Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It is supposedly in the "agreement" which has the stipulation, by Iran, that certain parts are not made public. I doubt that is where one would find the provision as we know about it, but it may be that it is in the "non-public" section. As far as I know noone is saying the provision does not exist, therefore I would tend to believe that it does in fact exist.Thanks for that.You are coming to this a little late in the game, but here you go:No, the thread was about them launching rockets.What have the Iranians violated?
all rules of human decency---------your question is like asking--- what rules did
Himmler violate? or Saddam? ----or POL POT?
Does this violate some agreement, or treaty or something?
Iran nuclear deal framework - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Iran Deal
I usually don't do this, but this is way too important to have anyone in the dark.
I searched and searched your link and can't find anything about a limitation on missiles.
I don't agree that it has already started. This idea has been put fourth in other threads, and I have yet to see substantiating evidence to that effect. I do agree that certain "groundwork" has been laid, and some would say it is imminent. I am not conviced there is no return from our current path. I just doubt that anyone has the testicular fortitude to to what would need doing to change course, and prevent another global war (this time even Sweden, Zimbabwe, and Panama will have to choose sides). This time it will involve all nations, regardless of their geo-political stance.Sorry, IDB, just realized you are from New Zealand. Not sure how much of this is being covered over there. My apologies. We are just on the brink of WWIII and our "leader(s)" here think it's still a game of pixie sticks.
world war III already started-------in Yemen. ------Iran started it over there because
most people know nothing about that land--------or why it might be important
you mean he is just like American politicians?....Netanyahu says he declined to meet Obama due to U.S. election campaignnetanyahu was happy to use the congress for his own election prop but won't meet a president that isn't running because of the election?what a hypocriteNope, he didn't even give Obama the courtesy of a call either
Netanyahu says declined to meet Obama due to U.S. election campaign
could you expand on your "hypocrite" comment OGGIE----to whom does it refer?
according to the article-----the trip was supposed to be for a meeting of
some jewish organization------ Obama was expecting a visit too?
He issues an invitation? you got some link? The "election prop" thing
is----conjecture.
TEL AVIV (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday he had declined a proposed meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama in order to steer clear of the U.S. presidential election campaign, as Vice President Joe Biden began a two-day visit to Israel.
that'd make him a hypocrite. but we all already knew the guy was an asshole not to be trusted, why should we be surprised he's a hypocrite, too?
I see.It is supposedly in the "agreement" which has the stipulation, by Iran, that certain parts are not made public. I doubt that is where one would find the provision as we know about it, but it may be that it is in the "non-public" section. As far as I know noone is saying the provision does not exist, therefore I would tend to believe that it does in fact exist.Thanks for that.You are coming to this a little late in the game, but here you go:No, the thread was about them launching rockets.What have the Iranians violated?
all rules of human decency---------your question is like asking--- what rules did
Himmler violate? or Saddam? ----or POL POT?
Does this violate some agreement, or treaty or something?
Iran nuclear deal framework - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Iran Deal
I usually don't do this, but this is way too important to have anyone in the dark.
I searched and searched your link and can't find anything about a limitation on missiles.
Before I put you on permanent ignore the UN Security Council, no friend of the US, imposed the new sanctions. Let me guess. I think the UNSC and the IAEA officials know just a little more than you do about what is contained in the agreement.I see.It is supposedly in the "agreement" which has the stipulation, by Iran, that certain parts are not made public. I doubt that is where one would find the provision as we know about it, but it may be that it is in the "non-public" section. As far as I know noone is saying the provision does not exist, therefore I would tend to believe that it does in fact exist.Thanks for that.You are coming to this a little late in the game, but here you go:No, the thread was about them launching rockets.all rules of human decency---------your question is like asking--- what rules did
Himmler violate? or Saddam? ----or POL POT?
Does this violate some agreement, or treaty or something?
Iran nuclear deal framework - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Iran Deal
I usually don't do this, but this is way too important to have anyone in the dark.
I searched and searched your link and can't find anything about a limitation on missiles.
So you don't know.
you are just making shit up.Before I put you on permanent ignore the UN Security Council, no friend of the US, imposed the new sanctions. Let me guess. I think the UNSC and the IAEA officials know just a little more than you do about what is contained in the agreement.I see.It is supposedly in the "agreement" which has the stipulation, by Iran, that certain parts are not made public. I doubt that is where one would find the provision as we know about it, but it may be that it is in the "non-public" section. As far as I know noone is saying the provision does not exist, therefore I would tend to believe that it does in fact exist.Thanks for that.You are coming to this a little late in the game, but here you go:No, the thread was about them launching rockets.
Does this violate some agreement, or treaty or something?
Iran nuclear deal framework - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Iran Deal
I usually don't do this, but this is way too important to have anyone in the dark.
I searched and searched your link and can't find anything about a limitation on missiles.
So you don't know.
Now bugger off.
I don't agree that it has already started. This idea has been put fourth in other threads, and I have yet to see substantiating evidence to that effect. I do agree that certain "groundwork" has been laid, and some would say it is imminent. I am not conviced there is no return from our current path. I just doubt that anyone has the testicular fortitude to to what would need doing to change course, and prevent another global war (this time even Sweden, Zimbabwe, and Panama will have to choose sides). This time it will involve all nations, regardless of their geo-political stance.Sorry, IDB, just realized you are from New Zealand. Not sure how much of this is being covered over there. My apologies. We are just on the brink of WWIII and our "leader(s)" here think it's still a game of pixie sticks.
world war III already started-------in Yemen. ------Iran started it over there because
most people know nothing about that land--------or why it might be important
No, I do not have first hand knowledge of what is contained in the agreement. Very few people do.I see.It is supposedly in the "agreement" which has the stipulation, by Iran, that certain parts are not made public. I doubt that is where one would find the provision as we know about it, but it may be that it is in the "non-public" section. As far as I know noone is saying the provision does not exist, therefore I would tend to believe that it does in fact exist.Thanks for that.You are coming to this a little late in the game, but here you go:No, the thread was about them launching rockets.all rules of human decency---------your question is like asking--- what rules did
Himmler violate? or Saddam? ----or POL POT?
Does this violate some agreement, or treaty or something?
Iran nuclear deal framework - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Iran Deal
I usually don't do this, but this is way too important to have anyone in the dark.
I searched and searched your link and can't find anything about a limitation on missiles.
So you don't know.
Maybe so, that does not make it WWIII. At best it makes it a regional dispute, with the possiblity of becoming global. At best. Time will tell if this is the begining, or just an isolated event. I truely hope it is the later.I don't agree that it has already started. This idea has been put fourth in other threads, and I have yet to see substantiating evidence to that effect. I do agree that certain "groundwork" has been laid, and some would say it is imminent. I am not conviced there is no return from our current path. I just doubt that anyone has the testicular fortitude to to what would need doing to change course, and prevent another global war (this time even Sweden, Zimbabwe, and Panama will have to choose sides). This time it will involve all nations, regardless of their geo-political stance.Sorry, IDB, just realized you are from New Zealand. Not sure how much of this is being covered over there. My apologies. We are just on the brink of WWIII and our "leader(s)" here think it's still a game of pixie sticks.
world war III already started-------in Yemen. ------Iran started it over there because
most people know nothing about that land--------or why it might be important
talk to a YEMENI-----we got lots in the USA------usually working in little shops ----
that sell newspapers and cigs-------and owned by their own relatives----in innercities.
Iran is CONQUERING port cities-----Aden, Taiz , Hodeidah etc-------and Iran is
gathering its forces UP NORTH on the border of Saudi Arabia. It's a very bit deal
now being overlooked
Maybe so, that does not make it WWIII. At best it makes it a regional dispute, with the possiblity of becoming global. At best. Time will tell if this is the begining, or just an isolated event. I truely hope it is the later.I don't agree that it has already started. This idea has been put fourth in other threads, and I have yet to see substantiating evidence to that effect. I do agree that certain "groundwork" has been laid, and some would say it is imminent. I am not conviced there is no return from our current path. I just doubt that anyone has the testicular fortitude to to what would need doing to change course, and prevent another global war (this time even Sweden, Zimbabwe, and Panama will have to choose sides). This time it will involve all nations, regardless of their geo-political stance.Sorry, IDB, just realized you are from New Zealand. Not sure how much of this is being covered over there. My apologies. We are just on the brink of WWIII and our "leader(s)" here think it's still a game of pixie sticks.
world war III already started-------in Yemen. ------Iran started it over there because
most people know nothing about that land--------or why it might be important
talk to a YEMENI-----we got lots in the USA------usually working in little shops ----
that sell newspapers and cigs-------and owned by their own relatives----in innercities.
Iran is CONQUERING port cities-----Aden, Taiz , Hodeidah etc-------and Iran is
gathering its forces UP NORTH on the border of Saudi Arabia. It's a very bit deal
now being overlooked
I can find no evidence of your claim. Do you have a link to where I might find such a declaration?PS Iran has declared war on Israel-------got it all ready for when Iran INVADES
Saudi Arabia-------any resistance by SAUDI ARABIA-----with help by US forces
already stationed in Saudi Arabia------will be described by Iran as "ZIONIST
AGGRESSION" and used by Iran as an excuse to bomb Israel
Using that logic, the world has been in a state of global war for decades, even pre-dating WWI. Like minded people seeking to form a way of mutual defence/aggression does not a global war make. When nations, from throughout the world, declare war, that is a global war. What you are descriping has, in effect, been happening sense before recorded history.Maybe so, that does not make it WWIII. At best it makes it a regional dispute, with the possiblity of becoming global. At best. Time will tell if this is the begining, or just an isolated event. I truely hope it is the later.I don't agree that it has already started. This idea has been put fourth in other threads, and I have yet to see substantiating evidence to that effect. I do agree that certain "groundwork" has been laid, and some would say it is imminent. I am not conviced there is no return from our current path. I just doubt that anyone has the testicular fortitude to to what would need doing to change course, and prevent another global war (this time even Sweden, Zimbabwe, and Panama will have to choose sides). This time it will involve all nations, regardless of their geo-political stance.Sorry, IDB, just realized you are from New Zealand. Not sure how much of this is being covered over there. My apologies. We are just on the brink of WWIII and our "leader(s)" here think it's still a game of pixie sticks.
world war III already started-------in Yemen. ------Iran started it over there because
most people know nothing about that land--------or why it might be important
talk to a YEMENI-----we got lots in the USA------usually working in little shops ----
that sell newspapers and cigs-------and owned by their own relatives----in innercities.
Iran is CONQUERING port cities-----Aden, Taiz , Hodeidah etc-------and Iran is
gathering its forces UP NORTH on the border of Saudi Arabia. It's a very bit deal
now being overlooked
It is already "GLOBAL"----in that sunnis are checking in at SUNNI defense and aggression sites and Shiites are checking in with --Shiite defense and aggression
sites. Where there are muslims----there are, generally, both sunnis and Shiites---
with Shiites often a minority-----but sometimes the majority. -----even in places
like Pakistan
That would be the sanction on nuclear-capable missiles?Before I put you on permanent ignore the UN Security Council, no friend of the US, imposed the new sanctions. Let me guess. I think the UNSC and the IAEA officials know just a little more than you do about what is contained in the agreement.I see.It is supposedly in the "agreement" which has the stipulation, by Iran, that certain parts are not made public. I doubt that is where one would find the provision as we know about it, but it may be that it is in the "non-public" section. As far as I know noone is saying the provision does not exist, therefore I would tend to believe that it does in fact exist.Thanks for that.You are coming to this a little late in the game, but here you go:No, the thread was about them launching rockets.
Does this violate some agreement, or treaty or something?
Iran nuclear deal framework - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Iran Deal
I usually don't do this, but this is way too important to have anyone in the dark.
I searched and searched your link and can't find anything about a limitation on missiles.
So you don't know.
Now bugger off.
I can find no evidence of your claim. Do you have a link to where I might find such a declaration?PS Iran has declared war on Israel-------got it all ready for when Iran INVADES
Saudi Arabia-------any resistance by SAUDI ARABIA-----with help by US forces
already stationed in Saudi Arabia------will be described by Iran as "ZIONIST
AGGRESSION" and used by Iran as an excuse to bomb Israel
Using that logic, the world has been in a state of global war for decades, even pre-dating WWI. Like minded people seeking to form a way of mutual defence/aggression does not a global war make. When nations, from throughout the world, declare war, that is a global war. What you are descriping has, in effect, been happening sense before recorded history.Maybe so, that does not make it WWIII. At best it makes it a regional dispute, with the possiblity of becoming global. At best. Time will tell if this is the begining, or just an isolated event. I truely hope it is the later.I don't agree that it has already started. This idea has been put fourth in other threads, and I have yet to see substantiating evidence to that effect. I do agree that certain "groundwork" has been laid, and some would say it is imminent. I am not conviced there is no return from our current path. I just doubt that anyone has the testicular fortitude to to what would need doing to change course, and prevent another global war (this time even Sweden, Zimbabwe, and Panama will have to choose sides). This time it will involve all nations, regardless of their geo-political stance.world war III already started-------in Yemen. ------Iran started it over there because
most people know nothing about that land--------or why it might be important
talk to a YEMENI-----we got lots in the USA------usually working in little shops ----
that sell newspapers and cigs-------and owned by their own relatives----in innercities.
Iran is CONQUERING port cities-----Aden, Taiz , Hodeidah etc-------and Iran is
gathering its forces UP NORTH on the border of Saudi Arabia. It's a very bit deal
now being overlooked
It is already "GLOBAL"----in that sunnis are checking in at SUNNI defense and aggression sites and Shiites are checking in with --Shiite defense and aggression
sites. Where there are muslims----there are, generally, both sunnis and Shiites---
with Shiites often a minority-----but sometimes the majority. -----even in places
like Pakistan
I find it dogmatic of you to refuse to supply even one link to subsatiate any of your claims. I, therefore, cannot put any faith in your claims, and will discuss them no further. Thank you for your input, it was...intersting if nothing else.Using that logic, the world has been in a state of global war for decades, even pre-dating WWI. Like minded people seeking to form a way of mutual defence/aggression does not a global war make. When nations, from throughout the world, declare war, that is a global war. What you are descriping has, in effect, been happening sense before recorded history.Maybe so, that does not make it WWIII. At best it makes it a regional dispute, with the possiblity of becoming global. At best. Time will tell if this is the begining, or just an isolated event. I truely hope it is the later.I don't agree that it has already started. This idea has been put fourth in other threads, and I have yet to see substantiating evidence to that effect. I do agree that certain "groundwork" has been laid, and some would say it is imminent. I am not conviced there is no return from our current path. I just doubt that anyone has the testicular fortitude to to what would need doing to change course, and prevent another global war (this time even Sweden, Zimbabwe, and Panama will have to choose sides). This time it will involve all nations, regardless of their geo-political stance.
talk to a YEMENI-----we got lots in the USA------usually working in little shops ----
that sell newspapers and cigs-------and owned by their own relatives----in innercities.
Iran is CONQUERING port cities-----Aden, Taiz , Hodeidah etc-------and Iran is
gathering its forces UP NORTH on the border of Saudi Arabia. It's a very bit deal
now being overlooked
It is already "GLOBAL"----in that sunnis are checking in at SUNNI defense and aggression sites and Shiites are checking in with --Shiite defense and aggression
sites. Where there are muslims----there are, generally, both sunnis and Shiites---
with Shiites often a minority-----but sometimes the majority. -----even in places
like Pakistan
wrong again------even WORLD WAR II and I-----did not include EVERY VILLAGE
AND TOWN IN THE WORLD------they were both ---SIMPLY---very wide-spread as
is the current WORLD WAR------sit tight-----it is not a JOUST between Richard the lion hearted and Sa'aladin
Kerry and Barry are irans bitches...Only fucking Obama would be such a limp wristed pussy who would send John Kerry of all people to make a deal with Iran's leaders.
They used the Obama/Kerry agreement as ass wipe before Kerry got on the plane!
Another one of Obama's failures.
Iran Threatens to Walk Away From Nuke Deal After New Missile Test
Excellent point in your siganture, Rustic. It did work pretty good for them...NOT!!!Kerry and Barry are irans bitches...Only fucking Obama would be such a limp wristed pussy who would send John Kerry of all people to make a deal with Iran's leaders.
They used the Obama/Kerry agreement as ass wipe before Kerry got on the plane!
Another one of Obama's failures.
Iran Threatens to Walk Away From Nuke Deal After New Missile Test
The UN and the IAEA and the Mullahs are the ones having the hissy fit asshole. Had the agreement been as 'wonderful' and effective and airtight as the fucking traitors Obama and Kerry claimed it is why is there now new sanctions being imposed? Or do you believe in fact the UN Security Council and the IAEA, neither friends of the US, are just being 'mean' to poor innocent Iran?That would be the sanction on nuclear-capable missiles?Before I put you on permanent ignore the UN Security Council, no friend of the US, imposed the new sanctions. Let me guess. I think the UNSC and the IAEA officials know just a little more than you do about what is contained in the agreement.I see.It is supposedly in the "agreement" which has the stipulation, by Iran, that certain parts are not made public. I doubt that is where one would find the provision as we know about it, but it may be that it is in the "non-public" section. As far as I know noone is saying the provision does not exist, therefore I would tend to believe that it does in fact exist.Thanks for that.You are coming to this a little late in the game, but here you go:
Iran nuclear deal framework - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Iran Deal
I usually don't do this, but this is way too important to have anyone in the dark.
I searched and searched your link and can't find anything about a limitation on missiles.
So you don't know.
Now bugger off.
Carry on with your little hissy-fit though...don't let me stop you.
