In New York,defiant Ahmadeninejad says, Israel will be eliminated

page: 10
25
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by neo96
 


Every single one of your sources is MSM. MSM sources report what they are told to report by various officials who, in many cases, actually write the stories for them (to ensure it gets spread as far as possible, a trick is to write the story for a reporter so they can run it, get credit for it, get paid for it, but not have to invest time in it).

It is unfortunate that, unless you are MSM, you don't get audience with those officials. And, unless you are MSM, you are not listed as "credible" among the mindless masses. The ultimate irony: the stamp of legitimacy for the watchdogs is actually the seal of a club for lapdogs.


So if the article is from MSM it's automatically false? That's funny because Iran's actions sure support what the MSM are reporting.




posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
So whenever people target Jews in the rest of the world, it's all about punishing the Zionists huh?

I suppose that if Iran actually nukes Israel, it will be solely about the Zionists who rule Israel and not the innocent civlians.

Who cares about them right? They all serve their Zionist masters anyway.


Hello informal fallacy. Please take a seat.



So we stifle the rights of a nation because of a series of hypotheticals? Do you support pre-emptive strikes? How about arresting someone who looksl ike they may soon commit a crime, but has done nothing wrong?

When was the last time Iran picked a fight with anyone? You are not talking about a nation that is known for war mongering. AHEM.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
I think his own site maybe the best site to stop mistranslation

president.ir...



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by tide88

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by neo96
 


Every single one of your sources is MSM. MSM sources report what they are told to report by various officials who, in many cases, actually write the stories for them (to ensure it gets spread as far as possible, a trick is to write the story for a reporter so they can run it, get credit for it, get paid for it, but not have to invest time in it).

It is unfortunate that, unless you are MSM, you don't get audience with those officials. And, unless you are MSM, you are not listed as "credible" among the mindless masses. The ultimate irony: the stamp of legitimacy for the watchdogs is actually the seal of a club for lapdogs.


So if the article is from MSM it's automatically false? That's funny because Iran's actions sure support what the MSM are reporting.


No, but if it is from a MSM source it is automatically "suspect". Did you read what I said? The MSM is nothing more than the mouthpiece for the government, and people's denial of this legitimizes both the MSM and the government in their daily lies and half truths told to The People. You get articles that are nothing but spin written by a staffer and meant to elicit a specific response from The People.


Irans actions are what they are. The MSM, however, provides you a report on those actions, then tries to tell you what their motives for those actions are, and all the hypotheticals justifying the fear that they have. Lets take the "wipe Israel off the map" claim. That is tied directly to the nuclear reactors by the MSM, and it is insinuated that there is a madman in Iran with his finger on a nuclear trigger, ready to turn Israel into a field of glass. The reality is, he wants to turn Israel into Palestine. "Wipe it off the map" means remove references to Israel from the map, and replace it with Palestine.

Now, I can be certain that this is what he wants. He feels that Israel is not a legitimate nation. And I think he has a point worthy of discussion. Problem is, the first thing someone says is "antisemitic!" and the conversation stops.

He may be a bigot, I don't know. I think his issue is more with what he calls "Zionists", or people who he believes are responsible for the political machinations behind the sustaining of Israel. I don't think he hates Jews in general. When I read actual transcripts of his, instead of out of context snippets made for headlines, I get the image of an intelligent man with a valid viewpoint, and that he is frustrated that he isn't even allowed to discuss it before being shouted down for it.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by mideast
 





Hello informal fallacy. Please take a seat. So we stifle the rights of a nation because of a series of hypotheticals? Do you support pre-emptive strikes? How about arresting someone who looksl ike they may soon commit a crime, but has done nothing wrong? When was the last time Iran picked a fight with anyone? You are not talking about a nation that is known for war mongering. AHEM.


hello fallacy fallacy, where someone points out that if a person makes a logical error then it renders the entire argument moot, which in itself is a fallacy.

Iran is responsible for a fair amount of state sponsored terrorist, but i suppose it's okay if it's all aimed at Israel because of those Zionist pigs that rule it.

You might want to check in to it. Iran is not the oh so innocent country some people like to think it is, and give it a pass because it's against those Zionist pigs in Israel.

Here's a little something to get you started:

en.wikipedia.org...

So don't give that poor little innocent Iran junk.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by miniatus
There's no necessity for Iran to have built centrifuges..


Is there a necessity for Germany or France to have built centrifuges?



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by mideast
 


Hmm....from your link:


Following is the list of Iran's 10 proposals.

1. By immediate reform of the regulations, the General Assembly, as the main pillar of the UN, must regain its true position as the manifestation of public participation in global management.

2. The regulations governing the Security Council must be totally transformed and reformed in the interests of nations and justice, through the participation of all members of the General Assembly immediately.

3. The progressive principles of equality and justice must be observed in the enactment and implementation of the law.

4. The international community should hold occupiers accountable and should try to return occupied lands to their real owners, and the rights of nations should be upheld.

5. The principles of the prohibition of threats and the initiation of force in relations between states and the peaceful resolution of differences should be the basis of the rule of law at the international level.

6. The principle of sovereign equality of states should be observed. All the governments should have an equal opportunity in management cooperation, normalization, and decision making at the international level.

7. All governments should equally honor their international commitments according to international treaties and regulations.

8. No government should abide by the rules imposed by the hegemonic countries.

9. Legitimate and legal rights of states and nations should be respected.

10. Respect for divine prophets and celestial religions, the common heritage of mankind, should be under legal protection in all societies so as to control the hostilities which result in hatred and war between human beings and atrocities and to strengthen peace and convergence of the people.


For the most part, I think this is something I would agree with. Of course, point 10 is total BS. To that i say "grow thicker skin and learn to ignore". But the other 9 points he makes are completely valid, and USED to be the cultural principles of America.

How's that for the ultimate insult: we hate our "enemy" because he reminds us of how great we used to be.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by mideast
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 





I suppose that if Iran actually nukes Israel, it will be solely about the Zionists who rule Israel and not the innocent civlians.


Salam Saddam

you know better that Iraq had no WMD's and Iran has no nuke and you won't see Iran nuking anywhere.

rest in peace


hold on a sec about the WMD's and IRAQ.

Many of Syria's Chemical Weapons May Have Come From Saddam's Iraq

Seems to me Bush may have been right the whole time. Now for the other side, I found this article about Iran's need for nuclear power.

Iran needs nuclear power

Now although I agree with this to some extent, I also doubt that they wouldn't eventually weaponize their plutonium.
It also could cause an arms race for other Arabian countries to develop nuclear weapons.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
You know, people are making the same mistakes with this guy as they did with Hitler. Hitler warned us what he would do with the Jews, nobody listened.



Reductio ad Hitlreum

It's rare to see that logical fallacy on the same page, twice. You take the cake.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 



Oh, they are by no means innocent. It is like two people who have played tit for tat for so long that they are both pretty guilty.

But what you define as "terrorist" applies to the US as well. Its that whole "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".

I am an American. A damned proud one at that. But, and as Franklin said, "Where there is liberty, there is my land." And I am not seeing much liberty in America any more.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Well many people here take blog's and alex jones' site as true journalism, which is far from the case. The fact is, it's all hearsay. Not saying some of what you say isn't true, but most site, whether independent of MSM, have some sort of agenda. It's hard to sort through all the crap and know what is truly going on.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ClicheCalvicade

Originally posted by GLaDOS

Originally posted by neo96

Iran has sent arms to Syria, they have sent arms to Lebanon. They have also sent arms to Iraq and Afghanistan.

US has sent weapons to nearly every country in the world. Your point is?


America is not a theocracy spearheaded by fundamentalists who encourage an apocalyptic, religiously fueled ideology.

If you did not honestly see the point...sheesh, I'll keep my tongue.


Which America, North, South or are you talking about the US?

If you are speaking of the US the maybe not as much religious fuel is needed to get the war machine moving, however the US government probably has most apocalyptic ideology available



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 




So we stifle the rights of a nation because of a series of hypotheticals? Do you support pre-emptive strikes? How about arresting someone who looksl ike they may soon commit a crime, but has done nothing wrong?


It's funny you should say that.

Part of Iran's "defensive strategy" includes a bunch of hypotheticals.


"We see the US and the Zionist regime standing fully on the side of each other and we cannot imagine the Zionist regime initiating a war without the US backup. Due to the same reason, if a war breaks out, we will definitely wage battle on both sides and will definitely be engaged with the US bases," he said.


english.farsnews.com...


"(Given the above-mentioned failures) how does it (the Zionist regime) want to be a threat against the Islamic Republic of Iran?" Salami asked.

He, meantime, underlined Iran's preparedness to confront any aggression against the country, and said, "Our defensive power has been created on the basis of our defensive strategy and the presumption ruling our defensive strategy is that we will enter an massive battle with a US-led coalition."


Just exactly how many times can one man use the words, "defensive strategy" in a sentence in order to get everyone to believe it? It sounds like he's trying to convince himself.

And let's not forget that "the PRESUMPTION ruling our defensive strategy is that we will enter an massive battle with a US-led coalition."

english.farsnews.com...

Honestly, I don't believe an initial strike will be "US-led", but we will be forced to go in and defend after the fact, because that's what we've always said we would do.

However, be prepared, Iran will try to convince everyone that Israel talked us into leading the way in order to start their WWIII mission.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Well Ahmadinejad's quote you posted didn't seem to make entire sense to me, but he didn't explicitly say "Israel will be eliminated."

Personally I think you were just waiting to pounce on the first thing that he said.

As for Ahmadinejad's ideas for reform of the UN, I agree with them.

The UN needs a major overhaul if it is to become truly effective and not deadlocked. The United States could help massively with this. I know that the response people will give is that's up to the other four permanent members of the Security Council too, but as the United States is the most politically influential country in the world they have the most clout to do this. But they won't. Because they like to do things their own way and only use the UN when it's convenient to themselves and US interests.
edit on 25/9/12 by Kram09 because: typos



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 



Oh, they are by no means innocent. It is like two people who have played tit for tat for so long that they are both pretty guilty.

But what you define as "terrorist" applies to the US as well. Its that whole "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".

I am an American. A damned proud one at that. But, and as Franklin said, "Where there is liberty, there is my land." And I am not seeing much liberty in America any more.


Look, I know our government is far from innocent, but the fact of the matter is, without us protecting Israel, there wouldn't be an Israel. Actually without us in the picture, there probably wouldn't be a middle east by now. A lot on here give the USA a hard time, but what would the world be like without the USA in it. China and Japan, Japan would be gone, Russia and the Eastern Block countries....

We do more good then harm IMO. Do we sometimes overstep our boundaries? Sure. However, for the most part I believe the actions we take are necessary to keep the world in check.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 





How's that for the ultimate insult: we hate our "enemy" because he reminds us of how great we used to be.


You are great people like any other nations.

IMO, your country ha been hi-jacked.

Your country is spending much time on war and war-plans.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by tide88

Originally posted by mideast
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 





I suppose that if Iran actually nukes Israel, it will be solely about the Zionists who rule Israel and not the innocent civlians.


Salam Saddam

you know better that Iraq had no WMD's and Iran has no nuke and you won't see Iran nuking anywhere.

rest in peace


hold on a sec about the WMD's and IRAQ.

Many of Syria's Chemical Weapons May Have Come From Saddam's Iraq

Seems to me Bush may have been right the whole time


I agree with your comments , but

Bush invaded Iraq and bombed it to stone age and you say he may have been right ?

Maybe you should invade Syria to check if he was right or not ?



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Deetermined
 





Just exactly how many times can one man use the words, "defensive strategy" in a sentence in order to get everyone to believe it? It sounds like he's trying to convince himself.


Defense strategy against Sadam , terrorism , velvet revolutions , Israel.

Saddam invaded Iran and Iran defended.

That is defense strategy



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I am an American. A damned proud one at that. But, and as Franklin said, "Where there is liberty, there is my land." And I am not seeing much liberty in America any more.


Great post, BFFT!

Have heart. We are still doing OK when it comes to liberty. Things can always be better, of course.



posted on Sep, 25 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Oh for the love of god!! The people here defending Ahmadnutjob, remind me of the United States media defending
something ridiculous Obama said, and using every excuse in the book. 'That was taken out of context'. 'He didn't mean that literally'. Blah, blah, blah. What about this clown makes you defend and worship him?

So you still question IF he said this? The fact that the United Nations told him to not start with his trifling rhetoric before he even opened his mouth, should be proof enough, 'NutJob' has said the very same garbage before!!! Hence the warning!!!

Whether or not he meant what he said should be beside the point!!! I believe he is a psychopath and is a loose cannon! The fact that he is allowed to stand on American soil and espouse this crap sickens me!

As far as you don't like the source, Tell Ahmadnutjob to shut his mouth, and not comeback til he can speak English, then there will be no debate!!

Pax





top topics
 
25
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join