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: 6
19
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
I've never heard of this site you post your undeniable "source" from, so I have to mention this.. "The Drum OPINION"? Alright then..

The real problem I have with this article, is it literally has almost NO sources, and one of them is a WikiLeaks cable.. which isn't the real issue itself, but this is a very poorly written article to not include SEVERAL sources, considering how deep this whole event has gotten.

Sorry..




posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by sonnny1
 


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

you did not claim it was comment, you claimed it as source


You failed to mention Iran’s refusal to allow independent inspectors. You failed to mention why a ‘peaceful’ nuclear program is being built 90 km underground.

you used that NONSENCE line to claim it invalidated the article in the op whi it isn't even part of

now you are saying

90 meters




you make the OPs point AGAIN
way to go


Look,we are spinning this in circles.

If ANYONE reading this was to look at it,they would understand that the Op's source,has replies. Thats what I used.

NOT ONCE have you answered any of the legitimate questions brought up. You want to spin this? Spin away. Op is wrong validating his source,thats opinion,and claiming proof.

Period.

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



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Laokin

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd


Your quoting your own statements lmao deluded much?


Nope,just someone that understands that the Article you are USING,comes from "The Drum",Opinion article.

The man who wrote that statement,obviously is much smarter then the man who wrote the "opinionated" piece.






Not really, at all.


A nuclear weapon of mass destruction is totally different than a nuclear power capability. As such, they shouldn't be treated as one in the same.


Anybody who does is naive or ignorant.



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


Tell that to Japan...........




posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by popsmayhem
We are facing a threat so great not known or seen since Hitler.

Ahmadinajihadi is the Hitler of OUR time.
There is no downplaying this.
I would call wiping Israel off the map
and killing all Americans with a nuclear bomb
be a suit case nuke or a car nuke getting into
the US sent from Iran. Or them sending an operative
to unleash biological weapons/disease
Why keep going further down the rabbit
hole and letting more third world countries
have very dangerous weapons?

Right, so it was none of any ones business
when Hitler was killing millions
of people for no reason, and committing genocide?
WRONG
Sorry, America is not land of the free and home of the wussy..

That is why it is home of the brave, because we will
face danger and tyranny at any corner, and destroy
evil by any means necessary.
Get a grip, grow a pair, and brush up on history son.


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


You tell someone to study history when you are severely behind on your own studies.

The new Hitler wannabe isn't running Iran he's running Israel.

He's a member of the party that financed Hitler and helped him with his rise to power.

He's a member of the party that stood by and did nothing while their fellow Jews were being fed to the ovens.

He's a member of the party that cries "they want to wipe Israel from the map" but please pay no attention as we try to wipe Palestine from the map.

edit on 29-2-2012 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
but the msm told me they were building weapons! who to believe!



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by LonelyGuy
but the msm told me they were building weapons! who to believe!


Well it doesnt get more mainstream than this

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation, commonly referred to as "the ABC" (and informally as "Aunty",[2][3] originally in imitation of the BBC's nickname[4]), is Australia's national public broadcaster. With a total budget of A$1.18 billion annually,[5] the corporation provides television, radio, online and mobile services throughout metropolitan and regional Australia, as well as overseas through the Australia Network and Radio Australia. Founded in 1929 as the Australian Broadcasting Company, it was subsequently made a state-owned corporation on 1 July 1932, as the Australian Broadcasting Commission. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983[6] changed the name of the organisation to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, effective 1 July 1983.[6] Although funded and owned by the government, the ABC remains editorially independent as ensured through the Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983.

Link



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Just because they don't seem to be storing nuclear weapons, doesn't mean they're not any less dangerous than before.

They still have a madman in power and the ability to do damage whenever they want. Just have to keep them in check and make sure they don't start anything by throwing sanctions at them as we've done for years when they acted out of line.

Where are the paid shills from the fringes who love Iran and think they're as cute and harmless as Teletubbies?

edit on 29/2/2012 by curious7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by curious7
Just because they don't seem to be storing nuclear weapons, doesn't mean they're not any less dangerous than before.

They still have a madman in power and the ability to do damage whenever they want. Just have to keep them in check and make sure they don't start anything by throwing sanctions at them as we've done for years when they acted out of line.

Where are the paid shills from the fringes who love Iran and think they're as cute and harmless as Teletubbies?

edit on 29/2/2012 by curious7 because: (no reason given)

What makes the man anay more dangerous than a president that can order the execution of anyone anywhere in the world just by calling them an enemy combatant?
A president that sidesteps congress.

To be honest I found Ahmadinejad intelligent in his answering of questions from his interviews I have seen, even the Larry king interviews.

I find that he gets called a mad man because of media sound bytes that replay only a few of his poorly translated quotations.
Mind you, he has been in power since 2005 and he has probably had far less bloopers than any other world leader, far less sex scandals and no one questions his birth certificate



posted on Mar, 1 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by munkey66

Originally posted by curious7
Just because they don't seem to be storing nuclear weapons, doesn't mean they're not any less dangerous than before.

They still have a madman in power and the ability to do damage whenever they want. Just have to keep them in check and make sure they don't start anything by throwing sanctions at them as we've done for years when they acted out of line.

Where are the paid shills from the fringes who love Iran and think they're as cute and harmless as Teletubbies?

edit on 29/2/2012 by curious7 because: (no reason given)

What makes the man anay more dangerous than a president that can order the execution of anyone anywhere in the world just by calling them an enemy combatant?
A president that sidesteps congress.

To be honest I found Ahmadinejad intelligent in his answering of questions from his interviews I have seen, even the Larry king interviews.

I find that he gets called a mad man because of media sound bytes that replay only a few of his poorly translated quotations.
Mind you, he has been in power since 2005 and he has probably had far less bloopers than any other world leader, far less sex scandals and no one questions his birth certificate


You watch, they will never debate the real point of WHY.

Like WHY is it ok for some countries that have been proven dangerous to have nukes while others cannot.
I seriously cant believe some of the comments by some of the members in here. I seriously hope they dont actually believe what they write because if they do...God help us all.

Where is this insanity going to stop?



posted on Mar, 1 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   
It's interesting also with the situation in syria... i'll try not to go off-topic, but as it stands the events in Syria lately do not look like they have happened at the same time the west has been pressuring Iran. Coincidence, not at all.

Tonight on several tv networks (news channels) they have been airing a report on hillary clinton speaking about how Iran is "supporting assad" being a bad thing... and that this should be condemned because of Iran supplying military arms to some extent (i would guess ammunition, shells, and the likes). But then we have the "rebels" in Syria somewhat being armed with 2000-3000 anti-aircraft missiles by the americans... OF WHICH ... 2000-3000 anti-aircraft missiles went missing from Libya's military stockpile just after the assassination of muahmar gaddafi.

Along with the recent upcoming declaration of assad to be labelled a "war criminal". It makes you wonder, is there actually a territorial "opposition" fighting the assad regime, or is it one that is under the influence of american politics? Who is this opposition? To me, it's an american backed opposition which is trying to defeat the Syrian regime so that Iran has one less allie to call for help from.

Of course Iran is going to support Syria as they are allies. If any of the Iranian leaders labelled the washington administration as "war criminals", for being allied with Israel, you can expect the "international community" to ridicule them with laughter and cheap punch lines.

War criminals, international community, opposition....? pfft. These words mean nothing when they are spoken by Hillary clinton.

There may be war criminals, but before... Hillary... you try to call someone that, you should first yourself be locked up for crimes against humanity, along with Blair, Bush, Obama and the rest of their administrations. There may be an international community, but you... Hillary... assume the majority of the world is a zionist cult, far from international. There may also be an opposition, but why do you... Hillary... call it an opposition if they are forces that you support and encourage, you should be calling them allies, correct?

The whole thing is a ploy. The more time goes on, the more obvious it is that the west are fuelling the assault on Syrian people for the sake of getting to the Iranian leadership as a form of pressure.

It makes me sick how we are all being played as part of a game and yet hardly anyone realises




top topics



 
19
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join