PDA

View Full Version : Anderson Cooper interview of RP on CNN.com's front page




wbbgjr
11-02-2007, 11:36 AM
Hey guys.. check it out and keep the viewer count high so that they keep it on the front page.

ChristopherJ
11-02-2007, 11:48 AM
Wooo....This looks like a good interview. Wonder how long the interview will be in total?

In the clip provided Solidad Obrien seems to just ask straight forward questions and then allow RP to explain his position.

Btw I found the clip on the AC360 blog front page. It wasn't on CNN's front page.

Thanks for the heads up...

margomaps
11-02-2007, 11:52 AM
There's a link under "Latest News" on the top of the page, right hand side, that says:

"Ron Paul: Giuliani doesn't understand 9/11 (Video)"

Click it!

LibertyEagle
11-02-2007, 12:01 PM
I watched the video that came up right after the interview with Ron Paul. It was showing a Missouri Senator endorsing Giuliani.

Man, I wish S. Carolina's governor would go ahead and endorse Paul. It ticks me off that that California Senator endorsed Fred. I guess he just felt like he couldn't wait. :(

Ibgamer
11-02-2007, 12:02 PM
That was a good little preview of the interview

I wonder how long its going to be on AC and how much publicity we will get for it

JMann
11-02-2007, 12:13 PM
Gezus- hate to give the Communist News Network a hit but I will.

newmedia4ron
11-02-2007, 12:16 PM
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/11/02/intv.ron.paul.cnn?iref=videosearch

Click on the little email symbol next to the volume bar.

Email it constantly so it becomes the most popular video on the site!(u could also win an ipod too)

Mitt Romneys sideburns
11-02-2007, 12:19 PM
Oh my, its like a flash back to 1988


Solidad Obrien: What if Iran gets nuclear weapons?

Ron Paul: But they already have them in Pakistan

Solidad: Im talking about Iran

Ron Paul: But they already have them in Pakistan.



1988

Interviewer: What if Mexico turns communist and gets nuclear weapons?

Ron Paul: But they already have them in Cuba

Interviewer: Im talking about Mexico

Ron Paul: But they have them in Cuba

JMann
11-02-2007, 12:20 PM
Looks like Cooper went ahead and got the sex change.

margomaps
11-02-2007, 12:23 PM
Looks like Cooper went ahead and got the sex change.

I think it suits him.

kalami
11-02-2007, 12:28 PM
he also got a tan

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 12:39 PM
I watched the video that came up right after the interview with Ron Paul. It was showing a Missouri Senator endorsing Giuliani.

Man, I wish S. Carolina's governor would go ahead and endorse Paul. It ticks me off that that California Senator endorsed Fred. I guess he just felt like he couldn't wait. :(

it's all poitics to them... Sanford aint endorsing Ron Paul, sorry to burst your bubble

Nash
11-02-2007, 12:39 PM
I watched the video that came up right after the interview with Ron Paul. It was showing a Missouri Senator endorsing Giuliani.

Man, I wish S. Carolina's governor would go ahead and endorse Paul. It ticks me off that that California Senator endorsed Fred. I guess he just felt like he couldn't wait. :(

It's not gonna happen unfortunately. Endorsing Paul right now is Political suicide considering who the party is run by.

If he wins some early states these guys might hedge their bets and endorse him but not until then.

constitutional
11-02-2007, 12:46 PM
That Was Great! :)

avix123
11-02-2007, 12:47 PM
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/11/02/intv.ron.paul.cnn

direct link

stones88
11-02-2007, 12:49 PM
Ron is wrong about Iran in that they have supported (funded) violence in the region. See Beruit bombings in 1983.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 12:51 PM
Ron is wrong about Iran in that they have supported (funded) violence in the region. See Beruit bombings in 1983.

and that has something to do with us..how?

stones88
11-02-2007, 12:59 PM
and that has something to do with us..how?

the bombings killed 241 AMERICANS.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:00 PM
the bombings killed 241 AMERICANS.

It proves him right :) why were we there in the first place?

murrayrothbard
11-02-2007, 01:01 PM
the bombings killed 241 AMERICANS.

How many Iranians died due to the US's support of Hussein in the Iraq-Iran war?

Thomas_Paine
11-02-2007, 01:04 PM
There's a link under "Latest News" on the top of the page, right hand side, that says:

"Ron Paul: Giuliani doesn't understand 9/11 (Video)"

Click it!

I clicked it then it took me to the clip about Iran. I want to see the one about Giuliani

margomaps
11-02-2007, 01:05 PM
I clicked it then it took me to the clip about Iran. I want to see the one about Giuliani

That is the clip. The interviewer asks him about his argument w/ Giuliani at the debates...it's probably 2/3 the way through the video.

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:10 PM
It proves him right :) why were we there in the first place?

It doesn't prove Ron right. He said that Iran has no history of particpating in violence in the region. He's factually wrong. Smile all you want though. I'm glad you did a quick wikipedia search. You need to more often, you're very uninformed about history. :)

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:11 PM
How many Iranians died due to the US's support of Hussein in the Iraq-Iran war?

A lot. What's your point?

KewlRonduderules
11-02-2007, 01:12 PM
It doesn't prove Ron right. He said that Iran has no history of particpating in violence in the region. He's factually wrong. Smile all you want though. I'm glad you did a quick wikipedia search. You need to more often, you're very uninformed about history. :)


No, he said Iran does not have history of attacking/invading other countries as an aggressor. This is FACT!!!

njandrewg
11-02-2007, 01:13 PM
A lot. What's your point?
that its blowback for what we were doing to Iran before that

RonPaulFever
11-02-2007, 01:15 PM
Looks like Cooper went ahead and got the sex change.


rofl

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:15 PM
No, he said Iran does not have history of attacking other countries. This is FACT!!!

I think funding Hezbollah to kill 241 American Marines in Lebanon qualifies as attacking another country.

Recovering Socialist
11-02-2007, 01:16 PM
Why is the background and lighting for Paul so terrible? Why isn't there better lighting, did CNN say take it or leave it? I don't know what perfect optics would have been, but this is definitely the opposite.

Ron Paul needs a pro to handle this stuff.

Patrick Rogers

The Only Woj
11-02-2007, 01:18 PM
RP is a dominator.

as far as Iran, they don't have a history themselves of attacking other nations ... but they have sponsored groups in other countries that essentially do that. though, I think if the whole Israeli/Palestinian conflict was resolved they would no longer be doing so.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:19 PM
It doesn't prove Ron right. He said that Iran has no history of particpating in violence in the region. He's factually wrong. Smile all you want though. I'm glad you did a quick wikipedia search. You need to more often, you're very uninformed about history. :)

Shut the hell up, dummy. You didn't prove me wrong, they attacked AMERICANS in the region, lard ass. "stone88" 88 = white power, huh? figures

Lord Xar
11-02-2007, 01:22 PM
I think funding Hezbollah to kill 241 American Marines in Lebanon qualifies as attacking another country.

No, you are wrong. You are now circumventing the issue by using proxies to supplement your argument.

You are using a circular argument that never has a point.

The very nature of us occupying foreign lands because of special interersts is NOT in the occupying lands best interest. What is so hard to understand about that? We shouldn't be there dictating policy. We put puppet governments in power, then dismantle them, then fund their regimes, then pull the plug... and then we point fingers.. hilarious. Even more so that you are using this circular argument.

Lord Xar
11-02-2007, 01:23 PM
Shut the hell up, dummy. You didn't prove me wrong, they attacked AMERICANS in the region, lard ass. "stone88" 88 = white power, huh? figures

white power? huh? I didn't get that at all. I got the impression he was defending our policy of middle east intervention which is NOT a "white power" thing. Don't assume the name represents the poster. Look at the message. If the posters message is corrupt, then everything about him/her is corrupt..

KewlRonduderules
11-02-2007, 01:25 PM
I think funding Hezbollah to kill 241 American Marines in Lebanon qualifies as attacking another country.


oh so because we funded al qaeda in Afghanistan in 1980's, we are responsible for their suicide bombings killing of innocents? So I guess it would count as us invading them in the 1980's too and Pakistan as well too, right?

That is just so flawed!

Got news for you, donations from private financiers and front companies throughout the world have been funding these terrorist organizations regardless of country they originate via off shore accounts. Want to do some research? How about looking up companies in the U.A.E. stock exchange , the cayman islands, and jersey- and see how many of them are front companies for these organizations. You will see that is a huge money bin for everyone- terrorists, zionists, chinese, japanese, westerners, neocons- you name it!

Don't give me this about Iran! Hezbollah has some pretty smart people. They know how to use money.

From your logic, al qaeda is the same everywhere around the world. it is not. Instead, there are different groups.

Adamsa
11-02-2007, 01:26 PM
Iran hasn't participated in an AGRESSIVE WAR in the last 110 or so years, that is the fact that is thrown around. Yeah Iran has (probably) attacked US soldiers in neighbouring countries via proxies.

Lord Xar
11-02-2007, 01:28 PM
RP is a dominator.

as far as Iran, they don't have a history themselves of attacking other nations ... but they have sponsored groups in other countries that essentially do that. though, I think if the whole Israeli/Palestinian conflict was resolved they would no longer be doing so.

Yes, just like we do.. in over a 100 countries.... Iran is just doing what it needs to do to protect itself. It doesn't have the economic nor technological capability to use traditional diplomacies to effect change. America has funded terrorist for decades. When someone else does it, becasue we are in their backyard - they are labeled as evil "axis of evil"... "terrorsist" "islofascistnazis" etc... all they hate keywords. to encite war against them. It is soooooo easy to manipulate the masses. Who owns the MSM? Just curious.

DrNoZone
11-02-2007, 01:29 PM
Thread thief's.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:29 PM
white power? huh? I didn't get that at all. I got the impression he was defending our policy of middle east intervention which is NOT a "white power" thing. Don't assume the name represents the poster. Look at the message. If the posters message is corrupt, then everything about him/her is corrupt..

"Look at the message." well, you resorted to ad hominem first ;) why don't you look at your own message. Attacked Americans ? You have just defeated your own "point"

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:32 PM
that its blowback for what we were doing to Iran before that

Ok, no doubt our alliance with Iraq resulted in blowback, but the FACT still remains that Iran has a history of involving itself, mainly through Hezbollah, in violent acts in the region.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:36 PM
Ok, no doubt our alliance with Iraq resulted in blowback, but the FACT still remains that Iran has a history of involving itself, mainly through Hezbollah, in violent acts in the region.

where's your link?

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:36 PM
Shut the hell up, dummy. You didn't prove me wrong, they attacked AMERICANS in the region, lard ass. "stone88" 88 = white power, huh? figures

Yeah, they killed Americans in another country.

stones88 = (rolling) stones/ 1988. 1988 was the year I was born, asshole.

Lord Xar
11-02-2007, 01:36 PM
Iran hasn't participated in an AGRESSIVE WAR in the last 110 or so years, that is the fact that is thrown around. Yeah Iran has (probably) attacked US soldiers in neighbouring countries via proxies.

True. But that is looked at as if its wrong. I mean, it is TERRIBLE that american's have died. But 'our' masters are playing games with America's men/women to promote its expansion idealogies.

We have used and will use any measure to precipitate attacking those middle east countries. And we do that by using "proxy" arguments... "they have wmd", "they have chemical weapons" "they are evil"... so we go there, blow everything up. Have our men killed and then call anyone opposed non-patriotic.

A good example is what is happening with our movement. Because MSM skews the news, because of our corrupt government, because of special interests controlling things, us grassroots have to get the 'name' out and do things in a way that is not traditional. We are doing things because there is no other way to effect change. "we are called lunatics, crazies" because the establishment does not want its applecard overturned. So, when Iran acts in a way to establsih its sovereignty or needs, we take that as EVIL and we Label it...

Again, Iran is a piece of shit... BUT, it is only doing what it is doing becasue we are an occupying force over there.

How come all of the presidents since the 1950's have been CFR members, or have very strong ties with the CFR? All of the current Top Tier have these same affiliations. And none of them are suggesting we should pull out. Of course "Shillary" flipflops but that is pandering. she will propagate this war and go into Iran, just let all the other top tiers... how come?

And once Iran is conquered. Who will issue the currency to Iraq and Iran?

American
11-02-2007, 01:36 PM
Ok, no doubt our alliance with Iraq resulted in blowback, but the FACT still remains that Iran has a history of involving itself, mainly through Hezbollah, in violent acts in the region.

Hezbollah was formed after Israel invaded Lebanon, they are defending there own country in which Israel invaded Lebanon first. Its been going on since the early 80's....

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:37 PM
Yeah, they killed Americans in another country.

stones88 = (rolling) stones/ 1988. 1988 was the year I was born, asshole.

Why were they there in the first place? dick wad

nice cover

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:38 PM
No, you are wrong. You are now circumventing the issue by using proxies to supplement your argument.

You are using a circular argument that never has a point.

The very nature of us occupying foreign lands because of special interersts is NOT in the occupying lands best interest. What is so hard to understand about that? We shouldn't be there dictating policy. We put puppet governments in power, then dismantle them, then fund their regimes, then pull the plug... and then we point fingers.. hilarious. Even more so that you are using this circular argument.

I'm not defending Reagan's foreign policy. I agree with Paul that we shouldn't occupy other countries.

There is no circular argument. 241 Americans died in Lebanon because of Hezbollah's actions, who were funded by Iran.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:41 PM
I'm not defending Reagan's foreign policy. I agree with Paul that we shouldn't occupy other countries.

There is no circular argument. 241 Americans died in Lebanon because of Hezbollah's actions, who were funded by Iran.

Americans.... not a country in a region

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:41 PM
Why were they there in the first place? dick wad

nice cover

It's irrelevant. And I'm not defending why we were there, dumbass. Ron made a factual error in my opinion. Funding Hezbollah to kill Americans in Lebanon I think qualifies as attacking another nation. Just because we weren't suppose to be there doesn't make it ok. Douche. :)

winston84
11-02-2007, 01:41 PM
It looks like its gonna be a good interview, but the lighting in that room RP is in freaken sucks!

American
11-02-2007, 01:42 PM
I'm not defending Reagan's foreign policy. I agree with Paul that we shouldn't occupy other countries.

There is no circular argument. 241 Americans died in Lebanon because of Hezbollah's actions, who were funded by Iran.

I disagree, those American died because we are supporting Israel. That is the number 1 reason today why the entire middle east will never be at peace as long as we support the western colonization of there holy land which is eaxctly what Israel is doing in the west bank.

We condemn it publicly then support them financially.......

reaver
11-02-2007, 01:42 PM
Why were they there in the first place? dick wad

nice cover

wow. just... wow.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:42 PM
It's irrelevant. And I'm not defending why we were there, dumbass. Ron made a factual error in my opinion. Funding Hezbollah to kill Americans in Lebanon I think qualifies as attacking another nation. Just because we weren't suppose to be there doesn't make it ok. Douche. :)

You're wrong. How was that attacking a nation in the region, fuck head? They were attacking America WITHIN another nation, big difference, stupid

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:44 PM
wow. just... wow.

yes? what a useless post

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:45 PM
Americans.... not a country in a region

Americans in Lebanon.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:46 PM
Americans in Lebanon.

Americans.... not a country in a region. Is that hard to comprehend? They were attacking us for being there... and that was a group, not a country. Where's your evidence to the contrary?

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:47 PM
You're wrong. How was that attacking a nation in the region, fuck head? They were attacking America WITHIN another nation, big difference, stupid

So if Iran killed a bunch of MI-6 in New York City, the U.S. should feel no incentive to retaliate? It's not some fucking loophole terrorists can use, I don't know why you're defending it.

DrNoZone
11-02-2007, 01:47 PM
You're wrong. How was that attacking a nation in the region, fuck head? They were attacking America WITHIN another nation, big difference, stupid

Seriously, enough of the personal attacks. Take this crap elsewhere please.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:49 PM
So if Iran killed a bunch of MI-6 in New York City, the U.S. should feel no incentive to retaliate? It's not some fucking loophole terrorists can use, I don't know why you're defending it.

That would be up to the US government. Lebanon was outraged? lol Lebanon was in a civil war at the time

margomaps
11-02-2007, 01:49 PM
Seriously, enough of the personal attacks. Take this crap elsewhere please.

Seriously. I don't care who's right or wrong here -- everyone involved in this argument is really starting to look like a jerk right now.

stones88
11-02-2007, 01:54 PM
That would be up to the US government. Lebanon was outraged? lol Lebanon was in a civil war at the time

Lebanon has no control over Hezbollah! Christ, I'm not arguing with you. Point take though - Iran is fully justified in funding Hezbollah to kill Americans in any country not named Iran.

Disgraceful.

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 01:59 PM
Lebanon has no control over Hezbollah! Christ, I'm not arguing with you. Point take though - Iran is fully justified in funding Hezbollah to kill Americans in any country not named Iran.

Disgraceful.

I never said Lebanon had control over Hezbollah. Point take though - A "terrorist group" attacked Americans inside another nation.... does that now infer that Iran is an interventionist nation now? They seem to be acting in their own best interests.

Tina
11-02-2007, 02:03 PM
I never said Lebanon had control over Hezbollah. Point take though - A "terrorist group" attacked Americans inside another nation.... does that now infer that Iran is an interventionist nation now? They seem to be acting in their own best interests.

Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government. The propaganda in the US spins Hesbollah as a terrorist organization.

BrianH
11-02-2007, 02:04 PM
Hey guys.. check it out and keep the viewer count high so that they keep it on the front page.

can I suggest everyone who posts a news story always include a link! We're all pretty busy and it doesn't make sense to send hundreds of people chasing around looking for your story because you don't post a link. I looked for 15 seconds on cnn.com and did not find it. So I move on...

JosephTheLibertarian
11-02-2007, 02:05 PM
Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government. The propaganda in the US spins Hesbollah as a terrorist organization.

uhhh but don't they have branches in multiple nations? stone88 really just spoiled the thread, I'm out of here.

KewlRonduderules
11-02-2007, 02:06 PM
Lebanon has no control over Hezbollah! Christ, I'm not arguing with you. Point take though - Iran is fully justified in funding Hezbollah to kill Americans in any country not named Iran.

Disgraceful.

Lebanon does not have control of Hezbollah- you are correct.

Iran funding Hezbollah is not entirely correct. You need to look at the financiers in the world markets who actually gain from supporting these so-called terrorists groups to say that Iran is funding them is such stuff you are getting from the MSM because they want to feed you that information- Iran evil, Iran terrorists, Iran suicide bombers, Iran 9/11, etc. You need to look at the big picture. The funding comes from all around the world- the profiteers are the ones who gain the most especially the cartels and the mafias of the world. Are there governments involved? Of course- Syria, Iran, and other countries that have large shia populations even Sunni countries. Maybe even Russia. But we are not hearing about it.

givemeliberty
11-02-2007, 02:07 PM
Like hamas hezbollah has a militant wing and a political wing. There are some members of hexbollah in the lebanese parliament but they aren't part of the government so to speak, as in a government agency or anything. They are more of a "movement".

Tina
11-02-2007, 02:18 PM
I'm not defending Reagan's foreign policy. I agree with Paul that we shouldn't occupy other countries.

There is no circular argument. 241 Americans died in Lebanon because of Hezbollah's actions, who were funded by Iran.

Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government. This is most likely propaganda to sell our wars. Most likey done by M*ssad. Read between the lines.

Gimme Some Truth
11-02-2007, 02:33 PM
Whilst we occupy and continue to mess in the internal affairs of the middle east region you can understand why (Militia)groups or countries are killing the occupiers . It is in their national interest and national security to do so.

"What would we think if the Chinese were in the gulf of Mexico?..."

Richandler
11-02-2007, 03:00 PM
The US has been begging for war throughout it's entire history. Even back to the Mexican American war we march troops pretty much in Mexico and the Mexicans shot us first, we called it a defensive war the rest is history. It is no different today. We march soldiers all around in foreign countries and when they shoot us we blow their country to hell. It's amazing simply taking a California history class that almost every modern political issue has been repeated from just the history of California!

It's amazing that our current President, a history major, didn't think for a minute why his dads Iraq war was so successful. It's because he didn't make enemies with the rest of the Middle East. He formed a coalition of arab countries and left Israel out of it. That is why the first Gulf War worked and this one didn't. This is recent history! Yet everyone seems to forget.