Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiNetanyahu: 'If Israel Doesn't Remove Iranian Threat, No One Will'
JERUSALEM - If Israel does not eliminate the Iranian threat, no one will, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday.
![[Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends a session of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, in Jerusalem May 25, 2009. Speaking of the US President and their recent meeting, Netanyahu added that he had reached understandings with Obama, among them that the most important goal for both countries is preventing Iran from attaining a nuclear military capability. Netanyahu told Likud members that Israel received a number of key pieces of defense aid from the Americans.
(REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun)]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/bibi.jpg "bibi.jpg")
"Israel is not like other countries," Netanyahu told his Likud
faction in a meeting which came one week after his meeting with
President Barack Obama at the White House. "We are faced with security
challenges that no other country faces, and our need to provide a
response to these is critical, and we are answering the call."
"These are not regular times. The danger is hurtling toward us?The real danger in underestimating the threat," Netanyahu said, addressing the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. "My job is first and foremost to ensure the future of the state of Israel ... the leadership's job is to eliminate the danger. Who will eliminate it? It is us or no one."
"Our relationship with the United States is of great importance," Netanyahu said. "Our situation today is different from our situation between 1996 and 1999. Our priorities must be inline with national security needs and we must unite in order to deflect the danger. The Defense Minister and I are working in coordination; he is not conducting an independent policy."
Netanyahu added that he reached understandings Obama, among them that the most important goal for both countries is preventing Iran from attaining a nuclear military capability. Netanyahu told Likud members that Israel received a number of key pieces of defense aid from the Americans.
Addressing the differing Israeli and American approaches to the issue of West Bank settlements, Netanyahu said the issue resembled a disagreement between good friends.
"The Defense Minister and I are working in coordination; he is not conducting an independent policy," he said. "During the elections I said that we are law-abiding and will deal with deal with the illegal outposts."
Israel's government and the American administration have expressed divergent views on how they perceive some of the most sensitive issues of the Middle East conflict.
The State Department said Sunday that the future status of Jerusalem would be determined through peace negotiations, despite Netanyahu's declaration last week that the capital would "never again be partitioned and divided."
"Jerusalem is a final status issue. Israel and the Palestinians have agreed to resolve its status during negotiations. We will support their efforts to reach agreements on all final status issues," a State Department spokesman said when asked to respond to Netanyahu's proclamation that Jerusalem would always remain under Israeli sovereignty.
At a state ceremony marking the annual Jerusalem Day on Thursday, Netanyahu said" "United Jerusalem is Israel's capital. Jerusalem was always ours and will always be ours. It will never again be partitioned and divided."
A U.S. Congressional delegation in Jerusalem said on Sunday that it was "skeptical" that Netanyahu's government would be able to move the peace process with the Palestinians ahead.
The five-person delegation from the sub-committee on the Middle East was headed by Congressman Gary Ackerman from New York, who is considered one of Israel's greatest friends on Capitol Hill. The delegation met with President Shimon Peres and other senior officials in Israel and in the Palestinian Authority.
The representatives had tough questions for the Israelis on construction in West Bank settlements and protested Israel's intention to continue building to accommodate "natural growth." They also expressed great concern over the siege on Gaza, noting that the civilian population was suffering greatly from a lack of food and medicine.
The prime minister said he had made the same declaration about the unity of Jerusalem during his recent visit to Washington, where he met with Obama over the peace process and Iran's nuclear program.
"Only under Israeli sovereignty will united Jerusalem ensure the freedom of religion and freedom of access for the three religions to the holy places," Netanyahu added.
Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said later Thursday that Netanyahu's position on Jerusalem was a setback to the goal of a two-state solution, which is strongly supported by the Obama administration.
"Mr. Netanyahu, by saying that, he's saying the state of conflict will be eternal," Erekat said.
78 Comments so far
Show AllLucitanian and Mike Corbeil:
Thanks for the heads up. Below is a partial paste of the UK article.
Peter Beaumont in London and Conal Urquhart in Jerusalem
The Observer, Sunday 12 October 2003 01.29 BST
Article history
Israeli and American officials have admitted collaborating to deploy US-supplied Harpoon cruise missiles armed with nuclear warheads in Israel's fleet of Dolphin-class submarines, giving the Middle East's only nuclear power the ability to strike at any of its Arab neighbours.
The unprecedented disclosure came as Israel announced that states 'harbouring terrorists' are legitimate targets, responding to Syria's declaration of its right to self-defence should Israel bomb its territory .
This is serious game playing for world control by unsteady minds. I don't give civilization much longer to be on this planet.
Hank
It also is America breaking its obligations internationally under NPT (again) and under its own laws by providing military and other non humanitarian aid to a country (Israel) having a clandestine nuclear arsenal.
So it just makes it more illogical for America to have any authority under NPT or UN rules to tell North Korea or Iran anything about what they are or are not doing. The hypocrisy is mind boggling!
Israel will not attack Iran unless there's a secret approval from the U.S. Administration! The U.S. Administration does give secret approvals on some matters, but will it do so about attacking Iran? I hope not and don't think it will. Otoh, maybe the "news" media stories about the Obama administration purportedly wanting Iran's help in or with respect to Afghanistan, and also with regards to oil deals with Iran, is all a smokescreen to try to get the public to believe that if Israel attacks Iran, then it was supposedly not with approval from the Obama or U.S. Administration.
Heh, "politics is full of hypocrisy", so it's inherently full of LIES, too.
Edit:
Netanyahu, or simply Israel, could be repeating these threats for the purpose of distressing and thereby distracting the public, distracting from focusing firmly on the "major events" actually happening; without having any real intentions for attacking Iran. This is another possibility and when this happens, then it's related to "divide to conquer" or "... to weaken" and what they'd be trying to "divide" in order to beat it, the target group, in this case would be public opposition focused on the GWoT wars that are [supreme] international crimes and need to be stopped, etcetera.
When wanting to win wars of aggression there is more than one front the war-makers have to win against. There's the front where the war is targeted, the military machine is applied, and then there's the opposition front back home, where the public needs to be kept weak in terms of opposition force, or else distracted, ...; rendered, one way or another, ineffective, and without brute police state force applied against a majority or large minority of the home population. Scare-mongering, when it's actually empty, like threats behind or for which there are no real intentions of carrying them out, can effectively weaken or reduce a home population that's restless, becoming focused on crimes of their government and therefore becoming more strongly opposed. Such focus strategically needs to be weakened or splintered, say.
I don't picture Israel attacking Iran because Israel knows that while Iran is not nuclear-armed and is far from having such arms, Iran nevertheless can reply very strongly and will definitely do so; and Israel is definitely within striking range.
Also, it's been reported by a number of people who certainly appear to know what they're saying and they say that Israel has only one possible air route for its bombers to fly to Iran [and] back home, and this route is over Iraq. If Israel uses Iraqi air space to attack Iran, then Israel inherently has U.S. approval, and Iran [will] interpret the situation in this manner; credible analysts have said. So, if Israel attacks Iran, then not only will Iran reply strongly with serious blows to Israel, Iran will also seriously attack the U.S. in the Persian Gulf and Iraq.
Israeli leadership therefore would not carry out such an attack on Iran. Not only would the military repercussions from Iran's replies be seriously damaging, plus deadly for U.S. troops in Iraq (and maybe, if not likely, Afghanistan), the political consquences would likely be very "blow back" in kind for the governments of Israel and the U.S., "blow back" coming from their own populations, which'd be seriously outraged, perhaps very, very strongly outraged. It could potentially lead to an Israeli population so outraged that the IDF might decide, in majority anyway, to abandon obeying the politicans and instead stand by the population, in which case maybe Netanyahu, Lieberman, and predecessors might wind up all dead in short ... time. That'd be a good outcome, but "there's gotta be a better way" for it to happen.
Lucitanian:
I appreciate your scholarly approach to the subject matter.
Reminds me of when I worked with intellectually superiors with numbers above 185.
On another note, several references are made about Israel having somewhere around 200-300 nuclear devices. What hasn't been said is yes that may be true,but what delivery system is in place to make the 200-300 operational.
I was with the 1st Marine div in Korea in '54, an artillery battery using 105 mm guns. To our north was an Army setup using 240s, The had the capability of firing Atomic shells if the time came to do so.
My point is what records are there that prove Israel has anything beyond artillery shells and or wing mounted bombs that fit on a F16. As far as I know, No news ever of Israel making any surface to surface missile testing, or underground testing of their nuclear devices.
Surface to air missiles from Russia in Iran could easily take out any air assault raid from Israel to Iran.If I can say it,
They can think it before any serious action takes place.
Again thanks for the record source.
Firstly, thank you for your compliment, but there is nothing high-brow about it. I’m just lucky to have the time to do some study, and write.
When discussing Non-proliferation relative to the Zionists in Israel it is useful to remember that not only did they develop their clandestine offensive nuclear weapons capability outside of existing international safeguard treaties, using NPT defying understandings with France, UK, and US who seem to easily ignor their obligations, but then in turn they proliferated themselves by passing nuclear and weapons technology to the reactionary apartheid state of South Africa so that, that country which was at the time under international sanctions for its human rights abuses became a nuclear power too. In a unique success story South Africa eventually and quietly disarmed under IAEA supervision and under the Mandela administration. Some people want a nuclear free world.
There is much evidence that Israel used that joint development with South Africa to test its weapons: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/
NSAEBB/NSAEBB190/index.htm
Its present delivery systems most likely include at least 2 nuclear armed subs: http://www.guardian.co.uk/
world/2003/oct/12/israel1
Israel has plenty of missile capacity with its improved Jericho III :
http://haaretz.com/hasen/
spages/1085619.html
But as Mike Corbeil points out bellow, to precession attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, Israel would need to use guided bombs delivered by aircraft, and their only approach would be via airspace presently under US control in Iraq. 10 months from now, who knows?
Iran has long proposed a verifiable nuclear weapons free Middle East, which would solve any doubts, but the sticking point is of course our Zionist friends and their need to threaten their neighbours with these dastardly weapons which they maintain along with arsenals of illegal chemical and bio WMD too. So indirectly the US’s alliance with Israel and their illegal protection of their clandestine nuclear capability is the root cause of proliferation in that part of the world.
Israel is a dangerous country in the hands of dangerous people, but the responsibility is squarely with the US.
The world will be a safer place if fewer countries will have nukes. The most critical step is to stop new countries and new organizations from obtaining nukes. In parallel, reduce the nuclear arsenal in countries that already have nukes, till we'll have a nuclear free world.
I’m with Obama on the nuclear issue.
It is sad to see so many people in CD who are committed to a shameful hate feast orgy. Some are so blinded with hatred, that they support a nucklear arms race and the spreading of nukes.
Where is the anti-nuclear progressive voice in this site?
Am I the only one who opposes the spread of nuclear weapons?
Here is some information about the doomsday clock.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_Clock
Israel won't attack Iran. Iran is merely an excuse for Israel to deflect attention from their own massive nuclear arsenal that threatens every muslim country in the world.
If America ceases their 3.5 billion dollar a year aid to Israel, nothing will change either (except a huge savings to U.S. taxpayers) in terms of Israeli security. What would change would be the fortunes of a handful of military contractors (Liebermans district is a prime example) who rely on these silly scare tactics to rob the public trough year after year.
Yeah, good luck.
.
Both Liebermann and Netanyahu are psychopaths of the first order. There is no chance of any reasonable negociations with these men. They are set on extermination of all of the Palestinians. Their mad dream is domination of all of the Middle East.........
These insane Zionists will destroy not only the State of Israel, but the Middle East.
The United States President must stop all funding, and military aid packages to Israel.....IMMEDIATELY
,
Spot on, most unfortunately. Are Zionists willing to bring down the whole world in defense of their invasion of Palestine?
They're certainly willing to be arguably the biggest cause of misery in the world.
Hitler, Chamberlain and Czeckoslovakia.
Netanyahu, Obama and Iran.
What is the difference besides bigger, more deadly toys?
Read some history.
Netanyahu boggles my mind. Why are the Zionists so determined to continually have war? The Iranians have signed the NPT and the Israelis have not. The Iranians are entitled to have nuclear power if that is what they want. The Israelis are a rogue nation with their Nuclear weapons, no different than North Korea with illegal Nukes. UN Resolution 181 needs to be nullified.
Deepa
I agree with what you have written.
My only question is: did US, UK, Russia, China, and France sign NPT? If they did, then how did Israel acquire nuclear technology? It is known that Israel got the technology from US, UK and France.
For the past 40 years, Israel and the U.S. have kept quiet about an Israeli nuclear arsenal that is now estimated at 80 to 200 weapons. Israel has promised not to test nuclear weapons while the U.S. has not pressed Israel to sign the nuclear NPT, which permits only five countries - the U.S., France, Britain, China and Russia - to have nuclear arms. Why is the exceptional status for the BIG FIVE? In the history, US was the only country that has used Nuclear weapons on another country. And the BIG FIVE have been the main Nuclear prolifirators.
The US also has opposed most regional calls for a "nuclear-free Middle East." The accord was forged at a summit between Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir and President Nixon on Sept. 25, 1969, according to recently released documents, but remains so secret that there is no explicit record of it.
On May 4, 2009 Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Mohammad Ali Hosseini told a UN meeting preparing for a major review of the NPT next year that nuclear cooperation by the US, France and Britain with Israel is "in total disregard with the obligations under the treaty and commitments undertaken in 1995 and 2000, and a source of real concern for the international community, especially the parties to the treaty in the Middle East."
In 2000, Israeli journalist Aluf Benn disclosed that Mr. Clinton at Wye River promised Mr. Netanyahu that "Israels nuclear capability will be preserved." Benn described as testy an exchange of letters between the two leaders over the Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty. He said Mr. Netanyahu wrote Mr. Clinton: "We will never sign the treaty, and do not delude yourselves - no pressure will help. We will not sign the treaty because we will not commit suicide."
Israel Is It's Own Existential Threat
"What makes this so?"
"It occupies the Palestinian homeland."
"Anything else?"
"Israel's Masada mentality?"
"Which is?"
"Our way or doomsday."
"The answer being?"
"Jewish colonizer and colonized Palestinian sit down together and work things out."
"Based on?"
"One equals one."
"Anything else?"
"Liberty and justice for all."
Israelis are real Masters at Bait and Switch:
Tue, 26 May 2009 06:06:23 GMT
In Gaza, infant dies as health held for ransom
The mortality brings to 337 the number of deaths resulting from exit denials to the Gazan sick.
Israeli delegation on the move over 'Iran threat'
An Israeli government delegation has set off to London in an attempt to divert attention away from its illegal settlements and onto Iran.
Israel drags Bolivia, Venezuela into Iran nuclear row
As Israel continues its campaign to rally support for military action against Iran, two countries with poor relations with the US have been linked to Tehran's nuclear program.
Deepa
"Israel is not like other countries," Netanyahu told his Likud faction in a meeting which came one week after his meeting with President Barack Obama at the White House. "We are faced with security challenges that no other country faces, and our need to provide a response to these is critical, and we are answering the call."
For Netanyahu, his claim of "threat to national security" justifies violating sovereignty and security of other countries. Doesn't this kind of argument sound familiar to Americans?
What the above argument ignores is that their very argument poses a threat to the national security of other countries. Then, does it justify other countries to attack Israel???
Lucitanian wrote,
'There are very good reasons that the Zionists want to dominate the writing of the history of the Holocaust; to erase their part.'
Were the 6m killed in death camps Zionists propaganda? I often wondered where that convenient number came from. Reading reports from news media back following the Holocaust the number claimed varied enormously. Nobody in their righ tmind disputes the terrible tragedy that befell the Jewish populations in Europe but I have yet to find irrefutable evidence of where the figure 6m came from. What about the other people exterminated by the Nazi thugs? How many? Where should one look to find unbiased assessments of what actually occurred and why are the doors being shut on disputing the accounts on this very important subject? How and where can one begin to examine these figures? I simply don't believe the truth is revealed in that as Lucitanian states in the above quotation, Zionists always want to control the media and the history while being economical with the truth. Any suggestions on where to search for the truth on these matters? Thanks all!
The words "Holocaust Denial" and "Holocaust Revisionist" are banded around to label anyone like you who would question the veracity of the 6 million figure for Jews killed in the Holocaust, despite documented revisions of numbers made available to the Red Cross and from the Soviet archives.
You can blaspheme against Muslims or Christians, and the courts are silent, nothing happens. You can liable someone’s writing and slander their reputation and it is only a civil offence between parties, but question this 6 million figure, and you can go to prison in Europe, it being a crime against the state in countries such as Germany.
Perfectly stupid, but true, and it must make you wonder why. Well it makes me wonder.
For Authoritative records:
http://www.its-arolsen.org/en/homepage/index.html
Contents of the Bad Arolsen Archives
Records pertaining to an estimated 17.5 million
people are archived in three broad collections:
Incarceration/Concentration Camp Collection
Nazi records documenting the capture, deportation,
and transfer of individuals to and between
concentration and death camps.
At least 10 million pages
Wartime / Forced-Labor Collection
Nazi records relating to individuals sent to forced
and slave labor camps.
At least 6 million pages
Post-War / Migration Collection
Records from the aftermath of the war — primarily
interviews of displaced persons and lists and
information on survivors and missing persons.
At least 14 million pages
Source: Information provided by International Tracing
Service, March 2007.
I strongly urge to make your own research, and yes there are a lot of loaded self made "authorities" and very few reliable statistical data either way other than the above. 90% of wht you find on the internet is disinformation.
Here is another starting point:
A collection of articles and book extracts:
Germar Rudolf (Ed.) Dissecting the Holocaust
http://germarrudolf.com/work/dth/found.html
enjoy!
[Any suggestions on where to search for the truth on these matters? Thanks all!]
Try the archives of the Third Reich. They're stored in Germany, but can be accessed by people who actually want to study them. The Nazi's did keep very good records of who they killed and where they killed them.
-How and where can one begin to examine these figures? I simply don't believe the truth is revealed in that as Lucitanian states in the above quotation, Zionists always want to control the media and the history while being economical with the truth. Any suggestions on where to search for the truth on these matters? Thanks all!
Lbanus, If what the Nazis did can be erased from living memory, then it should be small potatoes for Obama to erase the Bush years, because as disgusting as the US government is, they are small fry compared to the Nazis.
"where to search"? Try reading some books by well respected university profs, for a start. Or study history in school yourself. The murder of communists, Jews and handicapped people by Hitler is well documented. Hitler blamed his country's problems on them, the same way your government blames illegal aliens or al-qaeda or enemy combatants. Hitler just cranked it up a few notches more that is all.
Stupid slob Bibi is getting the message.
It's over for the zionist scumbags.
Let him invade Iran. It'll give an excuse for the rest of the world to further condemn him.
I don't want him to invade. War should not be on the table. But if he does he is building himself and many innocent Israei's graves.
-"Mr. Netanyahu, by saying that, he's saying the state of conflict will be eternal," Erekat said.
No one has yet mentioned that this puts Israel squearely in line with Bush's and Obama's "gwot" with its battlefield that is everywhere and its unlimited duration struggle.
Netanyahu is simply reading from Obama's talking points.
"...We are faced with security challenges that no other country faces,"
Looking back 40 years.. when the US carved up the region to create the state of Israel.. displacing countless Palestinians..
had the Israeli's ever reached out to the Palestinians, in gratitude.. helping the displaced population/ culture.. to build.. rebuild... move forward.. had they ever said " thank you".. and understood what the Palestinians were forced to give up...
they might not be living as an island in a sea of hostility.
This is still possible. It can/ could happen.. Israelis and jewish people.. need to and can.. acknowledge their history.,.. and make amends...
It is very rare for any species to attack and kill those which help it..
just think about neighbors on the small scale.. who do we like? who do we help...? those who treat us well and respectfully..
want to heal the world? look around and make peace with those you are not on good terms with...
be well
Exactly! Well said!
This is the best way to put a stop to this insane spiral of barbaric action and reaction, of violent perpetration and retribution.
On a personal level reaching out to your "enemy" is the easiest way to solve the issues at hand. Stop having to be RIGHT and making others WRONG all of the time and allow another narrative to enter into your world... an amazing thing happens when you let go of your rigid righteousness.
There is no reason that this would not work on a collective level, and I believe that underneath the mainstream madness perpetrated by the State there are good Israeli's and Palestinians who are working towards this goal. I think Michael Franti's documentary, "I know I'm Not Alone" does a great job of showing that healing on both sides of this conflict IS POSSIBLE! As soon as the people on both sides of this conflict stop listening to their corrupted leaders this may happen.
Those few "good Israelis" have no clout whatsoever. Stop pretending there's equivalency here.
No shit, sherlock! I'm not pretending anything here. Your snide comment is lame. I am very aware of who has the power, money, the military, and the near total control of information. It's the same scenario right here in the USA.
But, it doesn't take away from the fact that there are good people trying to make a positive difference in the background. And, sure, maybe it only affects a few peoples lives, but at least they are TRYING to bring some goodness into a horrible situation, rather than just making cynical and resigned remarks on internet forums - like you.
yes.. hard to believe that we have wars... we play so nicely together in virtual settings...
and that's in regards to comment and counter comment alike...
how about this:
instead of calling someone an idiot, or lame..
Those few "good Israelis" have no clout whatsoever. Stop pretending there's equivalency here.
Unfortunately, those few well intentioned people do not have enough influence to affect real change. I wonder what we can do to increase their numbers and impact? We need to stop pretending that change will happen with everything as it is right now. Only then can real solutions be sought and created.
and a possible response to the less than polite posting:
thank you for demonstrating how poorly we all get along, even when we are not divided by thousands of years of war and land dispute. This doesn't offer me much hope that we can change the world, when we can't even change our own behaviours. Why are you angry, anyway? What have I done to merit such scorn? If we all practice being respectful.. even when others are disrespectful.. hopefully we can encourage other people to listen to their better angels, rather than slinging insults and injurious words back and forth.
In response to what you had to say, your actual comments.. etc etc...
we all need to BE the peace we espouse.. and it doesn't begin anywhere.. but right here with each and every interaction. Approach people with respect, not scorn...
be well
TeriD,
You must have misunderstood the tone of my reply to wanderer.
"yes.. hard to believe that we have wars... we play so nicely together in virtual settings..."
--- nice satire.
"instead of calling someone an idiot, or lame.."
--- I didn't call wanderer lame. I called his comment lame... there's a difference - at least to me. My 'no shit sherlock' comment is not based on name calling or slinging insults. It is just an expression I use - even with family and friends - to point out the obvious. I guess sometimes I forget that some people are sensitive to certain words.
"Unfortunately, those few well intentioned people do not have enough influence to affect real change. I wonder what we can do to increase their numbers and impact? We need to stop pretending that change will happen with everything as it is right now. Only then can real solutions be sought and created."
--- These well intentioned people ARE bringing real change to the few they meet. Just because it is not immediately changing the entire world at this exact moment doesn't make the change any less. Watch the documentary "Promises" to see the change that Justine Shapiro and BZ Goldberg brought to a few Palestinian and Israeli children. Sure, this change only affected a few people, but it's still real change for a few, no? Real change for a few is a start and is better than nothing, right? And, THAT was the point I was trying to convey in my reply to wanderer.
I have been involved in an organization who has helped me find inner change and to people throughout the state I live in. When you are a part of being involved with helping others with the personal change they need in their life you witness something very amazing, and it gives you a great feeling of hope that humans may someday finally create a better world. I'm trying to do my small part in creating the change I want to see in the world. It's all I've got right now. Let me and the world know if you find bigger solutions to bring change to the whole world.
"thank you for demonstrating how poorly we all get along, even when we are not divided by thousands of years of war and land dispute. This doesn't offer me much hope that we can change the world, when we can't even change our own behaviors."
--- By no means am I perfect, but, again, I think you misunderstood the tone of my comment.
"Why are you angry, anyway? What have I done to merit such scorn? If we all practice being respectful.. even when others are disrespectful.. hopefully we can encourage other people to listen to their better angels, rather than slinging insults and injurious words back and forth."
---- I'm not sure who you are directing this comment towards because I haven't scorned you at all. And, anger never was the intended tone of my comment. In fact, I thought your original post was perfect and agreed with it 100%. Your perception of the dialogue between myself and wanderer is quite different from mine... and I respect that... so there is no need for me to address your idea about calling a comment lame as "injurious words."
Take care
hello-
you are taking my commentary personally.. as an attack- which is precisely what I was trying to denote avoiding. apologies. But do you see how easy it is to feel the " threat" in words and become reactive, rather than responsive.
I was not saying any of those were you intentions or your words. I specifically chose not to quote or point out anything specific. I was merely trying to present an " alternate reality" reading and response..
Remember- what we say.. and what someone hears.. are rarely the same thing.. consider.. what reaction do you want to create in the receiver.. when framing writing.. or... to quote an arab(?) proverb.. ( imprecisely).. consider the exit before entering the room.. or something to that affect...
What do you want the other side to take away, walk away with? anger? annoyance? a different way to think about himself or the world? a question that will stay with him to positive affect?
it is impossible to play tug of war.. when one of the people does not pick up the rope:)
and note.. in english.. there is no " vous" form of the word " you".. I use the word/ term you in the broader populace aspect.. not singling anyone out..
just hoping anyone who reads may be able to use the framework to reconsider their own discourses...
be well
Your measured response to markpaddles was kind indeed.
His vitriolic response, in spite of his subsequent denial, makes me wonder where he's really coming from.
yes.. it is always good to wonder where someone is coming from.. unfortunately.. we cannot control or affect that. What we can affect.. is where they go when they leave our perimeter/ sphere of " influence"...
think of interactions this way:
when " fred" says something... we have an " inner voice" reaction. this guy is a moron. what an ass.. etc ( I'm sure you get the idea)... that initial response is what flavours our responses. When we respond.. we are trying to convey " You're an idiot ( insert expletive of personal preference here:). that becomes the subtext of any dialogue. We want them/ their " inner voice" to feel the affirmation of that " statement." And it likely does. However.. pounding someone's ego into the ground ( which is likely the place they are already coming from.. rarely creates aha moments of insight, or even contrition. their " other inner voice" that doesn't want to own that label or identity.. counter-attacks.. with " youre a loser"... so that they can " win" at the I'm Okay game.. by making " you" not okay.
the trick is to try to play the game so that I'm okay, You're okay.. is the outcome. In order to do that.. we have to look at ourselves a little more closely.. or perhaps a little more discerning in how we approach things.
do we want the other person to be ( or continue to be) an ass.. or would we like to change the flow of that stream/ where it goes...? Is that served by creating additional discord?
bar-room brawl.. do we jump into a bigger fight... ? or do we step back, and start picking and choosing which ones we can pull out of the fray...?
remember- countries are just made up of lots and lots of people.. with mindsets and ways of approaching anything.. from their neighbor in the house next door.. to the person on the other side of a dividing line ( culture/ class/ race/country, etc)
be well
Thank you for the lesson. You have helped remind me of a tool in communicating that I too easily forget. If you noticed I made a post in the beginning of this thread and at then end of my comment I quoted a spiritual teacher who has made a huge impact in my life. A few hours later I read wanderer's response to this dialogue and I completely let my ego get in the way - one of the very things that Eckhart Tolle teaches about. I can admit that I was responding to wanderer from a place that I felt he belittled my comment.
Again, thanks for taking the time...
"His vitriolic response, in spite of his subsequent denial, makes me wonder where he's really coming from."
Oh my goodness... let me do my best to be responsive and not reactive to your comment.
First, I never intended for my comment to be "vitriolic"... But, since you feel it was. My apology. The explanation I gave to TeriD about my response to you is accurate. If you need to believe that I am in denial about it then so be it... from the looks of the way you are twisting my intentions there is nothing that I can do at this moment to change that.
Second, Teri's response to me was indeed very kind and I took something good away from my dialogue with him -- especially "what we say.. and what someone hears.. are rarely the same thing." You may try to take note of this as well. Also, note that I never insulted TeriD and actually agreed and praised his original comment, and then tried to add to his comment - although not very succesfully.
As to your wonderment of where I'm coming from: What would you like to know? Keep in mind that I don't know where you are coming from, so the only way this will work is if you fill me in on where you are coming from as well.
This guy is certifiably insane.
These monsters need to be apprehended and incarcerated whenever they are found outside their "country". Sadly and shamefully Canada allows them entry within it's borders.
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
This is a textbook example of the danger of our country allying itself with a small country that can throw the oil and gas rich Middle East into a huge turmoil. Sounds to me like Poland in 1939.
Am I the only one who finds this Netanyahu person singularly repulsive ?
No.
· Yr Obd't Servant
yayhoo, you are one sorry ass excuse of a human being and you give the jews a bad name by your terror tactics of genocide and war mongering, making YOU no different from those 'muslim terrorists' you continually create and label, as your nazi friends once said, 'life unworthy of life'.
And being a compulsive liar, you have not proved beyond any kind of reasonable doubt that Iran does have a nuclear weapons program. I would believe Scott Ritter assessment of that over yours any day and I don't forget either that you and your paranoid ilk in izrael know quit a bit about faking evidence.
I also have a very sneaky suspicion that you might be trying to make some 'more better money' by creating more of your circle jerk members, w & dick, fearmongering, to raise the price of oil and gas, you stinking csmfer.
Most of us here on this site understand that the Iran nuclear threat is a manufactured ruse used by the Israeli government to legitimize their corrupt and bankrupt asses. It is also part of the fear mongering that allows us to continue to give up our money and rights to fight "terror".
However a lot of people buy into the factless innuendo promoted on the news. Some truly believe that poor little Israel is threatened.
We have to start demanding facts. We have to say that this looks just like a repeat performance of the "weapons of mass destruction" and "mushroom cloud" talk that justified our invasions.
At some point Obama was talking about meeting with the Iranians. We cannot let the hysterics derail this sensible implulse. We need to send UN inspectors, artists, church people, honest reporters by the planeloads to visit and tell us about Iran. It is a beautiful and complicated country.
Joe
"Some truly believe that poor little Israel is threatened"
And they follow th Zionist spin, : "If the Jewish state of Israel is threatened, every Jew in the world is threatened and anyone who does not protect Israel's -right to exist- is part of the Anti-Semitic Plot to annihilate the Jewish people, etc."
This kind of propaganda is how the Zionists worked in cooperation with the Nazis in the 1930s to claim that the Arians were one "race" and the Jews were another and that they both deserved each their "Home Land". Palestine for the Jews, and Germany for the Arians.... So the Zionists used the Nazis collaborated to 1, to create e wedge between Jews and non-Jews. 2, eliminate the weaker and older, less robust and religious Jews who would not fight for the new Israel and 3, to create an identity as a people to afford a power wedge between the allied nations and he Third Reich
The most ardent Zionists collaborator with the German SS was agent Feivel Polkes of the Hagannah (the forerunner of the IDF) the Zionist underground military organization in British-run Palestine. Polkes spied for Germany where it did not conflict with his own political ends. Among other things, he would vigorously support German foreign policy interests in the Middle East and use his influence to secure sources of oil for the Reich … “if German foreign currency regulations for Jews emigrating to Palestine would be relaxed”.
The Gestapo were happy to do “everything in those days to promote emigration, particularly to Palestine.” SS files show that in return for information from Polkes on Jewish attempts to kill Hitler, “pressure will be exerted on the Reichsvertretung der Juden in Deutschland to oblige Jews who emigrate from Germany to go exclusively to Palestine, and not to other countries.” Not only were the Zionists trying to close the doors of Britain and the USA to Jewish refugees: they were pressing the Nazis not to allow anyone to leave unless it was for Palestine, and passing information to the Gestapo.
Theodor Herzl the founder of Zionism said “Anti-Semites will become our surest friends, anti-Semitic countries our allies.”
Quoting from “Jews against Zionism” : “The Transfer (Haavara) Agreement (which promoted the emigration of German Jews to Palestine) implemented in 1933 and abandoned at the beginning of WWII is an important example of the cooperation between Hitler’s Germany and international Zionism. Through this agreement, Hitler’s Third Reich did more than any other government during the 1930’s to support Jewish development in Palestine and further the Zionist goals.” It boosted the Nazi economy at a time when Jews worldwide were encouraged by other Zionist organizations to boycott German goods. Goods worth a total of 139.5 million Reich mark were transferred by 1939. The Agreement also made it possible to settle a large number of German Jews in Palestine. Before Hitler came to power, less than 3% of Germany's 500,000 Jews belonged to the Zionist movement.
There are very good reasons that the Zionists want to dominate the writing of the history of the Holocaust; to erase their part. While gaining cooperation with Hitler on the one side in founding of a Eretz Israel in Palestine, some 60% of all capital invested in the settler economy in Palestine between 1933 and 1939 came from Nazi Germany, by June 1937, the largest exporter to Palestine was Germany and that was despite, simultaneously, “The worldwide boycott against Germany in 1933 and the later all-out declaration of war against Germany initiated by the Zionist leaders and the World Jewish Congress (apparently) enraged Hitler so that he threatened to destroy the Jews…” (Rabbi Schwartz, New York Times, Sept. 30, 1997) And so persecution by the Nazis was assured and the uprooting was started.
The selection process was, one might say, also a “collaborative venture”. Chaim Weizmann, the Zionist leader who had arranged the Balfour Declaration and was to become the first president of Israel, made this Zionist policy very explicit: "The hopes of Europe's six million Jews are cantered on emigration. I was asked: 'Can you bring six million Jews to Palestine?' I replied, 'No.' ... From the depths of the tragedy I want to save ... young people [for Palestine]. The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They are dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world. ... Only the branch of the young shall survive. They have to accept it."[Chaim Weizmann reporting to the Zionist Congress in 1937 on his testimony before the Peel Commission in London, July 1937. Cited in Yahya, p. 55.]
The Zionists had limited success in their drive to relocate German Jews to Palestine. Of the two and a half million Jews seeking refuge from the Nazis between 1935 and 1943, less than 9% went to settle in Palestine.
There is clear proof that the establishment of Zionist state in Palestine was the most important priority of the Zionists - not saving the Jews of Europe from extermination. As Rabbi Moshe Shonfeld, in his book The Holocaust Victims Accuse (1977) commented:
The rescue committee of the Jewish Agency falsely bore the name 'rescue'. It would be more appropriate to call it the Committee for Covering Up, Ignoring and Silencing . . . the thoughts of Zionist officials and especially the chairman, Greenbaum, were steeped in plots and schemes to use the holocaust and its consequences to build up the national home and to realize the demands for establishing a Jewish State.”
… He refers to the same Zionist leader Yitzhak Greenbaum, who said in a speech in Tel Aviv, Palestine, on February 18th, 1943 that “One should resist this wave to push Zionist activities to secondary importance”. He also said 'One cow in Palestine is more important than all the European Jews'. The motto of the Zionists was Rak B'Dam (Only by blood will we get the land).
And who will remove the Israeli threat? These people are crazy.
Y'know, I wonder sometimes ... for the amount of money we have spent on the State of Israel in both foreign aid and military support so they could continue to struggle WITH the Palestinians, could we have just BOUGHT the territory it wants and PAID the Palestinians fair market value for the land and just GIVEN it to the State of Israel? Then we could stop being so guilty about what happened in Europe in the early years of the war we finally entered when Japan attacked us. Tidy!!
There should be no state of israel, it was created by zionist terrorists and should be dissolved sending its population back to Germany and Russia etc.
The only thing these ZioNazis understand is force and the only country that can force them is the US, but here we're already screwed because the US too is under Zionist-NeoCon control, with the puppet Obama, his handlers, and the Democrat majority, all following orders from Tel Aviv via AIPAC.
Like the Nazis, controlling Germany was neither the goal nor the problem; the Zionist aim has always been far beyond just establishment of a Jewish state with secure borders. As Hitler did, evoking existential threats from neighbouring and far flung states, the Likud Party combined with Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu Party, all Zionists, just like the Nazis, try to extend “lebensraum” and power far beyond even the borders that they refuse to stay behind, all the way to global domination, all in the name of defence of the ever threatened Jewish state. To these ends no means are put beyond use, military, financial manipulation, the all the dark arts of deceit and intrigue, false flag terrorism included.
How many monsters does America have to put back into their jars? They paid for Israel, they paid for Saddam, they paid for Al Qaeda and the Taleban. One has to ask, How did America think it would enhance its own power by financing these beasts, letting them free in the first place, or did they think they knew how to control them?
What now? Go on, lead the way! Take the responsibility. How do we get rid of such a dangerous uncontrolled racist terrorist regime like Israel under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud/Yisrael Beitenu Government.
The world can live with Israel, a little Jewish state not much bigger or more important than Hong Kong was, but the Zionists in Israel and around the world are another problem. Until people realize that, it will just get worse. It’s probably too late already.
Who will remove the ISRAELI THREAT??
As petrkrop correctly points out, the US has decided upon the role of the "decider" in World affairs. This allows them to disrupt every vote in the UN by using its power of veto, it allows it to protect Israel from the very sanctions which are directed against Iran and other countries.
There is no similarity between Iran and Israel, because Iran have allowed inspections at its atomic plants, and Iran has signed up to the NPT. Iran has not attacked any of its neighbours for hundreds of years. Israel on the other hand, has an undisclosed number of nuclear weapons, has frequently started wars with its neighbours, and does not allow inspections of its atomic sites. Furthermore Iran has never threatened to "wipe Israel out" or "destroy Israel".
It is Iran who has vowed never to seek nuclear weapons, but unfortunately, the US and Israel turn logic and truth on its head when discussing the Middle East.
To Bibi -
First: how about some hard, independently verifiable proof that Iran has or is close to having deliverable nukes aimed at Israel?
Second: since Israel is also thought to have NNPT-disallowed nukes, but, also like Iran refuses to confirm or deny their existence or allow for international inspections, doesn't Israel's behavior in this regard, which is no different than Iran's, render its argument [or wish] for an internationally-sanctioned preemptive attack on Iran a legal absurdity at best?
Third: why does Israel presume (whenever it becomes convenient to do so) that its religion-driven state policies have inherently greater standing under int'l law than the policies of Islamic religious states'? Since all such state policies are rooted in empirically non-provable claims, why should the USA, a secular republic, support either side in battles resulting specifically from such magical thinking?
The secular int'l legal community obviously needs to diffuse this dire tinderbox -- and quick. It can do that best by beginning to evenhandedly reject all policy rationale's that are based on claims of God's Will, etc., and by requiring adherence to int'l law by all parties.
It is this approach the USA should be leading.
Iran denies having nukes and publicly claims they are un-Islamic, the Iran is a member of the NPT it fully complies with it's obligations in regards to inspections, access by nuclear energy watchdogs.
The zioNazis know they have no legitimate claim to the lands they occupy, and that the only way to keep their ill-gotten possesion is by terrorism and WMD.
You are so right the USA should be leading but alas it is being led, to it's destruction just like the USSR.
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
The disaster of the aftermath of the Iraq invasion where no WMDS were found will be a lesson to those that decide Iran must be invaded because of its "Nuclear Weapons programs".
This time they will ensure such weapons are found, even if they have to plant them first.
Just as a BTW a staffer of the DOD claimed this scenario was playing out in Iraq. It was her claim they planned to plant said weapons in the very place Donald Rumsfled claimed they would be found. According to her claims the convoy was mistakenly taken out by friendly fire. I certainly would not put this by them as it seems to be SOP . (Ie the fake bin laden tapes)
"United Jerusalem is Israel's capital. Jerusalem was always ours and will always be ours. It will never again be partitioned and divided."
Insanity!
It's mine... all mine! It's always been mine! I will do whatever it takes to make sure it is always MINE!!!!!
So goes the demented chant of the egoic mind.
Netanyahu's quote illustrates, with great detail, the insanity of the egoic mind. What is even more INSANE is that this mentality goes beyond the personal and into the field of the collective ego (group think) and feels normal to the people identified with this mentality. "Israel is OURS! It has always been ours!! And, we will blow up whomever to protect it."
Does identifying with a piece of land really have anything to do with who you are? Ultimately, even if you believe that a piece of land makes up a part of who you are, it is still a fiction made up by your mind. In the last moment of your life I doubt that all of your possessions (house, car, land) that you have accumulated over the years will matter to you at that moment.
Too many of the religious people of this world have strayed so far from the teachings of their books... sad, sad, sad.
The other day I got into a debate with a Christian who was pro-torture and pro-war. He was going on and on about how the war on terror and torture were necessary to protect us. A few minutes later he went into some of his Christian beliefs. It was at this point in the conversation I couldn't help but stop him and ask what Jesus' last words were after he had been tortured and left to die on the cross. Oh, that's right... "forgive them for they know not what they do," and NOT "after I die go kill and torture all of these bastards for me!" He immediately went into some crap about how he tries his best to discern between guilty life and innocent life and how he was not willing to lose any more innocent Americans to protect the evil who want us all deader than fried chicken. I could only respond with... well, that's sounds like a perfect rationalization for you to blatantly crap all over Jesus' teachings.
Ahh... Hypocrisy at it's finest.
I am not really an expert on the Jewish religion. So, let me ask the Jewish folks on this forum a few questions. Is protecting Jerusalem and Israel, by killing others, a part of your religion? Or, are you the same hypocrite as the Christian who is pro-war and pro-torture? And, NO, I don't support the Muslim suicide bomber. I think he is just as lost as the Jewish or Christian person who supports violence as a solution - that is... unless using violence to protect your 'holy land' is part of the of the Jewish religion.
These Israeli, Christian and Muslim nuts may just kill us all in the end... The awakened individuals who see through their delusions can only hope that more begin to awaken from their dreamy apocalyptic dogmas.
"On a collective level, the mind-set "We are right and they are wrong" is particularly deeply entrenched in those parts of the world where conflict between nations, races, tribes, religions, or ideologies is long-standing, extreme, and endemic. Both sides of the conflict are equally identified with their own perspective, their own "story," that is to say, identified with thought. Both are equally incapable of seeing that another perspective, another story, may exist and also be valid. Israeli write Y. Halevi speaks of the possibility of 'accommodating a competitive narrative,' but in many parts of the world, people are not yet able or willing to do that. Both sides believe themselves to be in possession of the truth. Both regard themselves as victims and the "other" as evil, and because they have conceptualized and thereby dehumanized the other as the enemy, they can kill and inflict all kinds of violence on the other, even on children, without feeling their humanity and suffering. They become trapped in an insane perpetration and retribution, action and reaction." ---Eckhart Tolle
I'm no expert on the Jewish religion either but in Exodus, God gave Israel to the Jews and instructed them to drive out and kill the current inhabitants down to the last woman and child. It's quite explicit and brutal and most certainly provides a religious justification for modern practitioners of the Jewish faith to attack and kill their enemies without mercy.
Yeah that might be so, but how does that square with the notion that these "Jews" ain't those "Jews". Ever heard of the Khazar?
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
Not sure where you are going with this. I was merely highlighting how the Judeo-Christian religious texts, like many others, justify violence and aggressive war.
christ almighty, you really would piss a lot of people off w/some of your idiotic comments (like nazi/ashkenazi). before you could even answer your meaningless question, you, like the state of israel, would have to define "jew": is it a race or a religious identity?
it's people like you who give zionists their ammo for saying criticism of the actions of the state of israel is anti-semitic.
Blow away. There's nothing he said wrong in that post, and the Zionists have absolutely no ammo left except lies and distortions.
And Santa Claus knows if your naughty or nice...It's all a bunch of BS.
Which is why religion is not the basis for international law.
Iran, a Shiite nation, is now very much aliened with the Shiite majority in Iraq. An Israeli attack could result in a major Iranian lead Shiite assault on US troops in Iraq, with consequences that few can predict, except that it will be a bloody mess. Iran would likely shut down it's oil supplies to the west, prices would go through the roof. Gulf shipping could be disrupted, and then what, a full blown conflict with Iran, while Israel smugly sits back and watches the inferno, like sick and twisted pyromaniacs.
It's not a question of who will remove the Iranian threat, it's a question of who will remove the Israeli threat.
You got it right, after orchestrating the 911 hit with a direct result of over a million Iraqi civilian dead, how many Iranians would the USA blow away if zioNazis arrange a massive hit on USA troops in Iraq?
War really is a racket, Smedley was so right.
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
Is Cheney and his Neo-Cons on the loose again? His ZioNazis are yelling WMD!
Exactly the same as they did to start the illegal war on Iraq that destroyed America.
I hope Iran DOES get nuclear weapons. It will provide parity with Israel which has acted with impunity in attacking its neighbors. It is the neighborhood bully with devastating consequences for its unfortunate neighbors. If a real nuclear parity is achieved then there may be serious talks about getting rid of all nuclear weapons in the region.
There is no Iranian threat. The problem is the Israeli threat.
That is a very good point. Israel does not want Iran to have 'nucs', because they (who do) would have little power to enforce their illegal occupation of Palestine, and immunity from the very war crimes they "lament" were committed against them by Germany-----
On the other hand, if all nations had 'nucs' there would be an even ground to negotiate peace talks, no one would have more power than the other, and if one attacked the other, the there would be mutual destruction guaranteed.
Then the USA would be in a very dire situation for the first time since 1945---when they were the first and so far only nation to use 'nucs'----the USA would be forced to learn how to live in peace----they may not know what to do with that challenge; they have never been able to live in peace with others.
World Peace will never be obtained as long as one nation has more power over others--- human nature has proved to be the same as 'animal nature'----which lives by the rule; 'don't attack another animal that can wield the same damage you can----you might get eaten yourself'. America, has only won a few of their wars---they certainly never won the ones they started with my people----they just cheated, if we had had the same power that they (the USA) did, the story would have been entirely different.
Good Luck America, you really need it.............
Zionists are greedy violent materialists wrapped in the old testament who demand the whole Middle East as their Fiefdom.
China and Russia are the Only entities that can halt the raving mad Zionists.
Absolutely. Israel has 200-300 nuclear weapons. There is no reason why Iran should not have nuclear weapons, and every reason why Iran SHOULD get nuclear weapons ASAP. If Iraq and Afganistan had had nuclear weapons and effective long-range missiles, the U.S. would not have attacked and destroyed those countries.
If the Palestinians had had nuclear weapons, Israel would not have carried out its massacre of defenseless Palestinians in the Gaza Ghetto, and would not be continuing its ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
Thanks to the U.S. and Israel, it has become imperative that EVERY country get nuclear weapons, for self defense, as soon as possible.
I would like to know who made the U.S. the "decider" over what country can and can't have nuclear weapons. As the only country that has used nuclear bombs against civilians, not once but twice, the U.S. should be the only country in the world NOT allowed to have nuclear weapons.
So what's your end goal petrkrop?
That anyone will be permitted to step into the local gun shop and buy nukes?
A true progressive.
If Iran will get nukes, than other countries in the region will want nukes too (Turkey, Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia) - And after them other smaller countries will want nukes too, and it won't stopped there.
wmmccall, by supporting Iran's nuclear ambition, you support a nuclear arms race.
Remember the words of America's patron saint, Saint Ronald the Reagan, when he spoke of "mutual assured destruction" That will be the outcome if all the countries have nuclear weapons. Most people know that the only threat to peace will come from Israel, and their bully stooge the United States. Better to die on your feet than live on your knees...Just ask the people in Palestine or Iraq.
Letto you are forgetting one thing, your wannabe story starts with Israel acquiring nukes first, then everyone else had to follow suit.
Isreal should give up it's nukes, join the NPT, and open it's secret bases for inspection, the same as Iran.
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
I agree, white Rose. Israel should give up its nukes.
Nevertheless, fewer countries with nukes are better than more countries with nukes.
Israel had nukes for 50 years now. Iran is a new player. If Iran will acquire nukes - there will be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, and the world will be even less stable than what it is now.
the state which hides its monstrous and murderous face behind the name "israel" is a bloodclot in the heart of humanity
Israel has nukes, hence every country in the region wants them.
If Iran was led by competent leaders they'd point out that since Israel has the bomb, why shouldn't they have the bomb? Both countries engage in terrorism after all. Both countries should have nukes or neither of them should.
Iran's between a rock and a hard place, no one who has actual knowledge of nuke weapons development actually thinks they are building them; except for the usa and Israel (who're not exactly that trustworthy when it comes to wmds). What I really hoped for is a steady arguement that they do comply with the NPT and wish others to do likewise, after all a part of that treaty does mention that the major nuke powers will disarm...