Obama Rebuffs Israeli Hawk

There are very worrying signs about Israel and Iran, amid new threats from Israeli officials that they won't long tolerate Iran's nuclear program before they strike militarily. But, at the same time, there are reports that President Obama's national security team isn't buying the Israeli line that time is running out.

For instance, a top Israeli military official, in Washington, was not exactly given the red carpet treatment by Obama's top officials -- yet even so, he met Jim Jones, Obama's national security adviser, Hillary Clinton, and Dennis Ross.

The Israeli armed forces chief of staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, met yesterday with top US officials in Washington, including General James Jones, the national security adviser, and Dennis Ross, the State Department's special adviser on "the Gulf and Southwest Asia," and he warned that Israel is preparing for a military strike on Iran. According to Haaretz, the Israeli daily:

Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi on Monday said that while Israel was interested in exhausting diplomatic options against Iran's nuclear program, the army must nevertheless prepare itself for a military attack. ...

During a visit to Washington, D.C., Ashkenazi met with Dennis Ross, the designated U.S. envoy to the Persian Gulf, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to discuss the Iranian issue. The IDF chief told Ross that Israel would not tolerate a nuclear Iran. He said that a diplomatic approach to Iran's contentious nuclear program must be taken first, but said Israel must also prepare for other possibilities.

It's interesting that he met Ross, the hawkish former official of the pro-Israel thinktank, the Washington Institute for Near East Affairs, who's taken over the Iran file at the State Department.

Meanwhile, the still-in-formation government of Bibi Netanyahu, Israel's uber-hawk, has made some important appointments that relate to Iran, too.

First, Netanyahu has reached an agreement with Avigdor Lieberman, the far-right, anti-Arab hardliner, who will become Israel's foreign minister. According to the Jerusalem Post, which obtained a copy of the Netanyahu-Lieberman agreement, Lieberman will be given a big stake in Israel's Iran policy:

The coalition agreement that the Likud signed with Israel Beiteinu at 1 a.m. on Monday not only makes party leader Avigdor Lieberman foreign minister, it also puts him in charge of Israel's strategic dialogue with the United States on issues such as Iran, according to a draft of the deal obtained by the Jerusalem Post.

The joint American-Israel strategic dialogue committee is where key decisions are made regarding both countries' policies toward the emerging nuclear threat, and on other key strategic issues in meetings twice a year.

The committee's work is so sensitive that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert appointed Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz, a former IDF chief of General Staff, to head Israel's delegation rather than Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, because she is a novice on military matters.

Notably, Lieberman was given the post of "minister of strategic affairs" in 2006 by Prime Minister Olmert, in which he had responsibility chiefly for the question of the Iranian threat to Israel. At the time, an official of the Labor Party, Ophir Paz-Pines, citing Lieberman's radical views on Iran, said: "A minister of strategic affairs is a joke. Lieberman is himself a strategic threat."

The second important appointment is that of Uzi Arad, who will become Netanyahu's national security adviser. Arad, a long-time member of the Mossad, Israel's spy agency, was also mixed up in the spy scandal that involved two former officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committe, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, and a Pentagon official, Larry Franklin. (Rosen, who was charged with leaking classified information in the scandal, is the blogger who led the onslaught that killed the appointment of Chas Freeman to head the National Intelligence Council.) The center of that scandal involving Franklin's alleged passing of secret US plans about Iran to officials from AIPAC and the Israeli embassy.

According to the Washington Times, for the past two years the US government has barred Arad from entering the United States, citing the "espionage and sabotage" provisions of the immigration laws. Reports Eli Lake:

Uzi Arad, who is expected to serve as national security adviser in the next Israeli government, has been barred from entering the United States for nearly two years on the grounds that he is an intelligence risk.

Mr. Arad, a former member and director of intelligence for the Mossad, Israel's spy service, is mentioned in the indictment of Lawrence Franklin, a former Pentagon analyst who pleaded guilty in 2005 to providing classified information about Iran in a conversation with two employees of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). ...

Mr. Arad was a member of the Mossad spy service from 1975 to 1997. After retiring, he became Mr. Netanyahu's foreign policy adviser. While in the Mossad, Mr. Arad worked mainly on analysis, but he also served as a liaison for intelligence operations with allied services such as the CIA.

According to one report, visiting General Ashkenazi didn't exactly find the welcome mat rolled out for him:

Last year, Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi had no problem setting up meetings with top officials in the U.S. government.

On his current trip to Washington, Ashkenazi sought to meet the administration of President Barack Obama, but most officials were unavailable.

Diplomatic sources said Ashkenazi failed to obtain access to any Cabinet member, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The Israeli military chief, who sought to discuss the Iranian nuclear threat, won't even meet his counterpart, Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"The administration is sending a very clear message to Israel, and this is we want to talk about Palestine and not Iran," a diplomat who has been following U.S.-Israel relations said.

On March 12, Ashkenazi left for a five-day visit to the United States meant to lobby the Obama administration to abandon the planned U.S. dialogue with Iran. Ashkenazi, scheduled to meet with the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, was expected to have brought new Israeli intelligence on Iran's nuclear weapons and missile programs. But the diplomatic sources said the administration made it clear that nobody in a policy-making position was available to sit with Ashkenazi. This included the president, Vice President Joseph Biden, Gates, National Intelligence director Dennis Blair or Mullen.

Ashkenazi has obtained a meeting with National Security Advisor James Jones. But the sources said the meeting would focus on U.S. demands for Israel to ease military restrictions in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. ...

The Israeli chief of staff has also scheduled a session with Dennis Ross, the special adviser on Iran to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. But the sources said Ross was not regarded as being in a policy-making role.

The diplomatic sources said the White House and the senior echelon of the Obama administration have refused a dialogue with Israel on the Iranian threat. They said Ms. Clinton, during her visit to Israel, was largely silent during briefings by Israeli intelligence on Iran's nuclear and missile programs.

The slap at Ross, in the above report, that he is "not regarded as being in a policy-making role." and the report that Clinton "was largely silent" while Israeli officials harangued her about Iran, is a good sign.

If this latter report is true, it means that, so far, Obama and his team are standing strong against Israel's attempts to elevate the Iran problem to the level of a crisis. The real crisis, of course, is not Iran but Israel's refusal to talk seriously about a deal with the Palestinians.

Comments (178)

1. So tell me, Mr. Dreyfuss, how exactly does this story of Israel getting shut down completely by US policy-makers fit into your other narrative that the "Zionist Lobby" controls Washington? Perhaps the Jews themseleves think that they have too much power, so they order Mr. Obama to shut them out of policy discussions.

   Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 10:04am

2. I don't believe that the Israel lobby controls Washington, at all. They're big and important players. There are lots of others. Sometimes they win -- a la Freeman, when they created momentum that Obama didn't stop -- and sometimes they lose. I think they're losing now, on Iran, big time.

   Posted by RobertDreyfuss at 03/17/2009 @ 10:17am

3. tell izthatafact

   you are obviously part of the Israeli Lobby plot to discredit reports of the Israeli Lobby, as I am also.

   Posted by gren at 03/17/2009 @ 10:19am

4. I certainly hope that Israel will act in it's own best interest regarding nuclear threats from Iran.... and do what they feel is necessary, if it becomes necessary, regardless of whether or not it has the approval of the Obama administration.

   Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 10:23am

5. "I don't believe that the Israel lobby controls Washington, at all. They're big and important players. There are lots of others."----Posted by RobertDreyfuss at 03/17/2009 @ 10:17am

   BLASPHEMY, Mr Dreyfuss. CripThink and syfriend are now going to target you as a "Zionist stooge"!

   Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 10:38am

6. Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 10:23am

   Hey, SJ...why didn't DUBYA do something about Iran's "nuclear threats"????

   Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 10:39am

7. Mr. Obama "budged" on Iran before he was ever elected. His last appearance in the obligatory pilgrimage to the AIPAC convention to grovel in front of the lobby's honchos went through all the de rigeur devotions to Israel's "security".

   Even after his election, Mr. Obama populated the relevant portions of his administration by and large with figures who are out-and-out Lobby-approved Zionists.

   There has not been a single complaint from Mr. Obama or anyone in his administration about the ensconcing of Benyamin Netanyahu to the head-of-state position in Israel. There has not been an iota of response to the appointment of avowed racist and naked proponent of ethnic cleansing, Avigdor Lieberman, a figure who lives in an illegal colony in the West Bank and who openly espouses transferring or killing all Palestinians from lands that Israel covets, to the position of Israeli foreign minister.

   For that matter, the American mass media, censored by de facto Israeli operatives, has not acknowledged this event, either.

   There is no hope for the Palestinian people to emerge besides fighting back against Israel in the years to come. This is very sad, and undeniably true.

   Posted by syfriendly at 03/17/2009 @ 10:40am

8. Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 10:38am | ignore this person |

   Would you please shut up about me, you little creep?

   Posted by syfriendly at 03/17/2009 @ 10:41am

9. Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 10:23am

   What if Israels self interest is diametrically opposed to our national security interests?

   Also, do you apply the self interest comes first agenda to other nations, say Venezuela or Russia?

   Posted by crabwalk at 03/17/2009 @ 10:47am

10. Finally, where is the demand from the Obama administration - either overt and public, or "through channels" - that Israel acknowledge its own nuclear arsenal? This official non-secret has been allowed to fester for decades. Iran can be labeled a warlike "rogue nation" hell-bent on destroying its neighbors through its ultimate goal of attaining a nuclear weapon only for so long as the official argument that Iran is probably seeking a deterrent force and strategic re-balancer, to compensate for the Israeli nuclear arsenal, cannot be made. And the policy of allowing Israel to pretend it doesn't have a nuclear arsenal held by the US - a policy that the US appears to hold alone with Israel amongst all nations in the world - is the biggest reason that the argument that Iran probably seeks a deterrent cannot be made.

    And where is the movement forward on enforcing our own laws? Even as we all see photographs of Israel using cluster munitions and white phosphorous shells against densely populated areas, the Arms Export Control Act remains unenforced with respect to Israel - again, a policy of non-enforcement that the US seems to hold with Israel alone amongst all nations in the world. Where is the Obama administration demanding that we enforce our own laws with respect to Israel?

    And where is the serious threat to limit or curtail Israel's military "aid" subsidy? Far from any such threat, the US will continue this aid - while putting a large sum of money into "humanitarian" aid into Gaza, in an attempt to whitewash away the Israel's war there. We pay for the munitions to destroy Gaza, we manufacture them, we ship them to Israel (arguably in violation of our own law) and then we pay for the PR effort to help Israel recover its own image.

    Posted by syfriendly at 03/17/2009 @ 10:51am

11. Mask,

    You asked me "....Hey, SJ...why didn't DUBYA do something about Iran's "nuclear threats"????....."

    Mask, what are you asking me for? Send President Bush a letter and ask him. I am sure he would be glad to hear from you.

    Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 11:03am

12. Crabwalk,

    1. Israel's best interest is not opposed to our best interest. We will be much better off if Iran does not have a nuclear bomb, than if they do.

    2. Do I believe this same "self-interest" rule applies to Venezuela or Russia? Answer: No.

    Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 11:08am

13. Obama Rebuffs Israeli Hawk

    Is he all shiny new now?

    Posted by crabwalk at 03/17/2009 @ 11:11am

14. I disagree with # 1 SJ, in at least one respect.

    If Israel nukes Iran the oil stops. If Israel launches a nonnookyular attack, Iran squeezes the oil supply.

    We are still fighting a war with Irans neighbors over access to "our national interest".

    Iran is unlikely to use a nuke on the USA, it would be suicide. I do not worry even a little about any threat from Iran. The issue seems to be entirely for the benefit of Israel, which cannot get along with itself and those that live in it's borders, let alone most of it's neighbors. (with the exception of that twisted Jimmy Carter peace treaty that stands today, damn that man!)

    And it appears that you have dual system of what is right, one for those you deem allies, and one for all others. Amazing for someone that belongs to the "non-situational ethics" crowd.

    Posted by crabwalk at 03/17/2009 @ 11:28am

15. Who is Levi Johnson rebuffing now that Ms. Bristol (off limits family values) is not the marrying type?

    Why did they use the term "fiance'"?

    It is soooo French.

    Maybe they should have called it a "freedom union to be".

    Posted by crabwalk at 03/17/2009 @ 11:30am

16. 2. Do I believe this same "self-interest" rule applies to Venezuela or Russia? Answer: No.

    Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 11:08am

    This is hysterical. I once asked the late (and veryy un-lamented) Meir Kahane in public if, from the Arab point of view, they had the same right to violently fight for Palestine as the Jews who, if they followed Kahane's counsel, should drive the rest of the Palestinians out of Palestine. He replied that of course they did, from their point of view. However, the only problem, he continued, was that God sided with the Jews.

    What I'm getting at, sjchermak, is that one can have the opinion that what is good for the goose is NOT good for the gander, but you have to give us a reason why this is so, even if it is as patently ridiculous as "because God is on our side."

    Posted by cka2nd at 03/17/2009 @ 12:11pm

17. Crabwalk,

    You say if Israel nukes Iran the oil stops. I would not think Israel will use nukes to stop Irans nuke. Probably some form of non-nuclear bombs.

    You say it would be suicide if Iran uses a nuke on the USA. Who knows? Remember, Obama is president.

    Remember during the campaign when Obama and Hillary were asked what they would do if Iran nuked Israel? And how Hillary said that there would be no more Iran? And how Obama said that kind of talk is not helpful, etc?

    What makes you think if Iran nuked us that Obama would not want to talk it over with them and establish dialog and find out why they (Iran) are mad at us and what we did to provoke them, etc?

    Remember, Hillary is not president. Obama is.

    As far as "non-situational" ethics, etc. or whatever you call it, if you can not see the difference between Israel and Venezuela/Russia, then any conversation is moot. We are just arguing past each other.

    Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 12:13pm

18. syfriendly seems to have a very good "handle" on the US-Israel alliance. It is truly a case of the tail wagging the dog. One has to wonder why the hawk pro-zionist advisors to President Obama did not meet the hawk representative of Israel's government - or did they really not meet him? Anything is possible in Washington.

    I suggest that some of the responders to Robert D.'s article check the "jewsagainstzionism" website to get a realistic picture of Israel's vision of a future Middle East. Does the USA really want to be wagged by the Israeli dog?

    Posted by colsum at 03/17/2009 @ 12:20pm

19. syfriendly seems to have a very good "handle" on the US-Israel alliance. It is truly a case of the tail wagging the dog. One has to wonder why the hawk pro-zionist advisors to President Obama did not meet the hawk representative of Israel's government - or did they really not meet him? Anything is possible in Washington.

    I suggest that some of the responders to Robert D.'s article check the "jewsagainstzionism" website to get a realistic picture of Israel's vision of a future Middle East. Does the USA really want to be wagged by the Israeli dog?

    Posted by colsum at 03/17/2009 @ 12:21pm

20. Posted by syfriendly at 03/17/2009 @ 10:41am

    Well, first...no.

    Second, what WOULD you say about somebody who posted here "I don't believe that the Israel lobby controls Washington, at all. They're big and important players. There are lots of others.", then????

    Third, you won't answer honestly, because to take on even Robert Dreyfuss would show how far out on the Fringe you are and you know it.

    Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 12:25pm

21. Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 10:23am

    Given the fact that these are the same folks that sold us phony intelligence on Iraq, if they strike Iran using MORE phony intelligence, they could provide Obama an out for realigning the US relationship with Israel so that it is more even-handed.

    I think supporting war crimes action against those in Israel that engage in military strikes based on phony intelligence will send the right message to Israel that invasions of other countries based on phony intelligence will no longer be tolerated by the US or the world community.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 12:26pm

22. Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 11:03am

    I'm asking YOUR opinion, SJCHER.

    Or do you realize the paradox of answering that question?

    Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 12:27pm

23. If the one-state solution were realized (granting votes to both Israelis and Palestinians in a single, unified Israel-Palestine, a la the South African rebirth in 1994), there would be no Iranian threat, period. Because Iran could not nuke Israel, without also nuking Palestine.

    Posted by canaro71 at 03/17/2009 @ 12:32pm

24. Mask,

    The paradox here is that created by all the unanswered questions I have asked you. Such as why you want the Fairness Doctrine, etc. over on the other thread. Get busy and answer some of those, first.

    You never did provide examples of WXYZ television in Detroit showing bias towards Israel, have you?

    Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 12:45pm

25. I am pleased with the reaction of the Obama Administration to the propaganda efforts of the Netanyahu government in Israel, and the Neoconservatives in the United States. Netanyahu is their man in Israel. Israel will need some tough love if it is to survive. While I had heard that Shamir was involved with the Mossad, I didn't know that he ran the organization in the late fifties and early sixties until yesterday. No wonder the Mossad has such a reputation for ruthlessness. He may have recruited people from the Stern Gang and the Irgun for the Mossad.

    Posted by P. J. Casey at 03/17/2009 @ 12:54pm

26. Why is it ok for Israel to have nukes but not Iran? It appears Iran has more to fear from. I hope the Israelis get rid of these nuts ruining their country

    Posted by guerline04 at 03/17/2009 @ 1:08pm

27. The blowback from Israel's 'little adventure' in Gaza will take a very long time to receed...

    ...and maybe even longer to be openly discussed...;^)

    It was, in all likelihood, a HUGE mistake.

    Posted by ttr at 03/17/2009 @ 1:16pm

28. >>>Iran can be labeled a warlike "rogue nation" hell-bent on destroying its neighbors through its ultimate goal of attaining a nuclear weapon only for so long as the official argument that Iran is probably seeking a deterrent force and strategic re-balancer, to compensate for the Israeli nuclear arsenal, cannot be made. And the policy of allowing Israel to pretend it doesn't have a nuclear arsenal held by the US - a policy that the US appears to hold alone with Israel amongst all nations in the world - is the biggest reason that the argument that Iran probably seeks a deterrent cannot be made. <<<

    This IS a serious issue, as even the IAEA said that Iran's "interest" in obtaining a nuclear weapon was to deter Israeli aggression.

    When have we ever heard of an Iranian air strike on another country?

    Mossad intel cannot be trusted, as their loyalty is to Israel's right wing and "military" solutions, not the US or the world. If the right wing in Israel thinks all of Israel's neighbors should be weakened, then all of Mossad's intel supports such action. It makes absolutely no difference to them whether this really is in Israel's best long-term economic or security interest, and they could care less if gas goes to $10 a gallon or the US goes bankrupt supporting Israel's effort to weaken their neighbors.

    Selfish, selfish, selfish, is the only word to describe Israel's right wing.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 1:17pm

29. Posted by sjchermak at 03/17/2009 @ 12:45pm

    No, the paradox to the question "SJCHER, why didn't DUBYA do something about Iran's 'nuclear threat'?" is...

    if you defend Dubya, you can't explain why he left such a "grave threat" in place, yet is going to be "redeemed by history for his pro-active War on Terror"....or you have to play DOWN the threat from Iran.

    if you DON'T defend Dubya, you contradict Rush and your fellow 28% "Bush was a great President" Clubbers.

    Ergo...you won't give a straight answer (as noted twice now...and likely more to come)

    Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 1:29pm

30. There is commentary here that uses the logic that Iran and Islam thinks like the west. If we have learned anything from our campaigns in the middle east over the last several years it is that they do not think like us. They do not put life at the top of their priorities. They are suicidal.

    My view is that nuclear deterrence worked in the Cold War because both sides were in the Judeo Christian tradition, even the communist soviets. But Iran is not. They have a religious impetus that will have them whipped into a frenzy of death wishing to do the deed of destroying Israel and probably the United States. They believe Islam will be the better for it, even with their own destruction. This is the mindset we see with the suicide attacks. To think that Israel and the West are safe with a nuclear Iran because Iran has the same values and thinking the west does is extremely faulty thinking.

    Posted by BobM2006 at 03/17/2009 @ 1:52pm

31. Hey, SJ...why didn't DUBYA do something about Iran's "nuclear threats"????

    Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 10:39am

    Who said he didn't? If you listen to Seymour Hersh and Scott Ritter, we had special forces units and CIA in Iran during the past 5 years damaging Iran. (lol)

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 2:09pm

32. It is time for the Western powers to stop playing footsie with Israel and that country'e Middle East policies. Israel is an aggresive element in this region and it is time for us to remind them that their Industrial/Military ambitions are no different from Adolph Hitler's Territorial demands and that the impositions they impose on neighbours are the same as Nazi Germany imposed on the Jews. Are we so blinded by the anti-semitism of that era and the injustices meted out to Jews that we have given Israel a licence to commit crimes of similar dimension on their neighbours? It is time to call a spade what it is and recocnize that the State of Israel will not be satisfied until its warring agenda is fulfilled and the World is plunged into further disaster. As a WW2 veteran who witnessed the debris and wept with the survivors and vowed that it would never happen again little did I think that it would be the survivors who made it happen again because we subscribed to their vengeance and encouraged their vendetta.

    Posted by Harry G. at 03/17/2009 @ 2:16pm

33. we had special forces units and CIA in Iran during the past 5 years damaging Iran. (lol)----Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 2:09pm

    Then if true, that should be "good enough" for Israel, since Dubya is "da man" on fighting terrorism

    and nothing more....uh, right?

    Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 2:28pm

34. It's interesting how Israel will not deal with a nuclear Iran, when Israel itself possesses 400 nuclear weapons. America is the same thing, it's trying to go around the world and tell others they cannot haver nukes, yet we are the ONLY nation in the history of the world to ever drop an Atomic weapon (two of them in fact). And of course America has 10,000 Nuclear weapons in it's arsenal. I think it is time to end the relationship we have with Israel, stop giving them money and stop supplying them with Weapons. If this doesn't happen soon, Israel is going to get us all mixed up and involved (not that we really aren't already) in a huge middle eastern war, quite possibly WWIII. We need to remove AIPAC's lobbying powers from our government and just deal with israel the same way we do with any other foreign nation whom we consider an ally. Thanks, and visit my blog @ http://enemyartistkristofer.blogspot.com

    Posted by kristofeR! at 03/17/2009 @ 2:36pm

35. Posted by BobM2006 at 03/17/2009 @ 1:52pm

    BobM2006, I don't think like you either. So, do us all a favor and let's not pretend that your views are something "we" share.

    For example, when I hear the term "Judeo-Christian tradition" I generally think of all the Abrahamic religions - including Islam. I certainly don't think of communist Russia as part of the Judeo-Christian tradition.

    When you talk about Iran and Islam, you seem to forget the fact that there are 65 million people in Iran and 1.5 billion that believe in some variety of Islam worldwide. If the world worked the way you think it does, we would expect a lot more violence than actually occurs - which leaves us with the conclusion that the problem is religious fundamentalists of whatever persuasion.

    It is also fascinating that U.S. Christians want to talk about a "culture of life", when there is so little concern about the people on the recieving end of the bombs and other weapons we produce to be used in Gaza, Iraq, possibly Iran and elsewhere. This line of thought has a distict air of hypocrisy to it.

    Posted by srjenkins at 03/17/2009 @ 2:36pm

36. Harry G. claims to be a veteran of WWII, but he doesn't tell us on whose side he fought. He sounds more like a Nazi than an American. By suggesting that Israeli policies are equivalent to those of Hitler's Germany, he is speaking counter-factually and anti-historically. I suspect that he is a fascist sympathizer.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 2:51pm

37. Israel is an aggresive element in this region and it is time for us to remind them that their Industrial/Military ambitions are no different from Adolph Hitler's Territorial demands and that the impositions they impose on neighbours are the same as Nazi Germany imposed on the Jews. Are we so blinded by the anti-semitism of that era and the injustices meted out to Jews that we have given Israel a licence to commit crimes of similar dimension on their neighbours? It is time to call a spade what it is and recocnize that the State of Israel will not be satisfied until its warring agenda is fulfilled and the World is plunged into further disaster. As a WW2 veteran who witnessed the debris and wept with the survivors and vowed that it would never happen again little did I think that it would be the survivors who made it happen again because we subscribed to their vengeance and encouraged their vendetta.

    Posted by Harry G. at 03/17/2009 @ 2:16pm

    I share the suspicions of izthatafact, Harry. The times you post here, your views seem very different from the WWII vets in my family and friends. And they certainly are different from my fellow vets of the 60's.

    there is certainly a vein of anti-semitism whether intentional or not that runs through your postings.

    I'll ask you the same questions that I ask all the anti-Jewish posters.

    How is it that Israel occupies less than 1/2 of 1 percent of the middle east and is outnumbered by it's enemies by more than 25 million to 1, and they are the supposed bullies and threat to peace?

    How is it that most of it's Islamic neighbors remain committed to the destruction not just of the nation of Israel, but the Jews themselves, and Israel is the racist entity?

    I'll await your "rational" answers

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 3:26pm

38. Where were those US officials?

    Probably too busy dealing with the financial meltdown or watching baseball.

    Posted by alexjulian at 03/17/2009 @ 3:30pm

39. Israel has achieved more in 50yrs than the arabs in 250 years.

    And by the way isnt there a genocide in Africa to worry about

    Posted by alexjulian at 03/17/2009 @ 3:32pm

40. syfriendly is right on target. What chutzpah for Israel to self-righteously proclaim, "We will not tolerate Iran's nuclear pretensions," while Israel itself has a huge nuclear stockpile--and everybody knows it.

    Posted by apreisinger at 03/17/2009 @ 3:47pm

41. Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 3:26pm

    So if somebody isn't a right-wing Israel-right-or-wrong zealot like you...

    they're suspect for being a "real vet"???

    Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 3:48pm

42. So if somebody isn't a right-wing Israel-right-or-wrong zealot like you...

    they're suspect for being a "real vet"???

    Posted by Mask at 03/17/2009 @ 3:48pm

    He may well be a vet and if he is I thank him for his service. But I've never met anyone who fought in Europe who holds views like Harry's unless they are an anti-semite.

    There is little difference in scope between his posts and Sy Friendly or Cripthink. His language just isn't as blunt.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 3:52pm

43. >>>They believe Islam will be the better for it, even with their own destruction. This is the mindset we see with the suicide attacks. To think that Israel and the West are safe with a nuclear Iran because Iran has the same values and thinking the west does is extremely faulty thinking.

    Posted by BobM2006 at 03/17/2009 @ 1:52pm<<<

    This is the mindset of an EXTREMELY small fringe in Islam. Granted, this is the fringe that gets all of the attention, but it is the same as elevating the bomber of an abortion clinic to that of an official representative of mainstream Christianity.

    Palestinians use suicide bombers because they are not allowed "free" access to conventional weapons because of the Israeli blockade. So this is a "creative" poor-man's way of fighting Israel rather than a preference in Islam.

    Nonetheless, I agree that the balance of power theory from the Cold War was never ideal, and therefore extending this to Iran and Israel would also not be ideal.

    True peace is NOT the mere absence of war, it is a condition where one does not feel ill-will or desire to cause harm toward ones neighbors.

    The Islamic fringe that we call "terrorists" feel ill-will toward Israel and the US because of the treatment of their Muslim Palestinian brothers, and the encroachment of Western values on their culture. It is therefore rather easy to reverse this hostility with a change in Israeli and US behavior.

    If Israel embraces Palestine and cooperates with it and develops its economic capacity along with its own, Palestine will be the envy of the Arab world, and all Arabs would want to move there and be friends with Israel.

    Jews have lived in Muslim communities for centuries without conflict, and therefore it is possible to for them to live together in peace again.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 3:56pm

44. Jews have lived in Muslim communities for centuries without conflict, and therefore it is possible to for them to live together in peace again.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 3:56pm

    This is perhaps one of the biggest lies continuously perpretated by the anti-semites.

    Jews can "live in peace" as well as Christians if they submit to a state of Dhimmitude to Muslims. they must pay taxes for the right to live in peace. They must submit to the authority of Islam and all Muslims over them. They must agree to limitations on their religious practice. And they may never rule Jerusalem or have their Temple restored.

    That's what "peacemakers" like yourself want to impose on them.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 4:06pm

45. "(Iran has) a religious impetus that will have them whipped into a frenzy of death wishing to do the deed of destroying Israel and probably the United States" BobM2006.

    You Mossad agents are hilarious. Iran has never attacked another nation or entity in over 350 years except when it was in self defence. Israel on the other hand has never stopped making trouble and attacking other nations including the US, and it murdered 34 American crewmen in cold blood in 1967, when its false flag with Egypt backfired.On the other hand, it is ISRAEL which has the "religious impetus" not Iran. Interpol has already notified 180 countries of the arrest warrant out on 18 Israeli top officials on war crimes charges, and the ICC is working on the same charges as we speak.

    Posted by mystic7 at 03/17/2009 @ 4:08pm

46. Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 4:06pm

    The point I was making is that Jews and Muslims are not "natural" enemies as portrayed in the US press.

    Yes, the centuries of living in peace were "in" Muslim countries, but rather than focus on who pays and who gets the tax, you should acknowledge that they lived together without conflict for longer than the US has been a country.

    Now that Jews have their own country, there is no tax issue.

    It appears that it is primarily a small group of right wing Ashkenazi Jews in Israel that are having trouble getting along with Muslims, and this right wing group of Jews may have learned too much from their German oppressors and are now simply acting out the oppression they learned from this experience.

    It's kind of like the kid who was beaten as a child, and then grows up and beats his own child because this is all he knows.

    To break this cycle, it would be politically astute for Israelis to elect a Sephardic PM, and elevate Arab Israelis and other dark-skinned Jews to prominent positions, and have them negotiate with the Muslim world. The right-wing Ashkenazi in Israel seems to only have one mindset - the war mindset - and this is unhelpful in creating a climate that produces real peace and real security.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 4:27pm

47. Many believe that 90-95% of people calling themselves "Jewish" today are Ashkenazi (Khazars) who have no blood or historical connection to Israel (the Bible refers to them living in the Mt Ararat area (now Turkey) and Armenia (Noah's ark country), and since they were not Hebrews, they never spoke the Semitic language of Hebrew and developed their own language (Yiddish)which emanated from Germany and Eastern Europe.The Askenazim have always held the reigns of power in Israel since 1948.Only the Sephardic Jews, a small minority, DO have an historical connection to the land of Israel.Support for the Nazis by the Ashkenazi leadership was fundmental to Hitler's war machine, and it was exploitation of their suffering in Germany that led to campaign for a homeland in Israel.

    Posted by mystic7 at 03/17/2009 @ 4:44pm

48. Metteyya, you would be better off studying more and writing less. It is precisely the "dark-skinned" Sephardic Israeli Jews from the Arab countries (along with many of the post-USSR immigrants) who tend to be the most "right-wing" dogmatists and least accomodating towards the "peace process"; the majority of the "left-wing" parties are dominated by Ashkenazim whose families have come from those countries conquered by the Nazis. Since this doesn't conform well to your pre-packaged "Racial Theory of Evil" nor the chapter on agressive behavior from your high school psychology text, you will either have to revise your conepts or ignore reality; on this website I see more evidence of people doing the latter, but I won't pre-judge you personally.

    As to your defense of dhimmitude, I find it interesting that you think when Jews are forced to live in humiliation and subjugation that this constitutes "living in peace", but when other groups are perceived to be humiliated and subjugated they have a natural right to violent resistance.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 4:48pm

49. Mystic7, you too need to study more and speak less. The history of the Khazari Jews has nothing to do with the history of the Ashkenazim (except, perhaps, at Ku Klux Klan meetings and such). Also the Sephardim comprise more than 45% of the Israeli population; this is not a "small minority". Your contention that the "Ashkenazi leadership" collaborated with the Nazis and were "fundamental" to their plans is pure antisemitic blather.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 4:54pm

50. Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 3:26pm

    I'm not an anti-Jewish poster, but I'd like to respond to your questions.

    "How is it that Israel occupies less than 1/2 of 1 percent of the middle east and is outnumbered by it's enemies by more than 25 million to 1, and they are the supposed bullies and threat to peace?"

    Here are some questions for you.

    1. Can you point to which Middle Eastern countries have nuclear weapons?

    2. Who deployed their national troops in conflict over the last three years?

    3. When was the last time the governments of Egypt, Jordan, Syria or Lebanon bombed Israel's territory? Now, when was the last time Israel bombed the territory of these other countries?

    4. Who spends twice as much in defense than their four bordering neighbors combined?

    Just browsing at the figures, I see Egypt ($2.5 billion), Jordan ($1.4 billion), Syria ($858 million), Lebanon ($500 million) combine for a little less than $6 billion. Israel spends a little less than $10 billion - a quarter of which is U.S. money.

    "How is it that most of it's Islamic neighbors remain committed to the destruction not just of the nation of Israel, but the Jews themselves, and Israel is the racist entity?"

    I think the reasonable answer is that there is racism on both sides. It isn't an either/or situation, and there is also issues about Israeli occupied land and the treatment of Arabs in Palestine. It should also be noted that Egypt and Jordan have normalized relations.

    I think it is also interesting to note how you would respond to this reformulation:

    "How is it that most of it's Christian neighbors remain committed to the destruction not just of the nation of Iran, but Muslims themselves, and Iran is the racist entity?"

    How does that sound?

    Posted by srjenkins at 03/17/2009 @ 5:12pm

51. you are either acting ignorant or don't really know what the tax is.

    It is called Jizya and is paid to the Islamic Treasury. It is like a Mafia protection payment. By paying it you acknowledge you are under the protection of Muslims as a second class citizen. The Muslims also insist in accordance with the Quran that the Jew or Christian paying the Jizya, may be hit on the head or back of neck to ensure they know they are inferior to the Muslim. They take this from Qur'an 9:29. And there is no limit as to how much may be "taxed" from an infidel.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 5:14pm

52. Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 4:48pm

    I have met right-wing Ashkenazis and right-wing Sephardics, and progressive Ashkenazis and progressive Sephardics - the only point I was making there was that it would be "politically" astute to give Sephardic Jews and Arab Israelis a more prominent role in Israeli leadership, because the impression in the Muslim world and elsewhere is that these groups - the darker skinned population - are getting the short end of the stick in Israeli society.

    Impressions matter - and just like Obama sends a different impression about America, Israel can learn from this and be more politically astute with some of their political appointments.

    And, no, I am not defending "dhimmitude", just merely pointing out that Jewish communities in many Muslim countries have thrived for centuries without conflict. The other point I should have made is that it was not until the oppression and occupation of Palestine that the humiliation and subjugation of Jews in these Muslim rose to intolerable levels.

    Paying a tax (Zakat) is not unusual or oppressive, as Jews (and everyone else that is not a tax cheat) pay taxes in many Western countries, including the US. And like I said in a previous post, the tax is no longer an issue with the formation of Israel.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 5:20pm

53. Paying a tax (Zakat) is not unusual or oppressive, as Jews (and everyone else that is not a tax cheat) pay taxes in many Western countries, including the US. And like I said in a previous post, the tax is no longer an issue with the formation of Israel.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 5:20pm

    You are sidestepping the issue. None of the taxes you mention are like the Jizya. It is a tax purely of submission as an infidel to Islam. The Qur'an does not permit equality by other religions or their followers in any land that is Islamic.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 5:23pm

54. Metteyya,

    No argument here about the fact that Israel suffers many of the same effects of racial discrimination that the US does; however I think it's a bit of a stretch when you suggest that folks in the "Muslim world" generally care at all about the effects that this intra-judaic discrimination has on Israeli society.

    Also, while I recognize the well-intentioned sincerity of your argument I respectfully suggest that it isn't your place to say at what point the subjugation and humiliation of Jews at the hands of Muslims did or did not rise to intolerable levels. The fact that the Jews bore this burden peaceably for so many centuries speaks much more, I believe, to the inherently pacific nature of Judaism than it does to any evolved or enlightened policies of the various Muslim polities to which the Jews have been subject for 1400 years.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 5:34pm

55. Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 5:23pm

    The Quran specifically says as long as people of other religions pay Zakat like any other Muslim, they are free to live in peace in Muslim countries.

    Zakat is one of the Five Pillars of Islam and is used to help the poor in Muslim countries.

    Some Jews saw the tax as "subjugation", but I think that is a bit harsh considering that Muslims are obligated to pay the tax as well according to the Quran.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 5:37pm

56. Posted by antisocialist at 03/17/2009 @ 5:14pm

    Can you tell us what percentage of Muslim countries currently impose Jizra on non-Muslims?

    If there are countries without this tax currently, why don't they impose it?

    If there are countries that do impose this tax, who pays it? International conglomerates, individuals, who?

    All of you analysis is based on YOUR reading of Muslim scripture. Why don't we move away from your abstract conceptions and take a look at what Muslims actually do?

    Posted by srjenkins at 03/17/2009 @ 5:40pm

57. >>>I think it's a bit of a stretch when you suggest that folks in the "Muslim world" generally care at all about the effects that this intra-judaic discrimination has on Israeli society.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 5:34pm<<<

    I think the point, here, is that there is no such thing as "intra-judaic discrimination" when you are on the world stage. Being free from racial discrimination is a basic "human" right, and many in the world community were outraged when Israel and a Bush-led US refused to sign (the only 2 countries in the world) on to this basic human right declaration at a international human rights conference in South Africa.

    When I say "intolerable levels", I mean levels sufficiently high to cause migration of Jews from these Muslim countries to other countries, including Israel. This is something that can be "objectively" observed, and I did not in any way imply that I know as a non-Jew what would be intolerable in a subjective sense.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 5:46pm

58. The advice that izthatafact has given to Mystic7 quote, "you need to study more and speak less" is advice that he/she would be permitted to follow. This writer along with "antisocialist" have sent me a challenge to principle in both my war service and my political philosophy of which I suspect neither of them have experienced deed or belief, so I will enlighten them. First, I am a Jew; second I served with the British 1st Parachute Regiment and dropped into Normandy on June 5th 1944 and helped to secured Pegasus Bridge still seven hours before the beach landings. I fought at Arnhem where I was both wounded and decorated. I was there to free the prisoners at Belsen Concentration camp. I lost family to the Holocaust. 1948/1953 I stayed and worked on a Kibbutz in Israel and in late 1953 I emigrated to the United States and I am now a US citizen and a member of Addis Israel. Is it so difficult to understand that not all Jews agree with the sect of Israeli politicians who are habitually carrying chips of vengeance on both shoulders and seek solace from the Hawks of all nations who seek profits from war. Do you actually believe that the Twelve Tribes of Israel were compatible or are you still wrapped in the old American adage which says government right or wrong. My wife and I have free access to Israel and visit or daughter and grandchildren there annualy and it may surprise you to know that many Israelis share my vviews as I do theirs for as a people we are pragmatic and do not all bleed blue and white, unlike you who bleed red,white and blue. The lives lost by the Holocaust were not all Jewish and we bleed for the survivors of those who never returned, we despise war and torture and Guantanoma and all other warmongering philosophy. Advice to you is to read and to THINK!

    Posted by Harry G. at 03/17/2009 @ 5:51pm

59. srjenkins,

    In the context of discussing the history of Muslim subjugation of Jews you asked us to "move away from abstract conceptions and take a look at what Muslims actually do". Well, sir, what they actually do is prohibit any excercise of the Jewish (and Christian) religion or any expression of the Jewish faith in every country ruled by Sharia (perhaps some 25 countries around the world). In many cases an individual who is Jewish or suspected of being so is not permitted to enter these countries, and in no case is he or she allowed to display any evidence of his or her faith, no matter how personal, private or innocuous.

    Go ahead and blame Israel for this if you want; I choose to blame the leaders, and to some extent the 1.4 billion inhabitants, of these countires that support and enable this global Judeophobic pandemic.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 5:54pm

60. While I'm not a big Netanyahu fan, I believe his take on the emerging World view of Israel is correct when he stated that the World liked Jews more when they couldn't defend themselves. This perception has been fanned by Arab nations who would like to place all of the responsibility for a Palestinian settlement on Israel. These nations have never lifted a finger to aid the Palestinians - not with scraps of land within their enormous holdings nor with scraps of financial assistance from their enormous oil wealth. The only thing they have done is promoted the fable that Israel (and Jews in general) are their oppressors and given the Palestinians missiles instead of food and shelter (the recent rebuilding PR campaign by Hezbollah not withstanding). Of course, most European governments are equally hostile to Israel - they just conceal it better. Europeans have murdered more Jews AND Muslims by far than have been killed in local wars between Israel and its neighboring Arab states. For many decades, Arab leadership has milked the sand for oil and made themselves fabulously wealthy and powerful while keeping their people ignorant and poor. They point to Israel where the desert contains no black gold but is converted into fertile farmland, and tell their flock ,"Look, the Jews have stolen all the good real estate!" It's hard to find a national border on the face of the Earth that wasn't determined by war and the suppression of one people over another. Israel is something of an exception, owing its existence as much to International decree as to its war of independence.

    Posted by wbramh at 03/17/2009 @ 5:58pm

61. >>>All of you analysis is based on YOUR reading of Muslim scripture. Why don't we move away from your abstract conceptions and take a look at what Muslims actually do?

    Posted by srjenkins at 03/17/2009 @ 5:40pm <<<

    There are many "cultural" expressions of Islam that would be haram or inconsistent with the Muslim faith as stated in the Quran. The fact that these practices are occurring in "Muslim" countries do not make them "Islamic" practices.

    They even have prostitutes outside of the Kaaba, the holiest spot in Islam where Muslims perform the Hajj pilgrimage.

    Are you saying that if a Muslim country allows prostitutes at their holiest site that this must be "Islamic"?

    Part of the REAL Jihad (spiritual struggle) in Islam is rising above harmful spiritual practices. I am sure there are many stories in the Jewish community about Jews who were able to rise above spiritual obstacles as well while living in "Muslim" countries.

    The basic point that I have been trying to make in all of these posts, is that with a shared biological and religious history in Abraham (father of Issac and Ishmael), and centuries of living together in peace, Jews and Muslims can get along extremely well if those in leadership positions encourage this to happen.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 6:01pm

62. Metteyya,

    By your own definition, "intolerable" levels of subjugation are those that would "cause migration of Jews from these Muslim countries to other countries, including Israel." Well, that is exactly what has happened, isn't it? There are no more Jews in Muslim countries (with a small, pitiable, exception in Iran). There used to be multitudes; now there are none. By your own definition, the subjugation of the Jews by the Muslims must have been intolerable.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 6:01pm

63. HarryG.,

    Sorry, pal, anybody who would write as you did of the Israelis that "the impositions they impose on neighbours are the same as Nazi Germany imposed on the Jews" is not Jewish. I'm calling you out as a liar.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 6:04pm

64. Posted by Harry G. at 03/17/2009 @ 5:51pm

    Thank you for that post HARRY G, and for your service to this country.

    Believe it or not, I almost went to Israel to live in a Kibbutz and I am obviously not Jewish.

    I apologize that you have to endure post like that above from IZTHATAFACT, as this is very disrespectful to you as a Jew who cares deeply about the fate of Jewish people and the world.

    We need A LOT more Jews like you in leadership positions in America and Israel.

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/17/2009 @ 6:15pm

65. Thank you Metteyya! I had already dismissed the post you referred to as the work of a fool. Anyone who can post exactly three minutes after my response to him/her should follow my advice Read and THINK. On a more humouris note my wife suggested that maybe I should drop my pants and invite izthatafact to view the work of a cross-eyed Rabbi!

    Posted by Harry G. at 03/17/2009 @ 6:44pm

66. Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 5:54pm

    I think the context was a bit larger than Muslim subjugation of Jews. It also encompassed the bad behavior of Jewish fundamentalists.

    But, let's start with you say. "Well, sir, what they actually do is prohibit any exercise of the Jewish (and Christian) religion or any expression of the Jewish faith in every country ruled by Sharia (perhaps some 25 countries around the world)."

    Which countries are ruled by Sharia law? In most cases, Sharia law applies to domestic issues like marriages, inheritences and so forth. You really have to go to the extremes - Saudi Arabia, Iran, Northern Sudan - to find anything approaching rule by Sharia law that can touch on every aspect of life and has police enforcement. And even in these countries there is a great deal of variability in how Sharia is applied.

    For example, you seem to be talking about Saudi Arabia. In Saudi Arabia it is prohibited to have any non-Sunni Muslim religious service - except if it happens in a gated community of believers of another religious tradition. Oppressive? Yes, but it isn't anti-semitic.

    I'll grant that keeping Jews or people that have been to Israel out of Saudi Arabia seems anti-semitic. Another take is that this could also be a clumsy reaction and scapegoating similar to the fixation on illegal immigrants in certain segments of our society.

    I don't blame Israel. I blame fundamentalists - Jewish, Christian and Muslim. Yes, there are rocket attacks. But, Israel also walled in a population and waged war. Everyone is culpable.

    You take fundamentalists out of the picture and you could have peace in Israel tomorrow. I think the agreements that Israel came to with Egypt and Jordan shows exactly what is possible, and what the real problems are.

    Posted by srjenkins at 03/17/2009 @ 6:58pm

67. HarryG,

    I stand by my contention that you are lying about being Jewish. Everytime you write, you give more evidence. As any Jew can tell you, Mohels perform circumcisions -- not Rabbis. A real Jew, pacifist or not, wouldn't make that mistake.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 7:12pm

68. Metteyya,

    It's bad form going around apologizing for other people's posts. HarryG can (try to) defend himself, and I stand by what I wrote. Don't let the fact that you agree with his politics delude you into believing everything he writes. He is clearly lying about being Jewish; any Jew can see it.

    Posted by izthatafact at 03/17/2009 @ 7:15pm

69. After reading both the artical and most of the comments, the question whether Iran place a real threat to Israel or used so only in order to make the palestinien-iaraeli conflict less relevant is left unanswered. even as an israeli, I can agree to the asumption that at least part of the israeli obsessuin with iran is an israeli way to shift attention from a true peace process with the palestiniens, nevertheless can you assure me there is nothing behind israeli angst regarding iran? Afterall, if iran does obtain nuclear capabilities and does deceide to bomb israel, i'll be the one under threat wuile all you have to loose is your convictions. I didn't vote for neither netanyahu nur god forbit lieberman or will ever vote for anyone in the right wing, but I too believe giving lieberman the forighn office have les to do with international politics as to unternal one or in other words being the leader of the 3rd biggest party in isarael he was in the position to be pointed as a "high" minister and since giving him the internal house affairs place him as the chief of staff of the arab-israeli citizens, no one realy thought this option stands other options were the security minister or the department of law and while the roll of the seurity is much more important inside israel he was not given that or the department of law beacause there is still the posability that an acusation of curruption will emerge against him in the coming year. not giving him important gov. official role would have meant making a joint goverment with kadima and livni and if anyone thinks kadima is really so much diffrent then what the likud or netanyahu (or the labour party for that matter) have to offer is misleading himself.

    Posted by mopet at 03/17/2009 @ 9:24pm

70. "Obama Rebuffs Israeli Hawk" could be......setting his administration up for Plausible Deniability....not an entirely bad tactic.

    Remember, Magic is a master at this: Didn't know Rev. Wrong was so racist.....Ayers was a bomb-planter......Rezko was a scumbag w/shadowy ME ties....AIG would be handing out bonuses. Sure has worked out well for him, so far!

    Posted by Happy at 03/17/2009 @ 9:42pm

71. There is just too much talk in the media that Iran is building nuclear weapons. It is intended to persuade you to agree to invading Iran. Iran has a right to develop nuclear energy to supply it's people with power. It was Bush who started this nonsense when like he did when he sold Americans the Iraqi war. What I couldn't understand is why so many went along with it. I am not a politician and knew it was a ploy. Everyone walked around like they had been lobotomized. I say hooray for Obama in not making a big deal of Israel visiting their benefactor of over $3 Billion a year in aid in addition to weapons that this country gives them. Israel showed how mature it is when it bombed the Gaza Palestinians and other settlers and killed around 400 children. Sure, given them more weapons paid for by U.S. money. It is almost as bad as the millions given by AIG to their employees. I think Obama should make it clear that if Israel wants to go to war with Iran, that America will withdraw all our troop from that area, stop all financial gifting to Israel, and supply of weapons. Israel is anxious to show the world that they want flex their muscles and show the world they are no longer "victims". Take off the training wheels and let Israel fight it's own battles on it's own resources. I resent my tax money going to the new playground bully.

    Posted by Introspection at 03/17/2009 @ 9:46pm

72. The Article raises few important questions: Would the Israelis dismantle their nuclear stockpile if the Iranians agree to freeze their Uranium enrichment program? Do Americans have the right to tell the Israelis not to appoint Avigdor Lieberman as Foreign Secretary; considering his fascist views? Or it is only Israel and the Zionists Lobby can block our government Appointees (Chas Freeman)? Should Americans refuse to negotiate with Bibi Netanyahu, due to his refusal to recognize the two-state solutions, and for advocating the explosion of all Israeli Arabs from Israel? Should we bar The American Israel Public Affair Committee (AIPAC) from bribing our Congress with millions of Dollars every year? Since AIPAC is lobbying for foreign Government and AIPAC members have been indicted for spying on America for Israel. It is estimated that 80% of member of Congress are on AIPAC's payroll. Maybe We should suspend the 6 billion Dollars annual grant to Israel for spying on America.

    Posted by CripThink at 03/17/2009 @ 10:14pm

73. The Israelis toned down their attempts this year with only Gabi Ashkenazi. Last year they sent Ehud Barak and Meir Dagan along with Gabi Ashkenazi and were still turned down. George Bush had finally started listening to the US military,who warned that attacking Iran would do very serious political, military, and economic damage to the US. Only a few years before, General Peter Pace finally convinced the war hawks in the White House not to use nuclear bunkers in their plans to attack Iran. Does no one remember House Resolution 362 by Congressman Pence and Ackerman and Senate Resolution 580 by Kyl and Leiberman. It called for the US Navy to blockade Iranian ports, an act of war. AIPAC sent hundreds of people to lobby members of Congress and most of them didn't read the resolutions before they signed on. Luckily somebody finally warned of the potential for war and the Resolutions were killed. Cheney was one of AIPAC's best behind the scenes workers in his attempts to start a war with Iran. Remember the hysterical charges that the Iranians were providing shaped charge explosives to the Iraqi's or the offer to buzz Iranian bases on behalf of the Brits. Cheney was behind these attempts. Finally when he attempted to con the Joint Chiefs into an attack, they posed him a question, "When we attack and they retaliate, how far do we go to full war". The attack didn't happen! All of these close calls show that the Zionists and Likudniks will keep trying to sucker us into an attack against Iran like they did against Iraq. Read, "The Second Pentagon Papers" by Lt. Col Karen Kwiatkowski as a background. Other Israeli lobbying groups besides IAPAC are WINEP,AEI,BPC,UANI, the Heritage Foundation,and the Hudson Institute. Obama has hopefully wised up and stops any attck against Iran

    Posted by Aarky at 03/17/2009 @ 11:07pm

74. TO ALL THE DUMB PEOPLE IN THIS FORUM !!

    IRAN DOESN'T HAVE NUCLEAR-BOMBS !!

    IRAN HAS NUCLEAR-ENERGY !!

    ISRAEL JUST WANTS TO INVADE IRAN, TO TAKE OVER ITS OIL AND WEALTH !!

    .

    Posted by marxist-socialist at 03/17/2009 @ 11:13pm

75. owing its existence as much to International decree as to its war of independence. Posted by wbramh at 03/17/2009 @ 5:58pm

    wbramh,

    You mean its wars of ethnic-cleansing of Palestinians. When Herzl was talking grandly in 1895 in the privacy of his diary about "our own country," Jews were hardly one-twentieth of the population of Palestine. When Britain's Balfour Declaration promising a Jewish state in Palestine was issued in November 1917, there still were only an estimated 55,000 Jews among another 670,000 Muslim and Christian Palestinians. Massive ethnic cleansing of Palestinians took place between 1917 and 1948 by three Zionist terror groups; the Haganah, the Stern Gang and the Irgun. Palestinian villages were ransacked and thousands of Palestinians were murdered in cold blood to terrify Palestinians to flee their homes. 750,000 to 800,000 Palestinians were not permitted by Israel to return to their homes after the creation of Israel in 1948. Now you are pontificating that Arabs should rush to restore what the Zionists had destroyed, in such that those religious fanatics who left the comfort of their homes in Brooklyn can enjoy the land they looted from the Palestinian. It is known fact that the Zionist wealth is much larger than that of the Arabs; why don't you ask your Zionist friends to remedy what their ancestors had destroyed in Palestine? The UN has given Israel 49% of the land of Palestine in 1948; Israel today controls 78% of Palestine. Stop playing the role of victim; your darling Israel is the most racist criminal state in modern history; not excluding the Apartheid state of South Africa.

    Posted by CripThink at 03/17/2009 @ 11:29pm

76. While I don't want to see Israel attacked, I also hate reading and watching on t.v. Israel carrying on like the Nazis who abused them in the 30's and 40's.

    They want us to never forget how they were treated, it's time they remembered it as well and start treating others more respectfully.

    They keep claiming that they believe an eye for an eye, but they go way beyond the eye for an eye to destroying everyone for an eye. And they are losing their supporters bit by bit.

    Enough with their gestapo tactics. Or we should stop sending them anymore money. It's not like they're a poor country.

    Posted by lyris at 03/17/2009 @ 11:36pm

77. and sometimes they lose. I think they're losing now, on Iran, big time. Posted by RobertDreyfuss at 03/17/2009 @ 10:17am

    Bob,

    But wait, they have lost a skirmish; however, the war is not over. The lobby can fight on multi-fronts and they have fanatically loyal friends in Congress. These loyal friends will not hesitate for one minute to gang up on Obama and block most his domestic agenda in Congress. We all remember when they forced George H. Bush to cry uncle in 1991, when he tried to force Shamir to attend the Madrid Peace conference. The lobby is well entrenched in the mainstream media and they can easily unleash their loyalists there to discredit Obama on multi-fronts. Obama is handicapped by enormously hard domestic challenges, and thus, extremely vulnerable. The Israeli Lobby doesn't have to necessarily win on Iran; but those who stand in the way will pay heavy political price. Let me make a prediction: If Obama challenges the Lobby in his first term; I am not sure he will, he will fair worse than Jimmy Carter and become a one term president.

    Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 12:18am

78. What right does Israel have to demand that Iran forgo it's nuclear ambitions? Israel is the rogue state with the illegal (US financed) nuclear stockpile. It is Israel who should be subjected to international sanctions to force it to dismantle its outlaw nuclear capability. Iran needs that capability--to deter an attack by nuclear weaponized Israel. It's time for the US to stop abetting the bully in the Middle Eastern courtyard. Mr Freeman's successful character assassination by Americans acting as agents for a foreign entity is not a good sign though. The upmost irony is that those agents accused him of having ties with foreign powers and the media reported it without blinking. Very discouraging.

    Posted by bgmshroom at 03/18/2009 @ 12:49am

79. The Israeli espionage on America is well-documented and we have Israeli spies serving time in American prisons. If you think that spying on America by Israel is repugnant; then the despicable is when our so-called Israeli ally appoints the spy collaborator Uzi Arad as the Israeli Government's National Security Advisor. It is always the case that those who harm America the most are always held in high esteem in Israel. Remember the famous Israeli Spy Jonathan Pollard? He was the American Navy intelligence analyst who stole tons of the most sensitive American intelligence data and passed it to Israel. Much of this sensitive information ended with the Soviets. The Israelis gave it to the Soviets in exchange for allowing more Russian Jews to immigrate to Israel. Just to add insult to injury, the Israelis have named a street in Israel after Jonathan Pollard and built a nice home for him there. Appointing a fascist like Avigdor Lieberman as Foreign Minister in Israel is a diplomatic insult to America; the man opposed every American peace initiative for the Middle East. This is equivalent to appointing David Duke as the American Secretary of State. Can you imagine the Zionist's squeal if David Duke becomes our Secretary of States?

    Israel is the State that attacked and killed our sailors at the USS Liberty. Israel spied on us and defied us by appointing our detractors to high positions. Yet, we give this false ally 15 million dollars every day from our tax dollars. The Israeli Lobby must be mighty powerful to allow Israel to get away with so much betrayal of America.

    Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 02:30am

80. isthatafact you are such a silly person.

    Posted by Harry G. at 03/18/2009 @ 02:32am

81. CripThink wrote: " It is always the case that those who harm America the most are always held in high esteem in Israel."

    Israel is a great nation. Israel has proven a better friend to the U.S. than the U.S. has been to Israel. America has proven a worthless ally to Israel. You are simply a Jew-hater. That's all.

    Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 05:53am

82. Israel's tactic: Act with aggression and play the victim card and moan, "Everybody hates us and wants to kill us, look what they did in Germany and so on". There was probably a time when Jews can rightfully claim victim-hood but not any more. They control the most powerful country in the world, commit war crimes without being punished, threaten anybody they suspect is their possible enemy whether it is proven or not, bomb any neighbor whenever they choose, mostly defenseless populations. It is time for the rest of the world to recognize Israel for what it is, it is poison in the heart of the middle east. Amid this hopelessness ,worthwhile to remember how the mighty Soviet Union disappeared, how Hitler vanished though at the time he appeared invincible, how the USA did not win any war after the second world war, lost in Vietnam and Iraq. So this too shall pass, I say to the Muslim mothers and fathers who lost their babies in Gaza, Shatila, South Lebanon. We grieve for you and our hearts are with you.

    Posted by rnagisetty at 03/18/2009 @ 07:12am

83. rnagisetty, comparing Israel to Nazi Germany is absurd. You are a loon.

    Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 07:26am

84. Why can Israel have nuclear weapons and no other country in north africa is allowed to have them?

    Posted by UMAZE at 03/18/2009 @ 09:38am

85. What nation in north Africa wants nuclear weapons?

    Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 09:58am

86. It is alleged that Iran's goal is to develop nuclear weapones, which some seem to be against. My position is that if Israel is allowed to have them, why can't other countries in the region, North Africa, have them?

    Posted by UMAZE at 03/18/2009 @ 10:21am

87. Iranian mullahs and its president embrace an apocalyptic vision and ideology of a massive conflagration necessary for the arrival of the Madi, the twelfth immam / messiah. In other words they are fanatics. Iran is perhaps the region's largest sponsor of international terrorism. Iran was responsible the Kobar Tower bombing killing and maiming scores of U.S. servicemen. Iran was behind the suicide bombings in Lebanon - the U.S. embassy and - the U.S. Marine's barracks, killing some 241 U.S. Marines. Iran regularly threatens Israel with annihilation. You do not think the Jews take these murderous threats seriously? Israel threatens no other state in the region with annihilation. Post Holocaust, Israel achieved nuclear capability purely as a defensive measure so we would not see a yet another mass-slaughter of the Jews; this time in Israel. The Muslim and Muslim-Arab states are dedicated to the annihilation of the Jewish state. If they believe they can achieve this goal they will surely make good on it. Does this answer your question?

    Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 10:51am

88. So then you'll give the $4B/yr in aid back? Thanks!

    Posted by snowball666

    US has bought a lot of suicidal concessions from the Jews for your 3 billion per year in aid. US does not give aid gratuitously. Ask any American diplomat worth his or her salt. He will tell you America gives aid in order to buy influence; in order to oppress and pressure small nations to toe the American line. America gives a couple of billion of aid to Egypt in order to "keep the peace." The uninterrupted free flow of oil in the region is a US interest; thus American interest in the phony "peace" process. Othewise, Americans could care less about the 'plight' of the so-called "Palestinians;" an phony, make-believe people who are not a people. They are Arabs. The US has bought and paid for copious quantities of Jewish blood over the decades because of US policy to coerce Israel into dangerous, even deadly agreements with savages; the same savages that attacked Americans on 9/11. Only Americans seem to like these savages so long as they murder innocent Jewish women and children.

    I say keep your aid and we will keep our land. I would rather live in a tent if it means weaning Israel off American aid and bribery.

    Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 10:59am

89. The UN has given Israel 49% of the land of Palestine in 1948; Israel today controls 78% of Palestine. Stop playing the role of victim; your darling Israel is the most racist criminal state in modern history; not excluding the Apartheid state of South Africa.

    Posted by CripThink at 03/17/2009 @ 11:29pm

    More of your Arab lies.

    The Arabs received 75% of British Palestine, the Jews 25%. The Arabs then proceeded to argue against the Jews receiving any part of British Palestine and walked out of the UN over it. In an attempt to placate the Arabs, the UN resolution (a General Assembly Resolution that was non binding), gave the Arabs an additional 50%-which they still declined and immediately attacked Israel.

    you and your many anti-semite cohorts keep repeating the lies of the Arabs about the history.

    Posted by antisocialist at 03/18/2009 @ 11:02am

90. I find this web site interesting and instructive. On-line encyclopedia say, "The Nation is a weekly United States periodical devoted to politics and culture, self-described as "the flagship of the left."....

    Now look at the Robert Dreyfus, the author and a hater of Israel. Reading through the posts, many Nation readers are likewise Jew-haters, like many of Huffington Post's readers. This appears to give credence to the widely held charge, anti-Semitism is a thing of the left rather than the right. Though there is an fringe element (neo-nazis and white Supremacists, Ron Paul supporters and others) that attaches itself to the right like a parasite, by and large conservatives tend to support Israel and her right to exist. Not so on the left. Dreyfus and his readers are a case in point!

    Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 12:00pm

91. WHY ARE SO MANY CAPITALISTS AND LOYAL ZIONIST SUPPORTERS OF ISRAEL IN THE NATION MAGAZINE WEBSITE? I THOUGHT THAT THIS WEBSITE WAS SOCIALIST, ANTI-ISRAEL, ANTI-ZIONIST !!

    WHY DON'T THE PEOPLE WHO LOVE ISRAEL AND CAPITALISM SO MUCH GO TO JOHN MCCAIN, SARAH PALIN OR TO HTTP://WWW.FREEREPUBLIC.COM A FAR-RIGHT WING SITE FULL OF PEOPLE WHO LOVE CAPITALISM, IMPERIALISM AND ZIONISM !!

    ?

    Posted by marxist-socialist at 03/18/2009 @ 12:18pm

92. exiled: But we are supposed to hate Israel. For all the mass-murder that has committed against Palestines. What's so immoral about hating Israel?

    Please answer me: are you scared of hating the Israel rogue government?

    I hate Israel, i hate zionists, and i hate all abusers, abusing against weak populations !!

    Go to http://www.freerepublic.com they love Israel and capitalism in that site.

    By the way Ron Paul even though a capitalist would be a lot better for USA, than so many of the US bourgeoise social-democrat centrists. (And note that i am marxist-socialist, i hate free markets, but i understand that Ron Paul at least would stop all US wars, and would stop Israel, that is more than enough to trickle down wealth to US masses.

    By the way if i was Ron Paul i would kick Anderson Cooper in the face !!

    .

    .

    Posted by marxist-socialist at 03/18/2009 @ 12:22pm

93. A lot of profanity and insults are flying in the air, uttered by the Zionists and their Evangelical dog. It is indeed a sign of despair when the Zionists resort to verbal abuse instead of giving answers to legitimate questions. I feel your pain you Zionist jerks (Anti-Social, exiled, Harry G.), but is that the best you can do?

    Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 12:26pm

94. "Why can Israel have nuclear weapons and no other country in north africa is allowed to have them?" (UMAZE) May I add that Israel also doesn;'t want IRAN to have nuclear weapons which is in the ME. Israel also arms Mugabe (Zinbabwe). By the way South Africa relinquished its nuclear weapons voluntarily after Apartheid was eliminated PEACEFULLY.

    Antisocialist:Your math is wrong; Confusion does do that: You say the Arabs were originally awarded 75% of Palestine by the UN, and later claim the UN gave them an "additional 50% to placate them. That's 125% !!!! Last point, Israel is apoplectic about denying the Armenian Holocaust; But we all know that the Jews (crypto-Jews) murdered over one million Christian Armenians and denying it happened is typical of those who want everyone to believe that they are as pure as the driven snow.By the way I am a Jew.

    Posted by mystic7 at 03/18/2009 @ 12:31pm

95. marxist-socialist, I am neither a "capitalist" nor an imperialist. America is a imperial world power; not Israel. What is wrong with the Jew's right to a homeland? That's Zionism. You have a problem with the Jews living in their historic and Biblical homeland?

    Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 12:40pm

96. "We grieve for you and our hearts are with you" (rnagisetty) I echo all your sentiments which are eloquently articulated.

    Posted by mystic7 at 03/18/2009 @ 12:43pm

97. Last point, Israel is apoplectic about denying the Armenian Holocaust; But we all know that the Jews (crypto-Jews) murdered over one million Christian Armenians and denying it happened is typical of those who want everyone to believe that they are as pure as the driven snow.By the way I am a Jew.

    Posted by mystic7

    Israel's Jews do not deny the Armenian genocide. Where in the world did you read this? Turks are not Crypto-Jews. Turks are Muslim-Turks. What kind of perverse conspiracy theories do you attach yourself to? There are plenty of self-loathing and anti-Jewish Jews. You are in good company.

    Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 12:44pm

98. It is indeed a sign of despair when the Zionists resort to verbal abuse instead of giving answers to legitimate questions. I feel your pain you Zionist jerks (Anti-Social, exiled, Harry G.), but is that the best you can do?

    Posted by CripThink

    I will be happy to answer any of your questions. Have at it. Hating Jews may be profane. It is not profane to say so.

    Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 12:47pm

99. All religion is equally ignorant and superstitious. We don't support "Islamic States" or "Christian States", why should we support "Jewish States"? It's just an excuse to justify ethnic cleansing. You can see the result as Israel steals the Palestinians' lands and water while they imprison them in mass.

    Posted by JustFacts at 03/18/2009 @ 12:58pm

100. marxist-socialist wrote: "But we are supposed to hate Israel. For all the mass-murder that has committed against Palestinians. What's so immoral about hating Israel?"

     There has been no mass-murder. In war, people get killed. War is not pretty. World War II was not pretty. Plenty of Germans and Japanese were killed by the allies. Even civilians were deliberately targeted by daily and nightly allied fire-bombings of German and Japanese cities. This is war. People are killed. You are apparently wholly ignorant about war. Your country, Russia, massacred many Germans but it was defensive. Russia did not begin hostilities against the Germans. Same holds true for Israel. Israel is defending herself. You don't like that. You don't like the Jews defending themselves. You like the image of the groveling, self-abasing, weak Jew who can be thrown in the ovens. This is your wet dream.

     marxist-socialist: "Please answer me: are you scared of hating the Israel rogue government?"

     I have no use for this traitorous Olmert government. Why do you think I like traitors?

     marxist-socialist: "I hate Israel, i hate Zionists, and i hate all abusers, abusing against weak populations !!"

     And I hate evil monsters, murderers and their sympathizers.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 1:03pm

101. JustFacts since you are an atheist, we have nothing to discuss. King David was right when he wrote: "The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God," They are corrupt, and have committed abominable injustice; There is no one who does good...."

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 1:07pm

102. I will be happy to answer any of your questions. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 12:47pm

     That is encouraging exiled; you say that you are willing to answer logical questions.

     Why is it that the Israelis named a street after the traitor who spied on America (Jonathan Pollard)?

     Why does Israel spy on America? We practically give you everything for free.

     Why it is OK for Israel to have a nuclear stockpile and the Iranians can't? Iran never attacked anyone or occupied somebody else's territories; Israel has attacked its neighbors repeatedly and is an occupying power.

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 1:08pm

103. CripThink, a street named after Jonathan Pollard is a new one to me. Do you have a couple credible web-sites or sources to confirm this charge? Not some weird 9/11-Truther conspiracy web-sites.

     It is my understanding, most countries spy on one another; even allies. America spies on Israel. I'm not saying I am in favor of spying. Spying is as old as the the ancients in the Bible. One thing you need to keep in mind, Pollard is a traitor here in the US. Are American spies abroad considered "traitors" by most American citizens? I doubt it. Don't you. Same holds true in Israel is my best guess. What Pollard did was foolish but it was in no way unusual. Americans have captured many spies over the years; from both friendly and unfriendly countries. It is my understanding, Pollard has been treated especially harsh when compared to other spies that spied on the U.S. by allied countries.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 1:15pm

104. Iran never attacked anyone or occupied somebody else's territories; Israel has attacked its neighbors repeatedly and is an occupying power.

     Posted by CripThink

     What you've written is a bunch of nonsense. Shame on you. You are either a fool or you take me for one. Iran is amongst the world's largest state sponsors of Islamic terrorism. Iranian tentacles reach all over the Middle East and into Africa. Iranian and Saudi proxies (Hamas, Hezbollah, Fatah, Al Qaeda, etc.) have murdered countless innocents all over the globe. Who are you fooling other than yourself? Israel occupies her God-given land. Israel doesn't need your approval. Israel has attacked no one. All of Israel's wars have been defensive. You are so ill-informed, it is insulting to even to answer you. Do you read anything? Have you read ANY history at all?

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 1:25pm

105. Iran never attacked anyone or occupied somebody else's territories; Israel has attacked its neighbors repeatedly and is an occupying power.

     Posted by CripThink

     Taliban was the governing authority in Afghanistan before Americans and their Northern Alliance allies overthrew them. Taliban's Al Qaeda never occupied anybody eles's territory that I know of but they murdered some 3,000 innocent Americans on 9/11/2001. Is this your standard of measure? Al Qaeda and the Taliban were innocent because they did not occupy American soil?

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 1:39pm

106. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 1:15pm

     exiled,

     An Israeli square in Jerusalem to be renamed for Pollard; according to the Israeli National News: Arutz Sheva.

     http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/124739

     Many American agents in the Soviet Unions were arrested an executed as a result of the Pollard Affair when the Israelis sold the information given to them by Pollard to the Soviets.

     How about my second question about the Israeli nuclear stockpile?

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 1:50pm

107. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 10:59am

     The term Arab is a sloppy term - like Hispanic. At one level, it's a linguistic category. Arab speaking Jews? They're Arabs.

     So, it's not a useful distinction to call Arabs living in Palestine Arabs, and since they essentially have no nationality - as Arabs themselves do not - you're argument should make that point, rather than try to go the sloppy semantic route.

     "The US has bought and paid for copious quantities of Jewish blood over the decades because of US policy to coerce Israel into dangerous, even deadly agreements with savages..."

     Is it not savage to wall a people in and then conduct a war in that space? Want to give it a try at your house?

     You can criticize Israel without being an anti-semite. This is a variation of the "why do you hate America?" or "does your mother know you are an alcoholic" argument used by people that don't want to defend their positions rationally.

     Posted by marxist-socialist at 03/18/2009 @ 12:18pm

     All caps are annoying. And The Nation's politics are generally focused on electoral politics and the Democratic Party. Actual discussion of socialism, communism, anarchism or any other leftish -ism is rarely discussed here.

     Posted by antisocialist at 03/18/2009 @ 11:02am

     I find your support for the decisions of the League of Nations...interesting. The League of Nations also had provisions for indigenous populations, did it not? What about the Arabs that have lived there for generations? I think the problem is it was a creation of a "Jewish" state. It is invariably bad when states catch religion.

     Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 1:59pm

108. Arutz Sheva is one of Pollard's biggest defenders. Again, from the point of view of many in Israel, Pollard is not a traitor. Pollard is not something I have spent a great deal of time studying. According to my recollection, much of what Pollard gave Israel had to do with Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear capability; something the US should have shared with Israel anyway. What Pollard did was incredibly foolish. It seems as though he got a disproportionate sentence for his crimes, compared to other allies that spied on the U.S.

     It seems as though there is conflicting information on this Soviet Union connection. I found the following:

     http://www.jonathanpollard.org/1994/031894.htm

     Israel's nuclear stockpile is purely defensive in my view. Israel would only use nuclear weapons if it is attacked first with weapons of mass destruction or if she faces annihilation. We cannot say the same about Iran. Iran is breathing genocidal threats to wipe Israel off the face of the earth; Israel is a "dying corpse," etc.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:03pm

109. at the end of the Camp david negotiations, Israel offered to withdraw from approximately 93% of the West Bank, mitigate another approximately 3% with a land transfer adjacent to gaza, and grant the PA a quasi-sovereign control of the Temple Mount (Israel retaining a quasi-sovereignty to land below the Temple Mount. No right of return. Arafat walked away from the offer.

     The reason why Israel continues to administrate the west Bank though military control is because Arafat was unable to stand up to the Fatah and Hamas rejectionist militants. Similarly, the PA / Abbas show the same weakness today. Plus the right of return remains a stumbling block.

     The point is, that Israel has not in the past, and does not in the present, seek to retain the west Bank except for four urban areas adjacent to the Green Line which constitute only 6% of the West Bank. Criticism of Israel which ignores this fundamental fact is either uninformed or hatefully prejudiced.

     Posted by gren at 03/18/2009 @ 2:03pm

110. God-given land. Israel doesn't need your approval. Israel has attacked no one. All of Israel's wars have been defensive. You are so ill-informed, it is insulting to even to answer you. Do you read anything? Have you read ANY history at all? Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 1:25pm

     exiled,

     Yes, I have read the entire history except your Talmudic Scripts which urge Jerk like you spit on the gentiles' graveyards. It is the same Talmudic scripts that insult Jesus and his mother Mary and spread profanity about them. Is this the same scripts you are citing in which God has given you the West Bank and permitted it you to murder Palestinians and loot their land?

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 2:06pm

111. Posted by mystic7 at 03/18/2009 @ 12:31pm

     There is nothing inherently wrong with math that says 75% and 25% and then half of the 25% - which is 87.5% not 125%. Not that I'm agreeing with him, but his math isn't the problem.

     Posted by JustFacts at 03/18/2009 @ 12:58pm

     I think your atheistic religion is equally silly.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 1:25pm

     "Iran is amongst the world's largest state sponsors of Islamic terrorism."

     Care to talk about the Mossad? From Haaretz, "One of the Mossad's most important missions from the day of its inception was Israel's "special relations" with countries that did not recognize it and with minorities like the Christians in Lebanon and the Kurds in Iraq." How, exactly, is Iran different? Is it because they are Muslims and Jews are the chosen people? Or are you making distinctions based on how much involvement? Or some other criterion?

     Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 2:08pm

112. May I enter the fray?

     Posted by esthermem at 03/18/2009 @ 2:13pm

113. Posted by gren at 03/18/2009 @ 2:03pm

     Please feel free to talk about the Israeli settlements on land they don't want.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:03pm

     "Iran is breathing genocidal threats to wipe Israel off the face of the earth; Israel is a "dying corpse," etc."

     In the original, the comment is more along the lines of, "Israel will cease to exist." You have to make assumptions to read in Iranian agency in the comment.

     To illustrate, I might say, "I will cease to exist." However, it would be an assumption to say that I was feeling suicidal because I said this - an unwarranted assumption.

     It's splitting hairs, but the bottom line is that people are taking this statement to make an emotional appeal to people's fears. Iran does not have nuclear weapons nor would they use them against Israel if they did - no more than Pakistan.

     Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 2:18pm

114. at the end of the Camp david negotiations, Israel offered to withdraw from approximately 93% of the West Bank, Posted by gren at 03/18/2009 @ 2:03pm

     gren,

     Repeating an old Israeli propaganda can hardly make it true. The entire Arab World is putting a Peace proposal on the table right now. 23 Arab Nations will extend complete diplomatic and economic ties with Israel, if it withdraws to the 1967 borders. Go convince your fascists Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman to sign on to this excellent offer instead of spreading the old Israeli lies.

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 2:23pm

115. HAHAHAHA, WHAT A SCAM THE NATION MAGAZINE HAS BECOME !!

     YOU ACTUALLY MEAN THAT I AM SUPPOSED TO DIGEST THE CORPORATE PUPPET CAPITALIST IDEOLOGY OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY LIKE IF IT WAS GOD-ORDAINED?

     YOU ACTUALLY MEAN THAT US CITIZENS MUST BE UNCONDTIONALLY SUPPORTIVE OF OBAMA'S NEOLIBERAL WALL STREET ECONOMISTS?

     NO WAY !!

     ONLY A TRUE PARTICIPATIVE SOCIALIST DEMOCRACY LIKE THE ONE BEING APPLIED IN VENEZUELA CAN FIX AND SAVE USA !!

     THIRD-WAY CORPORATE NEOLIBERALISM LIKE TONY BLAIR'S BOURGEOISE SOCIALDEMOCRACY DON'T WORK!!! ONLY NATIONALIZATION OF PRIVATE CORPORATIONS, A FATTER STATE, MORE WELFARE PROGRAMS AND MORE SOCIALISM, WORKERS COOPERATIVES, COMMUNITY COUNCILS, MORE DEMOCRACY, LESS PRIVATISM CAN SAVE USA FROM COLLAPSING LIKE THE TITANIC !!

     Posted by marxist-socialist at 03/18/2009 @ 2:24pm

116. Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 1:59pm: "The term Arab is a sloppy term - like Hispanic. At one level, it's a linguistic category. Arab speaking Jews? They're Arabs."

     OK. "An Arab is a person who identifies as such on linguistic or cultural grounds." Originally these were the peoples inhabiting Arabia and other countries of the Middle East. There are Asian or Sephardi Jews that lived for many centuries under Islam, in north Africa, the Iberian Peninsula and the Middle East. I would not call them Arabs. Sephardi Jews are generally those Jews who lived in Spain, Portugal, North Africa and the Middle East. We call the "Palestinian" Arabs, Arabs because prior to the 1967 Six Day war this is how they self-identified; either as Arabs or Arabs that identified with Syria. "Moslems west of the Jordan directed their allegiance to Damascus, where the great-great-uncle of Jordan's King Abdullah II was then ruling; they identified themselves as Southern Syrians." This was prior to the 1967 Six Day war. Though there were Arabs, Jews and Christians living in "Palestine" for many centuries, as the Jews began returning en-mass to their land in the late 19th and early 20th centuries - as they began building up and cultivating the land - Arabs immigrated by the thousands and tens of thousands into "Palestine" in search of better paying jobs.

     It not savage to build a partition to keep suicide / homicide bombers from blowing up your women and children. Would you allow savage suicide bombers to enter your house?

     If you question Israel's right to exist in the Jews' historic homeland, in my view, you are an anti-Semite.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:29pm

117. EXILED: ISRAEL JUST WANTS TO KILL ALL PALESTINIANS, TAKE OVER PALESTINE LAND AND ALSO TAKE OVER US ECONOMY !!

     WAKE UP !! ARE YOU JEW OR ISRAELI OR SOMETHING?

     YOU ARE A ZIONIST LOYAL SUPPORTER OF ISRAEL !!

     ISRAEL IS NOT DEFFENDING ITSELF FROM ANYBODY !!

     ISRAEL JUST WANTS TO TAKE OVER ALL MIDDLE-EAST COUNTRIES, STEAL THEIR OIL, THEIR LAND, AND KILL ALL ARABS AND MUSLIMS !!

     GO TO A CAPITALIST REPUBLICAN PARTY FORUM, THEY LOVE ISRAEL IN THAT SITE !!

     AND YES OBAMA SHOULD KICK AIPAC, ISRAELI ELITES AND THROW THEM IN THE ATLANTIC OCEAN WHERE THEY BELONG

     I AM TIRED OF ISRAEL !!

     ,

     Posted by marxist-socialist at 03/18/2009 @ 2:30pm

118. EXILED IS AN ISRAELI JEW, HE IS LEGITIMIZING THE MASS-GENOCIDE THAT ISRAEL IS DOING AGAINST PALESTINES !!

     I HATE IMMORAL-RELATIVISM !!

     ACCORDING TO EXILED ISRAEL HAS A RIGHT TO MASS-MURDER PALESTINES !!

     OBAMA SHOULD BRING MORALISM BACK TO USA !!

     UNDER REPUBLICAN NEOCONS USA WAS A LAW-LESS REGIME WHERE KILLING AND MASS-MURDERING WAS OK !!

     REMEMBER THAT BUSH AND ISRAELI MOSSAD AGENTS DID 9-11, KILLED 1.3 MILLION IRAQUIS AND SO FAR THAT IS OK AND NICE ACCORDING TO REPUBLIC-RATS

     .

     Posted by marxist-socialist at 03/18/2009 @ 2:33pm

119. srjenkins, you are in terrible denial. Do you also - like Iran's president - question or deny the Holocaust?

     House Condemns Iran's Threats Against Israel Friday, October 28, 2005

     WASHINGTON -- The House on Friday unanimously condemned the "outrageous and despicable threats" Iran's president made against Israel and reasserted the U.S. commitment to defending Israel's right to exist.

     The House resolution, passed 383-0, demanded that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (search) repudiate his statement on Wednesday that "Israel should be wiped off the map."

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:33pm

120. EXILED: I FORGOT TO SAY, THAT ISRAEL WANTS TO TAKEOVER USA AS WELL. ISRAELI ELITES ARE NOT CONTENT WITH OWNING 2 COUNTRIES (PALESTINE AND ISRAEL), THEY WANT TO TAKE OVER USA AS WELL !!

     .

     Posted by marxist-socialist at 03/18/2009 @ 2:35pm

121. this site is becoming a hoot. all sorts of bugged-out loonies spouting doctrinal nonsense. best free entertainment in town.

     Posted by gren at 03/18/2009 @ 2:35pm

122. EXILED: ISRAEL JUST WANTS TO KILL ALL PALESTINIANS, TAKE OVER PALESTINE LAND....!!

     Posted by marxist-socialist at 03/18/2009 @ 2:30pm

     You mean like white Europeans took over north America, ethnically cleansing, despoliating and expropriating Indian lands. Whose land do you live on?

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:39pm

123. isthatafact is assuming that when HarryG referred to "dropping his pants to view the work of a cross eyed Rabbi" he was talking about circumcision and challenged HarryG's claim.As a Jew I don't, for only a Jew would use this phrase from the writings of "Sholom Aleichem" the Yiddish humourist and has nothing to do with circumcision but of Gebel (the cross eyed Rabbie) mistaken the buttocks of a baby for the breast of a chicken in declaring Kosher standing. I have decided that ISTHATAFACT is a man, for no woman,Jewish or not, could possibly be this dumb! As my grandmother would say, "a nahr bleibt a nahr" and for those unversed in Yiddish, "a fool is still a fool". I agree with HarryG on the position Israel (government) has taken in the question of militarism, they are acting like Hitler for the conquest of Europe.

     Posted by esthermem at 03/18/2009 @ 2:42pm

124. Iran does not have nuclear weapons nor would they use them against Israel if they did - no more than Pakistan.

     Posted by srjenkins

     How do you know they will not use them? One nuclear weapon detonated over Israel could wipe out tens, perhaps thousands of Jews. Iran is such a large land mass, they could absorb an Israeli counter attack. Iranian leaders have said as much. Iran's mullahs acknowledge, if they can incinerate five million Jews, trading 15 million Iranians would justify such an attack. Iran, by means of her murderous proxies, have been killing innocents all over the region for decades. These are people that do not regard nor value life. It is an entirely different culture and religion than we have in the west and in our Judeo-Christian tradition. They routinely boast that the Jews love life, while "we love death." These sorts of statements and threats are not something to take lightly. Jews have learned these lessons from hard and bloody experience. We have no need of naifs to lecture us that you are certain the Iranians would not use nuclear weapons against Israel.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:46pm

125. REMEMBER THAT BUSH AND ISRAELI MOSSAD AGENTS DID 9-11.... Posted by marxist-socialist

     You are certifiable.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:49pm

126. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:46pm

     If the Iranians are that bad, why did the Israelis sell Iran piles of weapons in 1986? Are you denying this too?

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 2:57pm

127. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:29pm

     "If you question Israel's right to exist in the Jews' historic homeland, in my view, you are an anti-Semite."

     That's the crux of the problem now, isn't it?

     I notice how you talked about setting up walls, but not about Israel conducting a military campaign within them. I see concern about Iran's support for terrorists, but none about Mossad/CIA support for militant minorities in other countries. There's talk about rocket attacks, but there isn't any talk about weapons fire by Israeli troops, bulldozers or attacks by extremist settlers on Palestinians.

     And I think it is the worst form of intellectual bankruptcy to label someone an "anti-semite" for wanting to bring in these topics or to tap down on the ridiculous fear-mongering that is going on about Iran.

     Further, it is a misrepresentation of my position to reduce my commentary to "question[ing] Israel's right to exist in the Jews' historic homeland". This is not my position.

     My position is that religion and government don't mix. I believe that Israel has to be more than a Jewish state, and it has a responsibility to treat Jewish and non-Jewish citizens with equal rights under Israeli law. We live in a cosmopolitian world, and we need to cultivate governments based on tolerance.

     That doesn't mean you have to be a fool. But, it does mean you cannot be a fearful bigot towards Arabs or that you can hide this bigotry by always calling the other guy "anti-semitic". Sure, there are anti-semites, here and elsewhere, but you seem rather free with the term to apply it to anyone making arguments you don't like rather than reserving it for people that believe Jews are inherently evil.

     I don't believe this. Nor do I believe Muslims or Iranians are evil either.

     Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 3:05pm

128. If the Iranians are that bad, why did the Israelis sell Iran piles of weapons in 1986? Are you denying this too?

     Posted by CripThink

     A while back, I watched a video of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane speaking before the National Press Club. I see the video is still up so you can watch it if you wish. The audio is not that good but it is acceptable. Kahane was asked this question. I beieve this happened during the Peres government and the Reagan Administration. I believe Prime Minister Shamir (prior to Peres) declined the administration's request to do business with Iran. The point is, what Reagan and Peres did was flat out wrong and immoral; evil even in my opinion. Reagan was no hero; not in my book. Kahane told the reporter something to the effect, 'because Israel is involved in something, this does not make it good' or right.

     I agree.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 3:21pm

129. Sorry, here is the link to the Kahane talk:

     http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5040457003958805741

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 3:22pm

130. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 2:46pm

     How does Iran know that Israel won't use the nuclear weapons it has on them? Because Israel is part of the Judeo-Christian tradition? Don't make me laugh.

     And how unfair that Israel should have to live under the same threat that they currently pose to everyone else in the region. God forbid Israel have to deal with Arabs as equals, right?

     Israel has set the stage. There are only two logical reactions a Iranian leader will have to the knowledge that Israel has nuclear weapons. One, they work with Israel to get rid of their nuclear weapons. They probably deem that unlikely. Two, they develop their own as part of a MAD strategy.

     And the real telling point about your argumentation is how you take the words of extreme mullahs in Iran as the sentiments of Iran, the country. How would that work if people started quoting Avigdor Lieberman and his ilk as representative of Israel?

     The moral bankruptcy of one rule for Israel and another rule for someone else is the problem. It's not unique to Israel, it applies to the United States and other permanent members of the UN Security Council. But, it's definitely a problem.

     "These sorts of statements and threats are not something to take lightly. Jews have learned these lessons from hard and bloody experience. We have no need of naifs to lecture us that you are certain the Iranians would not use nuclear weapons against Israel."

     Nor do they require the obsessive focus that many people give them - particularly those that don't understand the language, take them out of context and play fast and loose with translations because it suits their agenda.

     I'll let the arrogance of the naif comment pass. Your arrogance is probably why your arguments are so bad.

     Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 3:22pm

131. Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 3:05pm

     "My position is that religion and government don't mix. I believe that Israel has to be more than a Jewish state, and it has a responsibility to treat Jewish and non-Jewish citizens with equal rights under Israeli law. We live in a cosmopolitan world, and we need to cultivate governments based on tolerance."

     I am plenty tolerant. You've got the wrong guy if you think I am a bigot or a racist. I am not. I do not believe one race is superior to another race. Israel is plenty tolerant of other faiths. Both Muslims and Christians are free to worship in Israel; free to worship and pray at their holy sites. This is quite unlike most Islamic countries including Saudi Arabia, the custodian of Islam's two holiest cities. Should you be caught carrying a bible, you would be arrested, perhaps flogged and expelled. There are no houses of worship in the al-Hezaj other than mosques. Muslim countries and regimes, including "liberated" Iraq, Palestinian Authority, Gaza, Pakistan and Egypt, persecute their Christian minorities. During the 19 years Jordan illegally occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem, "in violation of the 1949 Armistice Agreement, Jordan denied Israelis access to the Western Wall and to the cemetery on the Mount of Olives, where Jews have buried their dead for more than 2,500 years. Under Jordanian rule, Israeli Christians were subjected to various restrictions during their seasonal pilgrimages to their holy places. The ancient Jewish Quarter of the Old City was ravaged, 58 Jerusalem synagogues -- some centuries old -- were destroyed or ruined, others were turned into stables and chicken coops. Slum dwellings were built abutting the Western Wall."

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 3:40pm

132. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 3:21pm

     exiled,

     The point I am making here is that Israel define who is the terrorist based on draconian rules which Israel violates on regular basis. Israel has supported true terrorist groups, with arms and military training, like the military Juntas in South America, while these juntas were murdering and raping their own citizens. Israel also supported the Apartheid regime in South Africa militarily and helped that regime build its nuclear arsenal. The Israeli history of ethnic-cleansing of Palestinians is no less terrorist than all the above. And a fellow like you trying to sell us the BS that Israel is founded on godly mandate and Biblical decree. If God has had any thing to do with this fraud; then he must be covering his face in disgust and shame for all the crimes committed by the Israelis under his name.

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 3:40pm

133. Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 3:05pm

     "My position is that religion and government don't mix. I believe that Israel has to be more than a Jewish state, and it has a responsibility to treat Jewish and non-Jewish citizens with equal rights under Israeli law. We live in a cosmopolitan world, and we need to cultivate governments based on tolerance."

     In general, you have been proven right historically. More often than not, when the clergy held political power things were not good for the people. You will notice in ancient Israel, apart from Moses, none of Israel's kings were priests so far as I recall. On the other hand, both priests, prophets, judges, etc., had a voice in the government as it should be. You are not arguing, for instance, here in America, people of faith should have no voice in the public square or in government decision-making. Are you? In the Torah, Moses commanded the Israelites to do justice to the alien, the stranger and the sojourner, which is why I often find much fault with what I can only describe as xenophobia toward Hispanics and other minorities here in the U.S.

     On the other hand, there is no requirement to be kind or compassionate to one's internal enemies. America has internal enemies and Israel has internal enemies; plenty of them. Do you read the polls in "Palestinian" territories? Do you know the percentage of Muslims living in Israel who celebrate suicide bombings against innocent Jewish women and children? Did you watch the news reports from the Palestinian territories on 9/11?

     If not, have a look:

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrM0dAFsZ8k

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMOZvbYJMvU

     You believe these people deserve equal rights? If you do, you are on the side of the enemy.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 3:51pm

134. Antisocialist:Your math is wrong; Confusion does do that: You say the Arabs were originally awarded 75% of Palestine by the UN, and later claim the UN gave them an "additional 50% to placate them. That's 125% !!!! Last point, Israel is apoplectic about denying the Armenian Holocaust; But we all know that the Jews (crypto-Jews) murdered over one million Christian Armenians and denying it happened is typical of those who want everyone to believe that they are as pure as the driven snow.By the way I am a Jew.

     Posted by mystic7 at 03/18/2009 @ 12:31pm

     My math is not wrong, my sentence structure may have been though.

     British Palestine was divided in 1947 giving the Arabs 75% which was first called Transjordan and now Jordan.

     The Arabs did not accept that deal (while taking the 75%) and wanted more. The UN then under a non binding general resolution, awarded them 50% of the 25% which was Israel.

     This still was not sufficient so they launched a war against Israel to try and take the remaining 12.5% which Israel possessed.

     Subsequent to continued wars with Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebannon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen among others -BUT NO SO-CALLED PALESTINIAN STATE, Israel regained control of East Jerusalem, Gaza, Sinai, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights.

     Those areas are officially deemed as Disputed Territories under international law.

     Even Resolution 242 that the anti-Israel types love to quote so much is a Chapter 6 Security Council Resolution and is nonbinding.

     Also, 242 does not call for a "Palestinian State" nor does it call for Israel to negotiate with anyone other than the countries that went to war with Israel.

     Posted by antisocialist at 03/18/2009 @ 3:57pm

135. Posted by antisocialist at 03/18/2009 @ 3:57pm

     Anti-Social,

     Let's see how "disputed" it would be when someone hauls your ass out of your own home and also takes over your backyard (like the Israelis did to the Palestinians). It is easy for an idiot like you to plot people's fate while sitting in the comfort of your home reading from your scripture of hate and distortion. Black robes like you should be expelled from the human race.

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 4:09pm

136. Israel has supported true terrorist groups, with arms and military training, like the military Juntas in South America, while these juntas were murdering and raping their own citizens.

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009

     I addressed these points above. Again, because Israel's government has given aid to this or that American covert operation (mostly during the Reagan administration) does not make it moral or right. The Saudis also lent a financial hand to Reagan's escapades in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Israel supported S. Africa's government in large part because S. Africa stood by Israel, traded with Israel, cooperated with Israel as the rest of Africa turned on Israel. I'm not saying it was entirely right. No country on the face of the planet is perfect. Israel is no exception. I believe Israel is generally justified in defending herself against totalitarian / imperial Islam. This is what Israel is facing in the Middle East. To one degree or another, all of Israel's neighbors are in a state of war with the Jewish state. Israel lives in a rough neighborhood. Israel's history is not one of ethnic cleansing, otherwise there would be not one Muslim living in Israel. Unlike America's Congress and U.S. president (Jackson) - which passed and implemented the "1830 Indian Removal Act" - Israel's Knesset did not pass nor implement a "Palestinian Removal Act." Not yet at any rate. Israel's experience does not hold a candle to the American experiment in terms of the ethnic cleansing, despoliation, theft, murders and expropriation of Native Americans. Does it?

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 4:11pm

137. It is easy for an idiot like you to plot people's fate while sitting in the comfort of your home reading from your scripture of hate and distortion. Black robes like you should be expelled from the human race.

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 4:09pm

     So, besides being an anti-semite, you are also anti-Christian. No surprise.

     Besides Muslims, is there any group or faith you do accept as being legitimate or even having a right to exist?

     Posted by antisocialist at 03/18/2009 @ 4:22pm

138. Besides Muslims, is there any group or faith you do accept as being legitimate or even having a right to exist? Posted by antisocialist at 03/18/2009 @ 4:22pm

     Anti-Social,

     I have no credibility left for any religion; specifically those sects which harbor creatures like you. You did not answer my question on how would you feel if someone hauls your ass out of your home.

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 4:33pm

139. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 3:51pm

     "You are not arguing, for instance, here in America, people of faith should have no voice in the public square or in government decision-making. Are you?"

     No. I'm making the distinction between being a nation of predominately Jewish citizens and a Jewish nation. Substitute Jewish with Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist/secularist or what have you.

     There is no way to seperate spirituality from individual decision making. But, the very genius of classical liberal forms of government is that it becomes possible for minorities to be involved in government and have a degree of protection from the tyranny of the majority or even "special" minorities.

     "You believe these people deserve equal rights?"

     It is precisely because they do not have equal rights that they are celebrating.

     Look, it's distasteful, wrong and stupid. But, Palestinians don't have a monopoly on it.

     There were plenty of Americans cheering the Shock & Awe of the U.S. military, even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. There was a period were Iraq had the number of deaths in 9/11, every month. Yet, American indifference is more praiseworthy than Palestinian celebrations? Not to me it's not.

     People are misinformed and they have their prejudices - but that doesn't give me the right to be prejudiced myself. Nor do I have the right to pretend that if I were in their place, that I wouldn't do the same exact thing. You have to walk a mile in those shoes, and when we try to do that, their behavior becomes both human and understandable.

     I believe that the God of Abraham is also the God of Mercy. The Law comes down to two things: to love God and to love one another - and that's not just limited to Jews & Christians; it includes our enemies.

     Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 4:34pm

140. esthermem; ei! ei! du fangst shoyn on? I have a Yiddish quoting mother-in-law. I appreciate that you came along to interpret for ISTHATAFACT but I am afraid that his low intellect will not grasp the significance nor will it distract his focus or his belief. I seem to be in his gunsight and he as redneck is out for bear. Thanks again but as you have already written, a nahr bleibt a nahr. Shalom!

     Posted by esthermem at 03/18/2009 @ 4:46pm

141. This thread is too heavy....folks, you need a break....check out one of the advertisers here at our favorite blog hangout....claims to have ~1.2 million members....hehehehe :)

     Welcome to Muslima.com!

     Muslim matrimonials, singles and personals

     Muslima.com is a leading Muslim matrimonial and marriage site bringing together thousands of Muslim women and men from around the world. If you're looking for a site to give you more than just personals for Muslim dating, join Muslima.com and see the difference. You can browse profiles and use chat and email to communicate with singles for your Muslim marriage. JOIN FREE NOW!

     Posted by Happy at 03/18/2009 @ 4:48pm

142. Israel lives in a rough neighborhood. Israel's history is not one of ethnic cleansing, otherwise there would be not one Muslim living in Israel. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 4:11pm

     exiled,

     Actually, if you read your own history, you will run into the heated debate between Ben-Gurion and other Zionist leaders pertaining to the fate of Palestinian around 1948. During that time when the Haganah, the Irgun and the Stern Gang where murdering and terrorizing Palestinians out of their homes; Ben-Gurion advocated keeping a sample representation of Palestinians in some old quarters in Haifa, and few other places. Ben-Gurion felt that this would convey an image of inclusivity on the Zionist State and shield it from international criticism. Other Zionist leaders could never forgive Ben-Gurion for that decision and wanted pure Jewish state. As for Israel, it is natural that it lives in rough neighborhood; The Israelis came to Palestine to murder, pillage, expel annex and occupy Palestinian homes and erase their national identity. All thieves who intrude and take over other people's property should feel insecure. If you really want to smooth out your neighborhood, then take the Arab Peace offer. 23 Arab Countries are offering Israel full recognition, economic and political ties if Israel gives up land it occupied in 1967. The Israeli answer to the Arab initiative was to vote to office fascists like Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman, don't blame but yourself.

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 5:06pm

143. Look, it's distasteful, wrong and stupid. But, Palestinians don't have a monopoly on it......People are misinformed and they have their prejudices - but that doesn't give me the right to be prejudiced myself. Nor do I have the right to pretend that if I were in their place, that I wouldn't do the same exact thing. You have to walk a mile in those shoes, and when we try to do that, their behavior becomes both human and understandable.

     I believe that the God of Abraham is also the God of Mercy......

     Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 4:34pm

     So you have sympathy for Muslim fanatics that slowly be-headed Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg as these two men screamed in agony - while their killers chanted verses from the Qur'an - because you've not walked in these murderer's shoes. You can identify with the 9/11 hijackers who cut the throats of female flight attendants and the pilot's throats in order to take the controls of these jets and fly them into the Trade Center towers.

     You feel sympathy for these monsters because you've not walked a mile in their moccasins. Even Adolf Hitler and other mass-murderers you can love because god commands you thereto.

     Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 6:48pm

144. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 6:48pm |

     exiled,

     It is hard to feel sympathy for any extremism; including Jewish extremists.

     I recall that the FBI arrested several Israeli Mossad agents on 9/11 who were dancing in glee on the rooftop of a building across the bay from the World Trade center. The Israelis were jumping up and down in delight while the World Trade Center was burning with Americans inside.

     I also recall that for 2 full hours, Israeli jets were strafing the American Navy Ship the USS Liberty with Napalm and bullets, then with torpedoes. 34 American Sailors were murdered in cold blood and 170 wounded; including the ship captain. It wasn't clear what verses the Israeli pilots were citing when they were murdering the Americans, maybe from the Talmud.

     So before you point a fingers at others for committing act of terror against Americans; it behooves you to look in the mirror

     Posted by CripThink at 03/18/2009 @ 7:44pm

145. Posted by exiled at 03/18/2009 @ 6:48pm

     "So you have sympathy for Muslim fanatics that slowly be-headed Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg as these two men screamed in agony - while their killers chanted verses from the Qur'an - because you've not walked in these murderer's shoes."

     The main difference between you and I is that I don't confuse the people that do these acts with Palestinians, Iranians or Muslims.

     You could make the same arguments about generalizing about the American people from the torture techniques utilized by CIA agents - and you'd be just as wrong.

     Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009 @ 8:09pm

146. So before you point a fingers at others for committing act of terror against Americans; it behooves you to look in the mirror

     Posted by CripThink

     Israelis said the USS Liberty incident was tragic result of mis-identification. If there were Mossad agents celebrating 9/11, shame on them. I cannot control the behavior of others; only my own. Nor will I attempt to justify bad behavior. Nonetheless, what you have alleged does not make Israel an evil state, only an imperfect one.

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 08:03am

147. I wrote: "So you have sympathy for Muslim fanatics that slowly be-headed Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg as these two men screamed in agony - while their killers chanted verses from the Qur'an - because you've not walked in these murderer's shoes."

     You replied: The main difference between you and I is that I don't confuse the people that do these acts with Palestinians, Iranians or Muslims.

     You could make the same arguments about generalizing about the American people from the torture techniques utilized by CIA agents - and you'd be just as wrong.

     Posted by srjenkins at 03/18/2009

     The point is CIA agents do not justifying their behavior by religion or religious texts. Islam is indeed doing this. Osama bin Laden's justifications for the 9/11 terror atrocities were all religious; based on the Qur'an, the Sunnah and the Hadith. Palestinian and Iranian terror is religiously based. Suicide bombings are justified by religious teachings, from Islamic law and tradition. So are be headings and other barbaric acts. The mistreatment of women in Islam is religiously based. Your comparisons haven't any basis in religion.

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 08:09am

148. Those areas are officially deemed as Disputed Territories under international law.

     Even Resolution 242 that the anti-Israel types love to quote so much is a Chapter 6 Security Council Resolution and is nonbinding.

     Also, 242 does not call for a "Palestinian State" nor does it call for Israel to negotiate with anyone other than the countries that went to war with Israel.

     Posted by antisocialist at 03/18/2009 @ 3:57pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     However, UNSC Resolution 338 called for the implementation of 242 and used the language "Decides that, immediately and concurrently with the cease-fire, negotiations shall start between the parties concerned under appropriate auspices aimed at establishing a just and durable peace in the Middle East."

     The use of "decides" indicates that 338 is a Chapter VII resolution. Since the same resolution called for the implementation of 242, it follows that it made 242 binding.

     The San Remo Conference, in fact, gave the UK the right to withhold the application of the mandate provisions in the area east of the Jordan river. British practice from the start of its assumption of the mandate involved exactly that. The de facto practice was to treat them as separate entities.

     Further, since the West Bank is territory seized beyond any internationally recognized line of Israeli territory, it is occupied in the legal sense of the word, not disputed. Article 42 of the Hague Convention actual states this "Art. 42. Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. "

     Posted by brunowe at 03/19/2009 @ 09:18am

149. there ar 6 million Jews and roughly 5 million Arabs between the meditteranean and the Jordan river. Expulsion of either population is not an option and a binational state divided as it would be by language and religion, secularism and clericalism is a formula for violent strife. a two state solution is the only viable option. However gettingthere is the puzzle. Hence dramatic and continuous outside encouragement from washington, Europe and the Arab world will be required. It wasthe absence of this mediation over the Bush years that created the standstill today.

     Posted by leftandsane at 03/19/2009 @ 09:42am

150. Osama bin Laden's justifications for the 9/11 terror atrocities were all religious;

     this is just a plain lie.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 11:12am

151. I recall that the FBI arrested several Israeli Mossad agents on 9/11 who were dancing in glee on the rooftop of a building across the bay from the World Trade center. The Israelis were jumping up and down in delight while the World Trade Center was burning with Americans inside.

     you recall nothing. this is also a lie. repeat, it did not happen.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 11:16am

152. Taliban's Al Qaeda never occupied anybody eles's territory that I know of but they murdered some 3,000 innocent Americans on 9/11/2001.

     you are conflating Al Qaeda and the Taleban.

     a shameful lie

     .the Taleban did not attack us, could not attack us, just like Saddam, who did not attack us and could not attack us.

     this thread is a nest of vipers spreading old, very old discredited lies.

     not so entertaining, really.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 11:34am

153. Iranian Official: Nobody Sees What Pope Does in Vatican

     by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu

     (IsraelNN.com) A member of Iran's Supreme Council for Cultural Revolution has claimed that the Pope traveled overseas to compensate alleged victims of sexual attacks by alleged homosexual priests. The comments of Hassan Rahimpour Azghadi were made several months ago and translated for publication on Wednesday by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).

     Azghadi, addressing viewers on Iranian television, charged that the pope traveled to the United States and Australia to compensate victims of alleged sexual abuse by priests.

     The Iranian official's function is to help export the Islamic Revolution and act against Western influence and feminism.

     He stated in one speech, "The corrupt Pope went on a tour in order to cover up the homosexuality of his priests. As you know, he made a tour from America to Australia, saying: 'We are sorry that our priests are pedophiles and homosexuals.' ... He paid three billion dollars in compensation to families whose little children were abused by priests in churches. But nobody sees what the pope himself does in the Vatican. It's not clear who should apologize for the pope's deeds."....

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 12:24pm

154. the pope is a dope.

     whatta reactionary a**hole. more Rottweiler than pontiff.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 12:27pm

155. contrast the nazi pope with the Dalai Lama. a healer he ain't.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 12:28pm

156. "you are conflating Al Qaeda and the Taleban. a shameful lie..the Taleban did not attack us, could not attack us, just like Saddam, who did not attack us and could not attack us.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 11:34am

     I did not mean to conflate the two. In a sense, did they not themselves much as the Nazi party conflated itself with Germany in the nineteen thirties and early forties? After Sudan urged Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda group to leave the country, Afghanistan's Taliban offered bin Laden protection and legitimacy in Taliban's Ministry of Defense. Thus when Al Qaeda attacked the U.S. on 9/11/01, it became Afghanistan's problem, the Taliban's problem as a whole. Yes or no?

     You cannot compare Afghanistan with Iraq. Bush was correct when he stated, "we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism....any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime."

     Too bad he did not adhere to his own doctrine.

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 12:43pm

157. nazi blah blah blah.

     any number of countries supported Bin Laden, not least his own country, Saudi, which supported him and others like him. Pakistan supported Bin Laden too.

     it's now six years later. are we going to make war on the Taleban for decades? to what end? to punish them?

     it's time for a better idea.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 12:49pm

158. I wrote: "Osama bin Laden's justifications for the 9/11 terror atrocities were all religious..."

     this is just a plain lie.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 11:12am

     You are joking. Aren't you?

     "All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on God, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al- Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said "As for the militant struggle, it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life...."

     Osama Bin Laden's Jihad and text of Fatwahs and Declaration of War

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 12:50pm

159. any number of countries supported Bin Laden, not least his own country, Saudi, which supported him and others like him. Pakistan supported Bin Laden too.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009

     You do not read carefully, do you? The Saudis were up to the eyeballs in the 9/11 atrocities. Bush covered up all this complicity for his Saudi friends. Saudi Arabia is the world's predominant exporter of this murderous Wahhabi stream of Islam that bin Laden embraces. Bin Laden and his family are all Saudi. Fifteen of the nineteen September hijackers were Saudi nationals.

     I wrote above, "Too bad he (Bush) did not adhere to his own doctrine."

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 12:55pm

160. Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 12:55pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     I read plenty. I'm not a conspiracy nut like you, thass all.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 12:57pm

161. Pakistan supported Bin Laden too.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009

     Again. I wrote above, "Too bad he (Bush) did not adhere to his own doctrine."

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 12:57pm

162. I read plenty. I'm not a conspiracy nut like you, thass all.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 12:57pm

     What do you mean? I am no conspiracy nut. What conspiracy theory have I propagated on this site?

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 12:59pm

163. Bin Laden's stated casus belli was the US troops stationed in Saudi. the other stuff is just the icing on the cake.

     Bush removed the troops. and no more attacks from bin Laden.

     cause and effect?

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 12:59pm

164. My guess is, they were removed from Saudi Arabia largely because they were no longer needed. US troops were there to protect the no-fly zone(s) and to protect the Saudis from Saddam's Iraq. America very much occupies Muslim lands. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are occupied by infidel armies.

     My guess is the larger reason bin Laden has not yet attacked America is due to America's forceful response to 9/11. Though I am no apologist for Bush, he did in fact respond, toppling the Taliban government of Afghanistan. Remember bin Laden was certain, after the Americans cut and ran from Lebanon and Somalia, the Americans are weak; and soft.

     Mr. Obama will help to further this view of American weakness in the Muslim world. Under Obama, America will rightly viewed as a weak nation; one that invites aggression. It was Joe Biden who said Obama will be tested.

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 1:11pm

165. "My guess is, they were removed from Saudi Arabia largely because they were no longer needed. US troops were there to protect the no-fly zone(s) and to protect the Saudis from Saddam's Iraq. "

     nonsense. where did they move the troops to? Kuwait.

     both Iraq wars were pursued on the basis of lies.

     "My guess is the larger reason bin Laden has not yet attacked America is due to America's forceful response to 9/11. "

     your guesses are faulty. forceful response? 15,000 troops sent to a country the size of Texas? evicting the Taleban from Kabul solved nothing, as evidenced by the fact that the war continues eight years later.

     Mr. Obama will help to further this view of American weakness in the Muslim world.

     whattaloadofcrap.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 1:19pm

166. Bin Laden would find sanctuary in any number of countries, he is the no.1 hero in the arab world, and beyond.

     from all reports he retreated to the border regions between afghanistan and Pakistan. so how does that prevent him from staging more attacks? or even running training camps.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 1:28pm

167. you recall nothing. this is also a lie. repeat, it did not happen. Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 11:16am

     Zionist duBois,

     The confirmation of the dancing Israelis in New Jersey while the Trade Center buildings were burning on 9/11. The links also show Israel's full advance knowledge of 9/11; Enjoy the reading :

     "Of particular interest is the coverage by The Forward, the oldest newspaper of the Jewish community in North America. They reported on one key aspect of the Israeli-9/11 connection: the story of the five employees of a moving van company apprehended hours after the twin towers were struck. They had been observed in Liberty State Park, New Jersey, overlooking the Hudson, with a clear view of the burning towers. A woman had seen them from the window of her apartment building overlooking the parking lot: they came out of a white van, and they were jumping up and down, high-fiving each other with obvious glee. Their mood, it could be said, was celebratory. They were also filming the towers as they burned, and taking still photos. "

     This the link to the above article: http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10528

     Another Link to the Isreal advance knowledge of 9/11 and their large scale spying on America:

     http://www.antiwar.com/israeli-files.php

     When Netanyahu was asked about 9/11, the first words out of his mouth were "It is good for Israel"

     Posted by CripThink at 03/19/2009 @ 2:12pm

168. Posted by CripThink at 03/19/2009 @ 2:12pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     I am no zionist, but you are a nutcase.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 2:24pm

169. I am no zionist, but you are a nutcase. Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 2:24pm

     duBois,

     O.K, then you must be a fanatic evangelical (Larry's Sect). You better verify before you utter your quick denial. You behave like a Zionist anyways! What do you think of the articles?

     http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10528

     http://www.antiwar.com/israeli-files.php

     Posted by CripThink at 03/19/2009 @ 2:42pm

170. "nonsense. where did they move the troops to? Kuwait."

     Maybe Bush cut and ran from Saudi Arabia in order to appease bin Laden. Like I said, unlike you, I am not a blind partisan or a Bush apologist.

     "both Iraq wars were pursued on the basis of lies."

     There are some lies in all wars, perhaps. Bush's father was not completely honest when we went to war with Saddam after he invaded Kuwait. Still the war was justified. So was Afghanistan though I believe Bush had ulterior motives here as well. Look at Clinton's war against our historic allies, the Serbs. He only furthered the Islamic jihad against the west. Lies? You bet. How about Kennedy's and LBJ's lies about N. Vietnam.

     "your guesses are faulty. forceful response? 15,000 troops sent to a country the size of Texas? evicting the Taleban from Kabul solved nothing, as evidenced by the fact that the war continues eight years later."

     Bush failed to get bin Laden. This was a terrific failure on Bush's part. Bush administration enabled bin Laden's and Al Qaeda terrorist's escape into Pakistan. Nevertheless, evicting the Taliban did not solve "nothing" as you suggest. I believe it is in part responsible for keeping America safe these past few years. Overthrowing the government of a nation is no small thing regardless of the country's size.

     I wrote: "Mr. Obama will help to further this view of American weakness in the Muslim world."

     whattaloadofcrap.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009

     Again, unlike you, I am not a blind partisan nor a Bush apologist. You are apparently an Obama supporter and partisan leftist. Am I wrong?

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 3:46pm

171. Again, unlike you, I am not a blind partisan nor a Bush apologist.

     I am neither, as anyone posting here regularly can attest to.

     "Nevertheless, evicting the Taliban did not solve "nothing" as you suggest. I believe it is in part responsible for keeping America safe these past few years. "

     how so?

     and why are we still there after, what, eight years. the goddamn revolutionary war took less time.

     "Overthrowing the government of a nation is no small thing regardless of the country's size."

     more nonsense in this case. the Taleban were evicted in two weeks was it?

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 4:24pm

172. when was Serbia ever an ally of the US?

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 4:35pm

173. when was Serbia ever an ally of the US?

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009

     Didn't Serbia side with the Allies against the Nazis? Not so the Bosnian Muslims and the Croats who allied with Adolf Hitler. Have you heard of Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem? Didn't he help Hitler organize these same killers Bill Clinton rescued? Didn't the Christian Serbs stand with the Allies?

     Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 6:11pm

174. Posted by exiled at 03/19/2009 @ 6:11pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     Serbia was not the US' ally during WW2. there were some serbian partisans, as there were other Yugoslav partisans. the rest is nonsense.

     I am well aware of al Husseini. he did not help organize yugoslavs or anything else.

     a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 6:50pm

175. it was the communists who provided most of the resistance in Yugoslavia and France for that matter. hence Tito as head of state.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009 @ 6:54pm

176. I am well aware of al Husseini. he did not help organize yugoslavs or anything else.

     a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/19/2009

     Why do you say these things?

     Hajj Amin Al-Husseini fled to Nazi Germany, along with Fawzi El Kaukji. In Germany, he broadcast for the Nazis. He lobbied extensively to prevent Jews from escaping Germany. In 1943, he was sent to Yugoslavia, where he organized the 13th Waffen SS division, known as the Hanjar (Hansar, Handjar, or Handzar, meaning "saber") division. These Muslims were trained in Germany and officered by Germans. The incorporation of Muslims into the SS required changes in racist ideological propaganda, and also required that they be given special privileges, and not required to eat rations of pork or alcoholic beverages.

     Heinrich Himmler wrote to their officers on August 6, 1943:

     "...I hold all commanders and other SS officers, responsible for the most scrupulous and loyal respect for this privilege especially granted to the Moslems. They have answered the call of the Moslem chiefs and have come to us out of hatred for the common Jewish-Anglo-Bolshevik enemy and through respect and fidelity for he who they respect above all, the Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler. There will no longer be the least discussion about the special rights afforded to the Moslems in these circles....

     Hajj Amin a Husseini reviewing a unit of Waffen- SS Handsar Division that he recruited.

     The division organized by Husseini was responsible for the murder of about 90% of Bosnia's Jews and destroyed numerous Serbian churches and villages. These recruits were favorites of SS chief Heinrich Himmler, who established a special Mullah Military school in Dresden.

     http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/Haj_Amin_El_

     Posted by exiled at 03/20/2009 @ 08:00am

177. Posted by exiled at 03/20/2009 @ 08:00am | ignore this person | warn this person

     I stand corrected on this point.

     Posted by emile duBois at 03/20/2009 @ 10:58am

178. if Obama is really for the change he must work on this point very hard. It looks ridicolous that another nation like Israel can control the States, but we know that there is something more dangerous on that, the real freedom that US sponsor as a champion in the world. I am an european that love America but I am really suspicious about Israel lobbies and their tricks

     Posted by thinkabout1941 at 03/22/2009 @ 10:36am