what ahmajimedad had to say just as many would not agree with everything the US says or Israel says...or many other says....but to get up and walk out in protest is just plain non diplomatic.
Here is a list of UN resolutions that Israel has not complied. As far as I know they have ignored every single resolution. But the situation is far worse than would at first appear, it involves the serious distortion of the official Security Council record by the profligate use by the United States of its veto power

not a very good i see some bias here do you not.

lets look at a simple definition of diplomat
diplomatic [ˌdɪpləˈmætɪk]
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) of or relating to diplomacy or diplomats
2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) skilled in negotiating, esp between states or people
3. tactful in dealing with people
4. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) (Library Science & Bibliography) of or relating to diplomatics

hmmmm does getting up and walking out sound at all diplomatic even when one does not agree with what is being stated.

I am glad to see people waking up and not believing the MSM...cause they sway public opinion only one way...all you have to do is GOOGLE IT....the media is run and controlled by the Zionist Elite, I wont bother to post it here as most people know this.

There is hope for mankind yet....................wooooohoooooo as we question everything

edit on 053030p://f10Monday by plube because: fixed link

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 04:29 PM
reply to post by Jakes51

I will post what I posted before again:

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

Once again, what did NK gain from Nukes?

Iran doesn't need nukes to influence the region, evidence suggests it already influences the region, that is what the US fears, hence the US is using every means necessary to stop Iranian influence, even illegal sanctions, and cyber war + terrorist groups.

The above being said, why would Iran nukes to influence the region? The public opinion in Arabs states show that Iran already has enough support.

Now, care to comment on Ayatollah's decree, that WMDs are Haram? And Ahmadinejad who said the age of nukes are over, finished, and only sick bullyism ideological driven nations such as US still use them to intimidate and control foreign nations. That is why the world hates US, while the US is trying to make the world hate Iran.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 04:59 PM
I think one Nation that needs to be held to account on the number and types of it's Nuclear Arsenal should be israel would you not think....the biggest threat to the world i would think is Israel.

By the late 1990s the U.S. Intelligence Community estimated that Israel possessed between 75-130 weapons, based on production estimates. The stockpile would certainly include warheads for mobile Jericho-1 and Jericho-2 missiles, as well as bombs for Israeli aircraft, and may include other tactical nuclear weapons of various types. Some published estimates even claimed that Israel might have as many as 400 nuclear weapons by the late 1990s. We believe these numbers are exaggerated, and that Israel's nuclear weapons inventory may include less than 100 nuclear weapons. Stockpiled plutonium could be used to build additional weapons if so decided.


I dont know if this is the case but if it is...then why would Iran be the threat.
I am sure that i will get shouted down for it...but hey...

The Mossad's planting and detonation of a micro nuke in Bali on October 12, 2002, killing 202 and injuring 209, provided yet another opportunity for them to practise their skills. Two small bombs were exploded at the same time, in order to cultivate the myth of the deadly professional "al Qaeda Muslim terrorists" whose trademark was synchronised attacks of great ferocity. The highly lethal micro nuke was targeted at the Sari Club, frequented by Australians, of whom some 89 were killed. There were no Israeli victims.


so personally if Iran was to become nuclear capable I think it just might be a stabalizing factor in the region.

Also like an earliar posts said...why would Larry King (zionist) keep going on Iran Iran Iran throughout the Interviews...another MSM method of preparing the public(which backfired...oooops).

Is Ahmajinedad a evil,egocentric,dictator who has human rights issues...heck name one leader that isn't.

ok besides Ghandi,Nelson Mandala.....

but you get the point

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 06:10 PM

Originally posted by knowneedtoknow
reply to post by ugie1028

Yep this is media total control they had like 4 commercials in 5 minutes

I believe it is called concision

Chomsky on concision:
" The beauty of concision , saying a couple of things between two commercials... is that you can only repeat conventional thoughts "

edit on 27-9-2010 by UmbraSumus because: delete repetition

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 06:26 PM
So. is the president of Iran, our next dangerous attack on freedom or world peace The next Villian in the story..demon to destroy allowed on larry king?. Is oprah next? Is he going to be in a music video with miley cyrus next? All this is a show. and its all allowed.. and I only stopped drinking the cool aide recently. You guys should see the absurdity here.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 06:30 PM

Originally posted by Angrybadger
So. is the president of Iran, our next dangerous attack on freedom or world peace The next Villian in the story..demon to destroy allowed on larry king?. Is oprah next? Is he going to be in a music video with miley cyrus next? All this is a show. and its all allowed.. and I only stopped drinking the cool aide recently. You guys should see the absurdity here.

Why doesn't Obama go on Iranian News Agencies?

Do you know why?

That way he can deligitamize Iran and claim that Iran has no freedom and won't allow me to get interviewed.

But ofcourse, if he gets interviewed, he would get ripped apart

How is he gonna defend the Hypocrisy, the first that will probably be asked, would be about Israel, why doesn't the US sanction Israel for not signing the NPT, or for having undeclared Nuclear Weapons, in an unstable part of the world

If I was the president of the US of A, I wouldn't wanna be interviewed in Iran

I would rather go to Europe, where US tax payers pay billions of dollars to spread US propaganda, hence (RFE).

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 07:03 PM
I think this is why Obama won't debate MockMood again.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 07:20 PM
I will watch the video later out of curiosity, but I just wanna comment on how pathetic I think all of the Americans are who would rather support Ahmadinejad and his regime over our own country. If you like him so much, why don't you move to Iran? It would benefit us if everyone who hates America would just leave.

Edit: I don't like Obama and I think he is a moron, but I am proud to live in the United States of America because it's where I was born and I will support my country, even if I despise the particular asshole who happens to be running the country at any given time.

edit on 9/27/2010 by OrphenFire because: Obama sucks anus

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 07:27 PM
"This is a small point but, in video 3 (9:00 mins onward) Kings states that '7 million - 8 million died' I assume he means Jews in the second world war. This seems a little desparate. Many years ago in school we were told 4 million died, then after that the 6 million figure is the number quoted most often. Now it is 7 million - 8 million in once sentence. A small point but being so flippant with two million lives does not give confidence to what he says sometimes."

A discrepancy of a couple of million people from someone like King is not surprising, since individuals like him, who promote and profit yellow journalism, often do not pay too much attention to facts. The reason why the fatality numbers keep going up must be due to inflation.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 07:31 PM
I find it more pathetic that some Americans cannot see the woods for the trees....

If I think my countries foreign policies are wrong, using your argument I must say nothing and remain silent....for fear of blinkered people like yourself who see Blind Patriotism as more important than the Truth....

I applaud anybody, anywhere, who speaks out, albeit on forums like this, against hypocrisy and tyranny.

To argue one must ALWAYS support ones own country, regardless of its hypocrisy, is just plain dumb.

Sometimes the truth hurts eh??

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 07:55 PM

The US media spins this guy as a crazed lunatic....

But it seems to me he just OWNED Larry King and the US media !!!!

We will see a nuke on US soil propagated by the same shadow government that brought us 9/11

and the blame will be put on this man.

My money is on Florida panhandle...

Fallout will be more controllable from interfering trade winds on a huge peninsula. Will blow out to the gulf or Atlantic.

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

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 08:34 PM
reply to post by knowneedtoknow

Apparently Larry King has no sense of diplomacy, nor does he (along with the rest of the lackeys in the MSN) show any ability to operate outside what is on an interview script...............Now we'll just cut to a break, we'll be right back.

posted on Sep, 27 2010 @ 08:45 PM
Oh man, that was enjoyable indeed!

Larry King got DESTROYED. What I hate and what was destroyed by Ahmadinejad in the conversations was how Larry King always tended to generalize things towards how bad Iran is and how he leaned towards Isreal.
I don't think Larry expected Ahmadinejad to take him down by reversing everything back onto America. That was genious and all too well needed. It's such an easy thing to do, and it gives great perspective into the the attacker to realize that he has no right to attack but only can suggest to improve.

Hahaha, made me laugh how there were like 5 commercials in the last 2 YouTube videos posted by the OP.
That already shows that things were getting blown apart!

Oh, I love this!

Especially the, "Who represents everyone?" part. Generalization in important topics is deadly, and usually when asked who is "they", the answer will come back to 1 - 2 groups/people or none.

Thank you for posting this!

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in