US officials, along with their British and French allies, made a very public point of storming out of the UN General Assembly today as Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gave a speech calling for nuclear disarmament and complaining about US threats to launch a nuclear strike against Iran.
Ahmadinejad reiterated his support for a third party enrichment deal, and complained that US threats for a nuclear first strike should be seen as a violation of the non-proliferation treaty (NPT). He also urged non-signatories to join the NPT.
In her own speech afterwards, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton angrily condemned Ahmadinejad for his “wild accusations,” and claimed that Iran status as a member of the NPT was itself putting the whole treaty in jeopardy.
Clinton’s claims are somewhat ironic, as the US threat to nuke Iran was made very publicly by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and others, while the claims about Iran’s “violations” of the NPT have never included even a shred of publicly released evidence.
These are the same sort of shenanigans employed by Churchill and his Zionist-backed "Focus" during the 1930s. The warmongers use the same tactics time after time because the sheeple are too dim-witted to see what's happening.
what an embarrassment to humanity….
i sure hope there are no aliens watching this shit or they might just decide to enslave us all for our own good
Where is the speech..?? Is THIS how they plan to confront Iran in the public arena..
Are their arguments so tenuous that they need to FLEE..?? O.K.,O.K… maybe he said something offensive and she and her partners should have walked out, but I don't see any such offending phrase(s). Putting a fat imbecile at state certainly wouldn't be my choice… Current diplomacy is as bad or worse than the shrub diplomacy…. I suppose when your argument is that the double standards are wonderful, one is reduced to theatrics like these.. OR…. When the desired result is domination and war, any successful alienation of the target party is a good one…. If America wasn't owned by foreigners, Obama could, should …would come to an agreement with Iran regarding the TWO WARS on HER border, one that is good for America, Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq and NOT the oil companies and Israel…. Sadly, it is them in charge these days… and we have these antics… Sad and NOT in America's interests
I thought it could get no worse than Condi Rice, but I was wrong. Great description of Hillary, by the way.
I thought it could get no worse than Condi Rice, but I was wrong. Great description of Hillary, by the way.
Only 3 countries walked out. We are up the proverbial creek without a paddle when Ahmadinejad makes more sense that the US. Iran supports a Nuclear free ME. Quick Obama hold him to it, but bugger it doesn't that mean Israel will have to give up their WMDs stockpile. France, the British and the Americans are all culpable in Israels obtaining Nukes. These same 3 hypocrites are now clamoring about Iran's Nukes and 'wild accusations'. If the US can't control its own ME pit bull how does it intend to control Iran and their battle hardened RPGs
Yes, the psychiatrists call this "projection" don't they? The US accuses Iran of exactly what the US does.
It is doubtful that even among intelligent and current Americans, the close to absolute US incompetence at diplomacy and negotiation is clear.
The US has been conducting business abroad as it has done at home–by ultimata, threats, hysteria, demonization, force and violence.
To wit: he US is, and has been for many decades, a predatory Capitalist warfare state.
But it is also bankrupt and is nearly at the end of its rope on the world stage.
Most of the world knows this.
With Clinton–again joke 3455. With the US in general, Republican or Democrat led–another serious dash toward the edge of the cliff.
We shouldn't forget what the pressure for sanctions actually means. Remember Albright's famous remark when she was secretary of state. She said the "price" of 500,000 dead Iraqi children was "worth it," something one could easily imagine coming out of the mouth of an avid Stalinist or Hitler worshiper. Now there is a bipartisan call for sanctions against Iran. Our so-called leaders are calling for "crippling" sanctions of the kind that were used against Iraq. What they are calling for is the murder of hundreds of thousands or perhaps millions of people. They should be called out for advocating the mass murder of children, which is in fact what they are calling for. We are governed by monsters, and we should respond to them with the same shudder of revulsion that we feel for the monsters of the last century.
Not sure if it was Arthur Silber or Chris Floyd, but I think they are right one when they talk about sanctions not being a seperate option to war, but rather being a prelude to war.
I find it ironic that one of the things we plan to target in our sanctions in fuel. Sure Iran has lots of oil, but their ability to turn it into fuel is not nearly so developed.
So remember this is all about their civilian nuclear program designed primarily to produce energy. Creating an increased energy strain on them would create an even a greater incentive for them to push forward with their nuclear program, because they would see the need for the energy all the more pressing.
Which circles us back around to what the point of the sanctions are. They are not to prevent a war. They are to help start one.
Not sure if it was Arthur Silber or Chris Floyd, but I think they are right one when they talk about sanctions not being a seperate option to war, but rather being a prelude to war.
I find it ironic that one of the things we plan to target in our sanctions in fuel. Sure Iran has lots of oil, but their ability to turn it into fuel is not nearly so developed.
So remember this is all about their civilian nuclear program designed primarily to produce energy. Creating an increased energy strain on them would create an even a greater incentive for them to push forward with their nuclear program, because they would see the need for the energy all the more pressing.
Which circles us back around to what the point of the sanctions are. They are not to prevent a war. They are to help start one.
Not sure if it was Arthur Silber or Chris Floyd, but I think they are right one when they talk about sanctions not being a seperate option to war, but rather being a prelude to war.
I find it ironic that one of the things we plan to target in our sanctions in fuel. Sure Iran has lots of oil, but their ability to turn it into fuel is not nearly so developed.
So remember this is all about their civilian nuclear program designed primarily to produce energy. Creating an increased energy strain on them would create an even a greater incentive for them to push forward with their nuclear program, because they would see the need for the energy all the more pressing.
Which circles us back around to what the point of the sanctions are. They are not to prevent a war. They are to help start one.
Not sure if it was Arthur Silber or Chris Floyd, but I think they are right one when they talk about sanctions not being a seperate option to war, but rather being a prelude to war.
I find it ironic that one of the things we plan to target in our sanctions in fuel. Sure Iran has lots of oil, but their ability to turn it into fuel is not nearly so developed.
So remember this is all about their civilian nuclear program designed primarily to produce energy. Creating an increased energy strain on them would create an even a greater incentive for them to push forward with their nuclear program, because they would see the need for the energy all the more pressing.
Which circles us back around to what the point of the sanctions are. They are not to prevent a war. They are to help start one.
ISRAEL BARKS! U.S. OBEYS!
ISRAEL BARKS! U.S. OBEYS!
This comment of Clinton shows once again the Americans are the most awful overt terrorists of the age since the 2nd world war,while they are the first and only user of the nuke,having more than 10000 atomic warhead, threating repeatedly others to use atomic bombs in different US governments ,incuding Bush & Obama,at the same time claim they sane.Its Elected president of the so called biggest democracy gets the so called peace nobel prize whose financial supports comes from the same fundation selling arms to make more wars,at the times when this president still are making war in Afghanistan and Iraq.At the same time the only antiwar site of Americans supports this country ,s tolls.is not strange?!!
Obama should sit down with Ahmadinejad and have a pow wow. Ahmadinejad shows he has large cajones in making the trip. Obama can show his is bigger by offering to hear him out, show him the respect he deserves. Walking out instead of hearing what he had to say is childish. We need Ahmadinejad help with the Taliban and we need his help in extracting our forces from Iraq. I would rather we had a comprehensive agreement with Iran and cut the umbilical cord to Israel. Israel has become more of an expensive folly, more a hindrance than a help.
I thought Ahmadinejad's speech was very peaceful and very intelligent. The US, French and British drones showed complete disrespect to President Ahmadinejad. I have more respect for the Iranians than I do the criminals running the US. Ahmadinejad is not like them at all.. Iran is lucky to have him!
Whats next? Hillary will take off her shoe and beat the desk in protest? Truly childish but what do expect from these selfish swine.
This is a bankrupcy on the part of US,UK and France to walk out as the only country used atom bomb was US and the new threat to Iran through their defence minister is publicly demonstrated and as always say is not upto the mark of solo super power.
Every problem in the world could be solved if have a Will that is missing by americans. If they want to remain super must change the attitude to dictate the world.
The US doesn't want to talk with Iran. That would mean they would have to end their first strike policy and oppose Israeli nukes.
The US doesn't want to talk with Iran. That would mean they would have to end their first strike policy and oppose Israeli nukes.
Thanks for the link. I heard it on youtube, and want to have a text hard copy.
Nobody should be walking out on another's speech, its sends the wrong message. Shame on all nations who gave him disrespect in this way. Peace means letting everyone talk, and talking rationally back, not running out like kids.
We have to ask ourselves if the countries that do have nuclear weapons are being run by adults. They don't even realize that the whole walking out on Ahmadinejad thing is seen as childish pique. The honorable thing to do, if you didn't want to hear the guy's speech, would be not show up at all.
The Iranians are accused of totalitarianism, but the delegations from the U.S., U.K. and France themselves can't bear to hear an opposing viewpoint – if one is presented they pick up their marbles and go home. Meanwhile, our so-called free press fails to report on Ahmadinejad's proposals or what he actually said.
We have to ask ourselves if the countries that do have nuclear weapons are being run by adults. They don't even realize that the whole walking out on Ahmadinejad thing is seen as childish pique. The honorable thing to do, if you didn't want to hear the guy's speech, would be not show up at all.
The Iranians are accused of totalitarianism, but the delegations from the U.S., U.K. and France themselves can't bear to hear an opposing viewpoint – if one is presented they pick up their marbles and go home. Meanwhile, our so-called free press fails to report on Ahmadinejad's proposals or what he actually said.
My top seven statesmen of the 21st Century:
1. Hugo Chavez
2. Vladimir Putin
3. Dmitri Medvedev
4. Evo Morales
5. Rafael Correa
6. Daniel Ortega
7. Hu Jintao
Men who have done more for their countries in a few short years than fucking Generations of syooge/poodle pretenders before them.
Notice they are ALL on Washington's "hit list".
My top seven statesmen of the 21st Century:
1. Hugo Chavez
2. Vladimir Putin
3. Dmitri Medvedev
4. Evo Morales
5. Rafael Correa
6. Daniel Ortega
7. Hu Jintao
Men who have done more for their countries in a few short years than fucking Generations of syooge/poodle pretenders before them.
Notice they are ALL on Washington's "hit list".
I agree 100%. I guess they couldnt handle the truth. Or as the Arthur Silber so succinctly points out "Truth is the Enemy".
Until the US presents even one shred of evidence that Iran violated the NTP, the US is basically demanding Iran prove a negative. In a twisted way it would be better for Iran if Iran had violated the NTP then they could expose what they did and end it and in sense, come clean. But since all evidence suggests they have not had such a program, they are being asked to prove a negative, which is impossible.
Good way to lay the groundwork for another war though. Make your demands impossible to satisfy.
I agree 100%. I guess they couldnt handle the truth. Or as the Arthur Silber so succinctly points out "Truth is the Enemy".
Until the US presents even one shred of evidence that Iran violated the NTP, the US is basically demanding Iran prove a negative. In a twisted way it would be better for Iran if Iran had violated the NTP then they could expose what they did and end it and in sense, come clean. But since all evidence suggests they have not had such a program, they are being asked to prove a negative, which is impossible.
Good way to lay the groundwork for another war though. Make your demands impossible to satisfy.
I agree 100%. I guess they couldnt handle the truth. Or as the Arthur Silber so succinctly points out "Truth is the Enemy".
Until the US presents even one shred of evidence that Iran violated the NTP, the US is basically demanding Iran prove a negative. In a twisted way it would be better for Iran if Iran had violated the NTP then they could expose what they did and end it and in sense, come clean. But since all evidence suggests they have not had such a program, they are being asked to prove a negative, which is impossible.
Good way to lay the groundwork for another war though. Make your demands impossible to satisfy.
How come human being can SOLVE very difficult scientific and technological problems such as building computers, satellites, Gene sequencing etc and are incapable of solving very simple political problem such as Iran’s nukes?
The answer is, in the first case intelligent scientists are in charge and in second case lower forms of life run the shows.
Imagine if the scientific community was as corrupt as the political system and all the staff were superstitious people with inadequate knowledge,……then they could’ve endangered our existence by developing stuff like viruses able to kill us all.
Studying in detail the processes and players for empowering entities who could make vital political decisions for humans reveals the depth of corruptions skillfully hidden from the public.
Why France, Britain and US walked out of that conference room? Study who are the real political players in these countries, then you might find your answer why.
We have to ask ourselves if the countries that do have nuclear weapons are being run by adults. They don't even realize that the whole walking out on Ahmadinejad thing is seen as childish pique. The honorable thing to do, if you didn't want to hear the guy's speech, would be not show up at all.
The Iranians are accused of totalitarianism, but the delegations from the U.S., U.K. and France themselves can't bear to hear an opposing viewpoint – if one is presented they pick up their marbles and go home. Meanwhile, our so-called free press fails to report on Ahmadinejad's proposals or what he actually said.
My top seven statesmen of the 21st Century:
1. Hugo Chavez
2. Vladimir Putin
3. Dmitri Medvedev
4. Evo Morales
5. Rafael Correa
6. Daniel Ortega
7. Hu Jintao
Men who have done more for their countries in a few short years than fucking Generations of syooge/poodle pretenders before them.
Notice they are ALL on Washington's "hit list".
i love dr.ahmadinejad because he is independence.he isnt with shit israel.