Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Login with Facebook Sign In with Google Sign In with OpenID Sign In with Twitter

In this Discussion

Obama vs. 9-11 Truth
  • September 07, 2009
    White House Throws Van Jones Under the Bus

    President Obama’s "green czar," Van Jones, was recently pressured into resigning. His crime? He had once signed a letter originating with one of the "9/11 Truth" organizations calling for a new investigation of the terrorist attacks.

    All he had asked for was a new investigation – and once this got out (thanks to Fox News nut-job Glenn Beck), he was shown the door

    White House spokesman Robert Gibbs took pains to stress that President Barack Obama "did not endorse" Jones' views...
    The three Jones sins were his having uttered an expletive in referring to Republicans, his having "signed a petition in 2004 questioning whether the Bush administration had allowed the terrorist attacks of September 2001 to provide a pretext for war in the Middle East," and his support for Mumia Abu-Jamal...

    Following recent media-generated controversy over Obama appointee Van Jones' signature on this Statement, (# 46) he and two other signatories have requested their names be removed. That has been done.

    Obama Warns not to challenge Official 9/11 Story

    Obama’s part in the US post-9-11 Big Lie make him an accessory after the fact of the 9-11 atrocity.

    Charlie Sheen's Video Message to President Obama


  • Friday November 13, 2009
    Alleged 9/11 plotters to be tried in New York

    Five men accused of plotting the September 11, 2001 attacks, including the self-proclaimed mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, will be tried in a civilian court in New York, The Washington Post reported Friday.

    President Barack Obama had pledged to inform a Guantanamo military judge by Monday whether to try the men before US federal courts or military tribunals -- a decision central to his plans to close the controversial facility.

    Asked about it in Tokyo, Obama said the Justice Department would make an announcement later in the day, calling it a "prosecutorial decision as well as a national security decision."

    "I am absolutely convinced Khalid Sheik Mohammed will be subject to the most exacting demands of justice," Obama said.*

    The decision would not affect the vast majority of the 215 detainees who remain at Guantanamo Bay, the controversial off-shore prison which Obama had pledged to close by January 22, the Post said, citing a federal official and other sources.

    Senior officials have already acknowledged the Obama administration is unlikely to meet the deadline that the president set just two days after taking office.

    Three prisoners have been convicted before military commissions, but the tribunals have been widely condemned for limiting defendants' rights and attracted criticism from the US Supreme Court in a 2006 ruling that forced an overhaul of the process.

    Despite the criticism, the Obama administration has indicated it will maintain the system established during former president George W. Bush's tenure.

    To mollify critics, the White House and lawmakers worked together on a bill passed in late October that boosted defendants' rights.

    The legislation barred the use of evidence obtained through coercion,* strengthened the rules on hearsay evidence and improved defendants' access to witnesses and evidence, even when classified.

    In a May speech, Obama said further defendant rights would "ensure that these commissions are fair, legitimate and effective," but added that his administration would seek to try detainees before federal courts "when feasible."

    Despite initial opposition from lawmakers reluctant to see detainees transferred to US soil, Congress ultimately approved legislation allowing Guantanamo prisoners to appear as defendants before federal courts.

    In some cases, bringing detainees before civilian courts may make it easier for the administration to secure convictions, and defense lawyers have long called for their clients to be granted US trials.

    "In the 9/11 case, they are not going to conduct the trial process behind closed doors, the whole world is going to be watching," said Suzanne Lachelier, military defense attorney for Mohammed's co-defendant Ramzi Binalshibh.

    But using civilian courtrooms could also pose serious problems for the administration, including the likelihood that the September 11 suspects would reveal explosive details about their treatment at the hands of Central Intelligence Agency interrogators.*

    * Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in one month

    Obama Blaming 9/11 on Al-Qaida Again

    Reverend Obama Observes 9/11 at Pentagon

    911 Pentagon Footage Fraud

    Plane hitting Pentagon... NOT!

    Why were 'first responders' de-contaminated at the Pentagon?,236.0.html

  • image

    " is important to recall why America and our allies were compelled to fight a war in Afghanistan in the first place. We did not ask for this fight. On Sept. 11, 2001, 19 men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000 people. ("blah, blah, blah, bullshit...") They struck at our military and economic nerve centers. They took the lives of innocent men, women and children without regard to their faith or race or station. Were it not for the heroic actions of the passengers on board one of those flights, they could have also struck at one of the great symbols of our democracy in Washington and killed many more... As we know, these men belonged to al-Qaida..." 
    - Barack Obama, Dec.1st, 2009

    Global Research, December 2, 2009
    Obama Reignites “War on Terrorism” With Massive Afghanistan Surge by Larry Chin

    Barack Obama has declared that he and his administration will “finish the job” in Afghanistan. In a speech that echoed, word for word, the now time-honored criminal 9/11 “war on terrorism” and “security” falsehoods of the Bush-Cheney administration, Obama is sending yet another “surge” of 30,000 US troops to the slaughter.

    Obama also promised, in the most bellicose fashion, to escalate the endless manufactured war against “violent extremism,” by sending American military-intelligence forces to every corner of the world where terrorists have a “foothold.”

    The criminal lie of 9/11, of “America under attack,” is the eternal pretext for imperial force. The lie has been cemented deeply, and irrevocably, into the fabric of society, and into the minds of the fearful and the ill-informed. And Barack Obama knows it, just as he knows the realities behind the lies he spews forth, in Bush/Cheney fashion.

    Clear-eyed observers warned since his ascension to power years ago that Obama has been a lifelong corporate “centrist” and accomodationist who will change nothing except for the style with which destruction is delivered. In fact, the manipulative Obama and his unsavory administration (of unsavory elites) has deepened every crisis, from the world war to the rape of the world economy.

    Obama has wholeheartedly presided over the massive global financial destabilization begun during Bush-Cheney, the continued militarization of the US homeland, and new waves of government-sanctioned looting on behalf of elite/Wall Street powers, disguised as health care reform and other false “reforms.”

    Now less than a year since taking office to mass popular appeal, any illusions that Barack Obama will bring any iota of “change” have been totally and utterly dispelled. Now, even Obama’s seemingly inexhaustible popularity appears to be plummeting. There will be no “exit strategies” or “withdrawals,” regardless of Obama’s false promises, and there will be no “change,” and no hope.

    The world instead faces yet another desperate round of mass murder, atrocities, and insanity, for military control of the Eurasian subcontinent; the “Grand Chessboard” as named by Zbigniew Brzezinski (who is, not coincidentally, an Obama advisor).

    A desperate Anglo-American empire in crisis, facing the fact of world energy depletion and structural collapse, lurches again for post-9/11 redux: more desperate war, more bloodshed, for control of the region’s oil and gas, oil and gas pipelines, opium and heroin, and to militarily and politically fend off Russia and China. More criminal politics, exemplified by the support of known US intelligence/oil asset Hamid Karzai, and his opium lord brother, while squashing all legitimate political resistance to foreign occupation (all labeled as “terrorists”). And Obama will continue to foist the lie of the 9/11 false flag operation to justify all of it, just as he has done since before he was (s)elected.


    President Obama's Secret: Only 100 al CIAda Now in Afghanistan
    With New Surge, One Thousand U.S. Soldiers and $300 Million for Every One al Qaeda Fighter

    Scott Horton Interviews Jeff Huber
    "I love all the great ironies of our age..."  Sometimes all you can do is laugh...  26:29 
  • image

    Candidate Obama promises to end the war. "You can take that to the bank."

    Dec 6, 2009
    US to launch new bid to hunt down Bin Laden
    The United States will launch a new effort to track down Osama bin Laden who is believed to be hiding in the mountains along the Afghan-Pakistan border, a senior US official said.

    Intelligence reports suggest the Al-Qaeda chief "is somewhere inside north Waziristan, sometimes on the Pakistani side of the border, sometimes on the Afghan side of the border," said national security adviser James Jones.

    In making the case last week for surging 30,000 additional troops into Afghanistan, Obama and his deputies have argued the Taliban are colluding with Bin Laden's network and therefore containing the Afghan insurgents is vital to defeating Al-Qaeda.

    Washington has stepped up a bombing campaign against Al-Qaeda leaders in Pakistan using unmanned aircraft, an operation that US officials decline to discuss publicly.

    The New York Times reported last week that the White House had granted authority to the Central Intelligence Agency to expand the air strikes in Pakistan to coincide with Obama's Afghan war strategy.


    Osama bin Laden:
A dead nemesis perpetuated by the US government

    Damn near dead, Dec. '01

    DAVID RAY GRIFFIN: Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive?
A list of arguments why bin Laden has been dead for a while.  13:33 minutes

    No-sama bin Laden
    If bin Laden is dead and al-Qaeda is shadow of what it once was then the whole justification for maintaining 100,000 soldiers and a nearly equal number of contractors in Afghanistan at ruinous expense becomes a fiction. President Obama based his call for an escalation on the terrorist threat in the region, but it can be plausibly argued based on available evidence that al-Qaeda has essentially faded away. If that is so, and Obama almost certainly knows that to be a distinct possibility, the American soldiers are essentially being sent to prop up two extremely corrupt American allies, President Asif Zardari in Pakistan and President Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan.

    Nobody is coming home. America is in for a prolonged, bloody, and expensive experience in AfPak in spite of Obama Administration insistence that there is some kind of end game. America under President Barack Obama will be nation-building big time and for years to come, until the supply of money and soldiers run out.

  • image

    Obama's speech last night called for an escalation of the war in Afghanistan, which, from the beginning, was nothing more than a military campaign designed to chase the 9/11 shadow patsy Osama bin Laden aka CIA asset and employee Tim Osman.

    Obama’s War Speech: The Questions It Raises… And The Answer That Must Be Given
    by Larry Everest (excerpt)

    On Tuesday, December 1, at the U.S. Military Academy in West Point, President Barack Obama announced that he would send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. He also called for 10,000 more NATO troops, which pushes the total U.S.-led forces to nearly 150,000, and he announced plans to step up the war on a number of fronts including (without being specific) in Pakistan. Obama has now tripled the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan since he took office.

    These military forces will not be going to Afghanistan to set up vaccination programs or conduct literacy classes for Afghan girls. They are going there as part of the most destructive military machine on the planet, to wreak violence. The military machine that has bombed wedding parties, that has held thousands of young Afghan men in Bagram prison without charges, that kicks down doors in the middle of the night—this machine is being strengthened and further unleashed.

    The core of Obama's argument for why people should support an escalating and ongoing war in Afghanistan is the same as Bush's: I'm doing it to protect you and your loved ones: "If I did not think that the security of the United States and the safety of the American people were at stake in Afghanistan, I would gladly order every single one of our troops home tomorrow.... I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by al Qaeda. It is from here we were attacked on 9/11 and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak."

    Do We Need 9/11-Style "Unity" Again?

    Obama ended his speech with a stark assessment of the difficulties confronting the empire, and a call for the kind of support the rulers had following 9/11: "We as a country cannot sustain our leadership nor navigate the momentous challenges of our time if we allow ourselves to be split asunder by the same rancor and cynicism and partisanship that has in recent times poisoned our national discourse. It's easy to forget that, when this war began, we were united, bound together by the fresh memory of a horrific attack and by the determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear. I refuse to accept the notion that we cannot summon that unity again."

    ...that's precisely what Obama has called on people to do—to blindly get behind the empire as it violently forges ahead in Afghanistan and globally. Obama's course is a criminal course; to fall blindly behind this, or to merely express trepidation or opposition and then impotently shrug your shoulders… especially for those who knew better when Bush did the same… is nothing less than complicity.

    Obama: "We Did Not Ask for This Fight"
    Bush: "We Did Not Seek This Conflict"

    Obama: "New Attacks are Being Plotted as I Speak"
    Bush: "At This Moment ... Terrorists are Planning New Attacks"

    Obama: "Our Cause is Just, Our Resolve Unwavering"
    Bush: "Our Cause is Just, Our Coalition is Determined"


    December 16, 2009
    Obama, Nobel Peace Prize winner, murders 120 in Yemen
    At least 120 Houthis have lost lives and 44 others sustained injuries as US fighter jets took part in air strikes in the northwestern Yemeni province of Sa'ada.

    "The US air force perpetrated an appalling massacre against citizens in the north of Yemen as it launched air raids on various populated areas, markets, refugee camps and villages along with Saudi warplanes," the northern Yemen-based Houthi Shia fighters said.

    Just one day after a very public denial that American forces were in the process of attacking sites in Northern Yemen, President Barack Obama ordered multiple cruise missile attacks on sites across the tiny, coastal nation.

    The air strikes were coordinated with the government of President Ali Abdallah Saleh and the attacks left 120 killed, many of them civilians according to witnesses. President Obama called Saleh after the attack to “congratulate” him on the killings. 


    December 18, 2009
    U.S. escalates ‘drone war’ in Pakistan
    It may take months before the United States deploys 30,000 new troops to Afghanistan under Barack Obama's latest surge, but the U.S. military is already rushing to expand its "Drone War" in neighbouring Pakistan's troubled tribal areas.

    Since Mr. Obama came to power in January, his administration has carried out about 50 unmanned drone strikes inside Pakistan, more than the Bush administration in its final three years


    December 18, 2009
    US Drones Kill 12 in North Waziristan - Third Strike in 24 Hours in Tribal Area
    The “hideout” in question amounted to a cluster of tents occupied by nomads who regularly migrate back and forth across the border from Pakistan to Afghanistan. The identities of the slain were not clear. 


    Surging by the Minute
    $57,077.60. That’s what we’re paying per minute. Keep that in mind — just for a minute or so.

    Women and men from Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, will be among the first to head out. It takes an estimated $1 million to send each of them surging into Afghanistan for one year. So a 30,000-person surge will be at least $30 billion, which brings us to that $57,077.60.  That’s how much it will cost you, the taxpayer, for one minute of that surge.

    One more thing, that $30 billion isn’t even the real cost of Obama’s surge. It’s just a minimum, through-the-basement estimate. If you were to throw in all the bases being built, private contractors hired, extra civilians sent in, and the staggering costs of training a larger Afghan army and police force (a key goal of the surge), the figure would surely be startlingly higher. In fact, total Afghanistan War spending for 2010 is now expected to exceed $102.9 billion, doubling last year’s Afghan spending. Thought of another way, it breaks down to $12 million per hour in taxpayer dollars for one year.

    And don't imagine that this is a terrible thing either! There's no shame in paying $400 for every gallon of gas used in Afghanistan, especially when the Marines alone are reported to consume 800,000 gallons of it each day. After all, the evidence is in: a few whiners aside, Americans want our tax dollars used this way. Otherwise we'd complain, and no one makes much of a fuss about war or the ever-rising numbers of dollars going to it anymore.

    Cost Of War:
  • image

    Patriots from an outlaw organization that imports deadly drugs and has overthrown democratically elected governments around the world.

    February 5, 2010
    Obama hails CIA 'patriots' at memorial service

    President Barack Obama paid tribute to seven CIA officers killed in a suicide attack in Afghanistan, hailing them as "patriots" at a rare memorial service at the spy agency's headquarters.

    In a break with tradition for the secretive Central Intelligence Agency, the president delivered the eulogy to an audience of about 1,000 CIA employees, relatives of the slain agents, lawmakers and officials.

    "For more than 60 years, the security of our nation has demanded that the work of this agency remain largely unknown," said Obama. "But today, our gratitude as citizens demands that we speak of seven American patriots who loved their country and gave their lives to defend it."

    The seven agents were killed in a suicide attack in Afghanistan on December 30, when a Jordanian double agent who had been brought to the US base in Khost after promising to share intelligence on Al-Qaeda blew himself up.

    Obama said the officers came from different backgrounds but were bound by a "common spirit."

    "They served in the shadows and took pride in it," he said.

    "They were doing their job and they loved it. They saw the danger and accepted it. They knew that the price of freedom is high and, in an awful instant, they paid that price."

    Obama said the seven officers were at the forefront of a "war" to safeguard the United States. "Let their sacrifice be a summons. To carry on their work. To complete this mission. To win this war, and to keep our country safe," he said.

    The event at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, outside Washington, was closed to reporters and the White House issued the text of the president's speech afterward.

    Although the CIA has not released the names and background of the dead officers, Obama referred to one of the victims by name, Scott Roberson, expressing his condolences to his widow who gave birth to a baby girl after her husband's death.

    Washington has stepped up drone strikes against Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants in the aftermath of the suicide attack amid speculation the Pakistan Taliban leader linked to the attack, Hakimullah Mehsud, was likely killed in one of the bombing raids.

    Friday's event was unusual as presidents and government leaders frequently honor the sacrifices of troops in uniform but rarely acknowledge the sacrifices of American spies or their families.

    The identities and biographical details of the CIA agents killed in the December attack have gradually leaked out over the Internet and in the US media since the incident.

    Two of the officers, Jeremy Wise, 35, a former Navy Seal from Virginia, and Dane Clark Paresi, 46, of Washington state, were reportedly working for Xe Services, the security company known previously as Blackwater.

    Six others were injured in the attack, including the CIA's second-in-command in Afghanistan, reports said.

  • PurpleHazePurpleHaze
    Posts: 717
    May 03, 2010
    Is the War in Afghanistan Justified by 9/11?

    by David Ray Griffin 

    “Whereas it is widely recognized that the US-led war in Afghanistan is illegal under international law, because it was never authorized by the UN Security Council, most Americans have believed that it was morally justified as a response to the 9/11 attacks, and many believe it is still justified as a necessary means to prevent another attack originating from that region. My lecture will present evidence showing that both of these beliefs are untrue, so that the 9/11 Truth Movement and more traditional Peace and Anti-War groups should be able to combine forces to oppose this illegal and immoral war.” - David Ray Griffin

    YouTube - David Ray Griffin speaks to a full house in Chicago, IL, on April 27, 2010

    It is the civilian deaths that are giving US policymakers serious headaches. The strategy outlined by Gen. Stanley McChrystal – and supported by Obama with the deployment of 30,000 additional troops – centers on protecting the Afghan people. It is unclear how killing civilians with drone attacks furthers that goal

    The right-wing blogoshere commentary on the USA Today report (highlighting the 250% rise in civilian casualties caused by NATO action from 2009 to 2010) notes that if George Bush was president, the level of antiwar protest and left media attention would be palpable. But since Obama is president, no protests, no outrage in left media outlets, only silence. The U.S antiwar movement had quickly fallen in line behind its Dear Leader in early 2009.

    For many Americans, it is unfathomable to think that Obama has been more gruesome than Bush. Even putting the two in the same sentence sounds like blasphemy. But the fact is the Obama administration has used the Predator and Reaper drones much more often than the Bush administration. The truth hurts. And the numbers do not lie.

    Afghan mourners gather to pray by the flower-decorated coffins of four children in Khost province on April 20, 2010.

    May 10, 2010
    Clinton: Pakistan Officials ‘Harboring’ Bin Laden
    In perhaps the clearest signal yet that tensions between the US and Pakistan are on the rise, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has accused unnamed parties in Pakistan’s government of harboring al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. "I believe that somewhere in this government are people who know where Usama bin Laden and Al Qaeda is, where Mullah Omar and the leadership of the Afghan Taliban is, and we expect more cooperation to help us bring to justice, capture or kill those who attacked us on 9/11,” Clinton warned.

    May 09, 2010
    US Threatens Pakistan Over Times Square Bomb - 'Boots on the Ground' Approach Could Destabilize Pakistan
    As with Yemen, the US has really been attacking Pakistan all along, killing some 700 civilians in 44 drone attacks in 2009 alone. And perhaps even more-so than with Yemen, the evidence is overwhelming that the Times Square attack didn’t happen in a vacuum, and that US attacks and constant US meddling in Pakistan is actually fueling the insurgency, which didn’t exist in any serious form until the 2001 US invasion of neighboring Afghanistan.

    May 11, 2010
    US Missile Onslaught Kills at Least 24 in Pakistan - At Least 20 Missiles Fired at North Waziristan Today
    The United States fired at least 20 missiles into the North Waziristan Agency today, destroying homes, cars and tents and leaving at least 24 tribesmen killed and an unknown number of others wounded.

    The US, as usual, would neither confirm nor deny any of the attacks, but media outlets quickly speculated that the attacks were “retaliation” for the failed Times Square bombing, which was itself retaliation for the previous drone attacks.

    On the other hand there was no indication that most of the slain had any previous ties to any militant group. The only person identified among the 24 was the brother of an alleged Taliban commander, though it wasn’t even clear if he had any ties beyond familial ones to the Tehreek-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

    The US has been threatening Pakistan since this weekend over claims that Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad had ties to the TTP. Despite US claims to the contrary, Pakistan’s government insists it still can’t find any actual ties between the two.



    Let's be clear. Barack Obama runs the biggest killing machine in the world. He unleashes it to protect the interests of US capitalism. This is not a break from the imperialist past but its continuity. Barack Obama is a war criminal. He should be in leg irons before the International Court of Justice in The Hague.

    A look at costs of Afghan war to U.S. taxpayers
    Congress has approved $345 billion so far for the war in Afghanistan, where the United States invaded to fight al Qaeda and topple the Taliban after the September 11 attacks in 2001. About twice as much money -- $708 billion -- has gone to the war in Iraq so far, CBO says. But Afghanistan is becoming the more expensive battleground, as the pace of U.S. military operations slows in Iraq and quickens in Afghanistan.

    Cost of War
    One Day of the Iraq War = 720 Million Dollars, How Would You Spend it?
    One Day of the Iraq War = 84 New Elementary Schools
    One Day of the Iraq War = 12,478 Elementary School Teachers
    One Day of the Iraq War = 95,364 Head Start Places for Children
    One Day of the Iraq War = 1,153,846 Children with Free School Lunches
    One Day of the Iraq War = 34,904 Four-Year Scholarships for University Students
    One Day of the Iraq War = 163,525 People with Health Care
    One Day of the Iraq War = 423,529 Children with Health Care
    One Day of the Iraq War = 6,482 Families with Homes
    One Day of the Iraq War = 1,274,336 Homes with Renewable Energy
  • image

    Sep 24, 2010
    Obama slams Ahmadinejad for "hateful" 9/11 remarks

    President Barack Obama on Friday condemned as hateful and inexcusable suggestions by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that the U.S. government may have been behind the September 11, 2001, attacks.

    Ahmadinejad responded to the U.S. criticism of his remarks by saying that Washington and its allies "need to listen."

    In an interview with the BBC Persian news service, Obama lashed out at Ahmadinejad for the latest of what the White House called a long list of outrageous comments that would deepen Tehran's isolation from the international community.

    "It was offensive. It was hateful," Obama said according to interview excerpts released by the White House.

    "And particularly for him to make the statement here in Manhattan, just a little north of Ground Zero, where families lost their loved ones," he said. "For him to make a statement like that was inexcusable."

    Ahmadinejad told the U.N. General Assembly on Thursday that U.S. statesmen were isolated in saying that al Qaeda militants carried out the suicide attacks that brought down New York's World Trade Center and hit the Pentagon outside Washington and called for a U.N. investigation.

    He said most Americans and others around the world believed the U.S. government orchestrated the attacks to rescue the economy and save Israel, comments that prompted the U.S. delegation, all 27 European Union member states and several other delegations to leave the assembly hall in protest.


    Ahmadinejad returned to the issue during a news conference on Friday, saying he met with four groups of U.S. citizens in New York who disagreed with the U.S. government's explanation for 9/11. He said he was not surprised by the angry response his remarks had elicited from U.S. officials.

    "The U.S. government, if it's upset, it should be," he said, adding that an unidentified poll showed that 80 percent of Americans found the events of September 11 to be suspicious.

    "Their (U.S. and EU) tolerance seems to be low," Ahmadinejad said. "Their nerves get disrupted too fast. They need to listen."

    He said 9/11 had caused two wars -- in Afghanistan and Iraq -- leading to the deaths of "hundreds of thousands."

    "Now they recently starting bombing Pakistan," Ahmadinejad said. "What's going on? How many terrorists are there? Is nine years or 10 years not enough time to get rid of them?"

    British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said Ahmadinejad's 9/11 remarks were "bizarre, offensive and attention-grabbing pronouncements." U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon also said he strongly condemned the comments.

    One reporter asked Ahmadinejad to clarify whether or not he has said that Israel should be wiped off the map, as has been widely reported.

    He responded that the Palestinians should be allowed to decide for themselves what kind of state they want to live in without outside interference.

    "Sixty years ago there was no occupying regime (Israel)," he said. "It was imposed on the people. Let the people decide."

    The Iranian president also criticized U.S. media, suggesting that American reporters all seemed to be under the influence of the U.S. State Department. He said one interviewer had raised his voice and insulted him.

    "In the interviews I had with all the American media, all the questions were the same," he said. "The only difference was the order they were asked ... The American media is the least trusted in the world."


    For more than seven years, the United States and its Western allies have been locked in a standoff with Iran over its nuclear program, which Washington believes aims to produce weapons but which Tehran says is for solely peaceful purposes.

    In Obama's speech at the United Nations on Thursday, he reiterated the U.S. position that the door to diplomacy with Iran remained open but that Tehran must fulfill international obligations over its nuclear program.

    Ahmadinejad told a news conference on Friday he was ready for talks with the international community and that an Iranian official might meet next month with a representative of one of six world powers offering Iran political and economic incentives in exchange for halting uranium enrichment.

    However, he thanked the people of New York, calling them kind and "very good people," and the New York police department. He also apologized for any traffic jams he caused.


    OBAMA vs. JFK

    JFK was adamantly determined to stop Israel from building the nuclear bomb.

    Obama Administration: Israel Has ‘Right’ to Nukes
    Call for a Nuclear Free Middle East 'a Mistake'
    July 07, 2010

    A statement released yesterday by the Obama Administration has made public America’s long-standing support for the Israeli government’s large, undeclared nuclear arsenal, and insists that Israel has an inherent “right” to possess such an arsenal for “deterrence purposes.”

    Officials have also reportedly acknowledged that the Obama Administration has labeled its previous support for a “nuclear-free Middle East,” including a vote in favor of this at a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) conference, had been “a mistake.”

    The Obama Administration complained at the time of the vote that it unfairly “singled out” Israel, apparently oblivious to the fact that Israel is the only nation in the Middle East with nuclear weapons, as well as the only nation which is not a signatory of the NPT.

    Israel has ruled out ever signing the NPT, though it has called for the treaty to be strengthened to punish signatories like Syria and Iran for what it perceives as “violations.” Israel has likewise never publicly acknowledged the size of its nuclear arsenal, though the fact that it exists is not generally considered a secret.