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.

 

The systematic exaggeration of the Iranian threat

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by sonnny1
 


yupr quote is from the comments section not the article there is a big difference
the fact that you didn't state that is well...telling

and really illustrates the Op's statement about the systematic overstatement of the threat of Iran

way to go


Thank you, its great to see that there are people who can see the game that is being played here.




posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by sonnny1
 


your quote is from the comments section NOT the article there is a big difference
the fact that you didn't state that is well...telling

and really illustrates the Op's statement about the systematic overstatement of the threat of Iran

way to go
edit on 28-2-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)


I thought stating this:

Heres a great reply from your "opinionated " source......

Was clear enough.........

It was a reply,was it not???


edit on 28-2-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by reaxi0n

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by sonnny1
 


yupr quote is from the comments section not the article there is a big difference
the fact that you didn't state that is well...telling

and really illustrates the Op's statement about the systematic overstatement of the threat of Iran

way to go




He didn't state it? Weird cause I see this....


Heres a great reply from your "opinionated " source......




Jesus you people are naive.

FIRST of all a comment to an article is NOT a source and SECOND the poster of the comment doesnt provide any proof or links to back up his statement. Bait and switch pure and simple.. Im actually impressed the shills were on to this article so quickly. Nice work.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd


There is no greater proof required. The ABC is as mainstream a news agency as you can get seeing as its sponsored by the Government.



Again,if you read the EXACT words from the top of the article,you will see OPINION.

Opinion,is now proof?

Deny ignorance indeed.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by sonnny1
 


your quote is from the comments section NOT the article there is a big difference
the fact that you didn't state that is well...telling

and really illustrates the Op's statement about the systematic overstatement of the threat of Iran

way to go
edit on 28-2-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)


I thought stating this:

Heres a great reply from your "opinionated " source......

Was clear enough.........

It was a reply,was it not???


edit on 28-2-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



So what who cares? Itw asnt written by the author of the article and it provided no proof NO PROOF... DO....YOU......UNDERSTAND?? OPINION.....OPINION...lol why is this so hard for you to get?

Comments to an article is NOT the same thing as the article.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 


Someone replied to the crappy author of this opinionated piece.

I quoted the response.

It was actually better authored,with better facts.Kudos to the responder.

Not once have you really answers any of the questions I asked you.

Pertinent questions,to Iran's refusal to let inspectors do their job.

Pertinent questions as to why have a hidden facility.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd


There is no greater proof required. The ABC is as mainstream a news agency as you can get seeing as its sponsored by the Government.



Again,if you read the EXACT words from the top of the article,you will see OPINION.

Opinion,is now proof?

Deny ignorance indeed.



The article was PUBLISHED by the ABC which means it underwent editorial screening. So the sources and comments in the ARTICLE have to be verified by the editor. Comments on the other hand can be made by any body. They dont provide proof just their opinion.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 


Someone replied to the crappy author of this opinionated piece.

I quoted the response.

It was actually better authored,with better facts.Kudos to the responder.

Not once have you really answers any of the questions I asked you.

Pertinent questions,to Iran's refusal to let inspectors do their job.

Pertinent questions as to why have a hidden facility.



What the hell are you talking about?? There were NO facts in that comment just opinion.. Are you allowed to be on the computer right now? i mean seriously? He provided NO links to his OPINION.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 


It's always funny to get called a shill for providing things that completely contradict what you are trying to get across. Please use a better argument.

Which part of that comment do you find untrue? We can take this step by step. For starters, here is the Feb 24th IAEA report mentioned in it.

isis-online.org...

And here is the IAEA report from november that was mentioned, which states:


A detailed analysis of the information available to the Agency (indicates) that Iran has carried out activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device. This information, which comes from a wide variety of independent sources, including from a number of Member States, from the Agency’s own efforts and from information provided by Iran itself, is assessed by the Agency to be, overall, credible. The information indicates that: prior to the end of 2003 the activities took place under a structured programme; that some continued after 2003; and that some may still be ongoing.


info.publicintelligence.net...



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd


What the hell are you talking about?? There were NO facts in that comment just opinion.. Are you allowed to be on the computer right now? i mean seriously? He provided NO links to his OPINION.


When you spout off nonsense like this..........................


Originally posted by TiM3LoRd
There is no greater proof required.



I question the validity of the source.


edit on 29-2-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by reaxi0n
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 


It's always funny to get called a shill for providing things that completely contradict what you are trying to get across. Please use a better argument.

Which part of that comment do you find untrue? We can take this step by step. For starters, here is the Feb 24th IAEA report mentioned in it.

isis-online.org...

And here is the IAEA report from november that was mentioned, which states:


A detailed analysis of the information available to the Agency (indicates) that Iran has carried out activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device. This information, which comes from a wide variety of independent sources, including from a number of Member States, from the Agency’s own efforts and from information provided by Iran itself, is assessed by the Agency to be, overall, credible. The information indicates that: prior to the end of 2003 the activities took place under a structured programme; that some continued after 2003; and that some may still be ongoing.


info.publicintelligence.net...



HAHAHA


So what's fuelling this, mostly Republican, urge to bomb the mullahs? Perhaps it was the incendiary, "new" International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) suggestion that Iran was enriching uranium as part of a secret weapons program in a hidden location? Interestingly, these allegations have only resurfaced since the new IAEA boss, Yukiya Amano, took up his position. The British media watchdog Medialens had an explanation and it came from US diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks showing Yukiya Amano may not be an honest broker in this debate.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd


What the hell are you talking about?? There were NO facts in that comment just opinion.. Are you allowed to be on the computer right now? i mean seriously? He provided NO links to his OPINION.


When you spout off nonsense like this..........................


Originally posted by TiM3LoRd
There is no greater proof required.



I question the validity of the source.


edit on 29-2-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)


You question the validity of your own government??? And the people hired by them?



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd


HAHAHA


So what's fuelling this, mostly Republican, urge to bomb the mullahs? Perhaps it was the incendiary, "new" International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) suggestion that Iran was enriching uranium as part of a secret weapons program in a hidden location? Interestingly, these allegations have only resurfaced since the new IAEA boss, Yukiya Amano, took up his position. The British media watchdog Medialens had an explanation and it came from US diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks showing Yukiya Amano may not be an honest broker in this debate.


Nice copout. Facts are presented so "he's lying"




43. The information indicates that Iran has carried out the following activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device:

• Efforts, some successful, to procure nuclear related and dual use equipment and materials by military related individuals and entities (Annex, Sections C.1 and C.2);
• Efforts to develop undeclared pathways for the production of nuclear material (Annex, Section C.3);
• The acquisition of nuclear weapons development information and documentation from a clandestine nuclear supply network (Annex, Section C.4); and
• Work on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components (Annex, Sections C.5–C.12).

44. While some of the activities identified in the Annex have civilian as well as military applications, others are specific to nuclear weapons.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd

You question the validity of your own government??? And the people hired by them?


I question your source when you use statements like "There is no greater proof required."

Not only that,you agreed it was opinion........



Really,now,lets not backpedal to hard...........




posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by reaxi0n


43. The information indicates that Iran has carried out the following activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device:

• Efforts, some successful, to procure nuclear related and dual use equipment and materials by military related individuals and entities (Annex, Sections C.1 and C.2);
• Efforts to develop undeclared pathways for the production of nuclear material (Annex, Section C.3);
• The acquisition of nuclear weapons development information and documentation from a clandestine nuclear supply network (Annex, Section C.4); and
• Work on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components (Annex, Sections C.5–C.12).

44. While some of the activities identified in the Annex have civilian as well as military applications, others are specific to nuclear weapons.


Nice bait and switch again. THAT QUOTE is NOT from the article so please show the link where you got it from thanks..That way we can verify its authenticity and credibility.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
Has Neville Chamberlain risen from the grave and gotten an ATS account? Nah, the Germans are no threat to anyone. It's just propaganda....



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd

Originally posted by reaxi0n


43. The information indicates that Iran has carried out the following activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device:

• Efforts, some successful, to procure nuclear related and dual use equipment and materials by military related individuals and entities (Annex, Sections C.1 and C.2);
• Efforts to develop undeclared pathways for the production of nuclear material (Annex, Section C.3);
• The acquisition of nuclear weapons development information and documentation from a clandestine nuclear supply network (Annex, Section C.4); and
• Work on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components (Annex, Sections C.5–C.12).

44. While some of the activities identified in the Annex have civilian as well as military applications, others are specific to nuclear weapons.


Nice bait and switch again. THAT QUOTE is NOT from the article so please show the link where you got it from thanks..That way we can verify its authenticity and credibility.



Bait and switch? Do you know what that means or do you just like the way it sounds?

here's a novel idea....wait for it.....read the damn reports I posted



That is from the November report

But wait, I forgot, you like to ignore facts
edit on 2-29-12 by reaxi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd

You question the validity of your own government??? And the people hired by them?


I question your source when you use statements like "There is no greater proof required."

Not only that,you agreed it was opinion........



Really,now,lets not backpedal to hard...........



LOL are you trying to be confusing on purpose? What does you questioning the source have to do with my opinion on the article?? I believe I dont need any more proof and that this whole Iran fiasco is nothing more than an excuse to go to war again.. What does that have anything to do with the source of the information????

Are you special???



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by reaxi0n

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd

Originally posted by reaxi0n


43. The information indicates that Iran has carried out the following activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device:

• Efforts, some successful, to procure nuclear related and dual use equipment and materials by military related individuals and entities (Annex, Sections C.1 and C.2);
• Efforts to develop undeclared pathways for the production of nuclear material (Annex, Section C.3);
• The acquisition of nuclear weapons development information and documentation from a clandestine nuclear supply network (Annex, Section C.4); and
• Work on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components (Annex, Sections C.5–C.12).

44. While some of the activities identified in the Annex have civilian as well as military applications, others are specific to nuclear weapons.


Nice bait and switch again. THAT QUOTE is NOT from the article so please show the link where you got it from thanks..That way we can verify its authenticity and credibility.



Bait and switch? Do you know what that means or do you just like the way it sounds?

here's a novel idea....wait for it.....read the damn reports I posted



That is from the November report

But wait, I forgot, you like to ignore facts
edit on 2-29-12 by reaxi0n because: (no reason given)



Ignored the facts?? can you please link to the source please..



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:12 AM
link   
reply to post by TiM3LoRd
 


I said I already posted it here

"Are you special?"
Just in case you have a hard time finding it in that post, here it is.

info.publicintelligence.net...
edit on 2-29-12 by reaxi0n because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join