![]() ![]() |
![]() |
| |
|
Clinton Threatens to ‘Obliterate’ IranPosted on Apr 22, 2008
How proud the Clintonistas must be. They have learned how to rival what Hillary once termed the “vast right-wing conspiracy” in the effort to destroy a viable Democratic leader who dares to stand in the way of their ambitions. The tactics used to kneecap Barack Obama are the same as had been turned on Bill Clinton in earlier times, from radical-baiting associates to challenging his resolve in protecting the nation from foreign enemies. Sen. Clinton’s eminently sensible and centrist—to a fault—opponent is now viewed as weak and even vaguely unpatriotic because he is thoughtful. Neither Karl Rove nor Dick Morris could have done a better job. On primary election day in Pennsylvania, even with polls showing her well ahead in that state, Hillary went lower in her grab for votes. Seizing upon a question as to how she would respond to a nuclear attack by Iran, which doesn’t have nuclear weapons, on Israel, which does, Hillary mocked reasoned discourse by promising to “totally obliterate them,” in an apparent reference to the population of Iran. That is not a word gaffe; it is an assertion of the right of our nation to commit genocide on an unprecedented scale. Shouldn’t the potential leader of a nation that used nuclear bombs to obliterate hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese employ extreme caution before making such a threat? Neither the Japanese then nor the Iranian people now were in a position to hold their leaders accountable, and to approve such collective punishment of innocents is to endorse terrorism. This from a candidate who attacked her opponent for suggesting targeted strikes against militants in Pakistan and derided his openness to negotiations with other national leaders as an irresponsible commitment on the part of a contender for the presidency. Clearly the heat of a campaign is not the proper setting for consideration of a response to a threat from a nation that is a long way from developing nuclear weapons. Obviously the danger of Iran’s developing such weapons can be met with a range of alternatives, from the diplomatic to the military, that do not involve genocide and at any rate must be considered in moral and not solely political terms. Or is it base political ambition that would guide Clinton if she received that middle-of-the-night phone call? If so, it cannot be assumed that Hillary Clinton as president would be less irrationally hawkish and more restrained in the unleashing of military force than John McCain. The latter, at least, has personal experience with the true, on-the-ground costs of militarism gone wild. Yes, I know that McCain still holds out the hope of winning the Iraq war that both he and Hillary originally endorsed, but for Clinton to raise the rhetoric against Iran in the midst of a campaign is hardly the path to Mideast peace, whether it concerns Israel or Iraq. It is bizarre that a politician who bought into the phony threat about Iraq’s nonexistent WMD arsenal now plays political games with the alleged threat posed by Iran. The war has accomplished only one major change in the configuration of Mideast power: Iran now holds uncontested supremacy as the region’s key player. Whatever chance there is for stability in Iraq now depends on the blessings of the ayatollahs of Iran, whose surrogates were put in power in Baghdad as a consequence of the American invasion. It is totally hypocritical for Clinton or McCain to now talk about getting tough with Iran over the nuclear weapons issue, when both contributed so mightily to squandering U.S. leverage over Tehran. To meet that potential nuclear weapons threat from Iran requires a serious, non-rhetorical, multinational response that makes clear that no nation has the right to obliterate the population of another, and that nations, even our own, that claim that right should be challenged as unacceptably barbaric. Instead, Clinton played into the thoughts of fanatics throughout the world who believe that might makes right and who take the United States—which spends more on its military than the rest of the world combined (including many billions on new sophisticated and “usable” nuclear weapons)—as both their enemy and an example to emulate.
What better argument do the ayatollahs need to justify their obtaining a nuclear “deterrent” than that the possible leader of the first nation to develop nuclear weapons, and the only one to ever use them to kill people, now threatens the people of Iran with obliteration?
Previous item: McCainomics Next item: Pennsylvania and the Persistence of the Race Chasm Elsewhere: . Comments: 272 Published. Add Yours?Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. |
By The Charters Of Dreams, May 6 at 9:31 pm #
(4 comments total)
Mr Abdallah, please listen—and learn:
“Bob Beamon didn’t get a lot of encouragement as a child. Raised by his grandmother, his mother died of tuberculosis when he was 11 months old, and he never knew his father. He struggled with doubt, thinking he was unwanted, for many of his early years. In high school, a coach offered a glimmer of hope, saying he had the talent to go to the Olympics if he kept working hard. And he did.
It’s been 40 years since Beamon literally walked on air, obliterating world and Olympic records with a long jump of 29 feet 2½ inches at the Summer Olympics in Mexico City.
Eloquent and thought-provoking, Beamon has become a sought-after public speaker. “I have a few messages, but education is the main thing,” he says. “It’s to get kids to deal with reality. Many of them become involved in drugs or something else, and it’s a dirty world when they get into drugs.”
Beamon compares the situations of stuggling inner-city youths to those in Third World countries, hoping to awaken a sense of appreciativeness and esteem.
“You know, overseas in the little villages of Africa, for example, there is no hope,” he says. “The children are dying of diseases and hunger and they can’t get medicine. Our kids here are throwing away food. We are really blessed over here, and I tell them that. I tell them, ‘I don’t care what color your skin is, what nationality you are or what religion you preach, there is opportunity here.’ ”
A few years ago, at a Manhattan hotel where he was a guest, the hotel’s assistant manager approached him. “Remember me, Mr. Beamon?” the young man asked. Beamon smiled but shook his head. “One day you gave an incredible speech at our school,” the young man told him. “I just followed what you said and tried to make something of myself. I just wanted to thank you for it.”
For Beamon, those experiences are the payoff and motivator behind his success, and the success of those he inspires.”
The Lesson:
The Bob Beamon’s of world will do far far more good than your proposals ever will—because Bob Beamon life is a living testament to the hope and power and promise of America. Perhaps, Mr. Abdallah, you see yourself and others as helpless victims, destined to be nothing in this world. If so, you do a profound disservice to yourself and those others. The Bob Beamon’s of the world have done more good for more people than any radical leftest agenda:
‘I don’t care what color your skin is, what nationality you are or what religion you preach, there is opportunity here.’ ”
Bob Beamon is a living proof of the truth of that statement. Bob Beamon offers people something the Left never has—he believes.
Reply to this | Hide 6 replies | Report thisBy tdbach, May 7 at 5:38 am #
(90 comments total)
Nonsense
This is one of those feel-good stories that true believers latch onto with the ardor of children clutching their favorite stuffed bunny. And with even a casual look you can see it’s made of cotton, not flesh and bones.
Sure, Bob Beamon came from nothing and made something of himself. So did Nikita Khrushchev. It’s not about a magical land of opportunity. It’s about some people just having something special inside them, a super-ambition that overcomes virtually every obstacle. They are the exception, not the rule, in all societies, rich or pore, free market or communist. Yes, our system provides many more opportunities than a closed, totalitarian system. And that’s a good thing. But to suggest that every one of us, if we just would get off our lazy asses can become an Olympic record-breaker -or even a McDonald’s franchise owner- is patently nonsense. It’s the wet dream of the right, the grand rationale for hording what they have earned (or inherited). It confuses equal opportunity for equal possibility, it ignores the reality that we are not created equal and equality of opportunity in LAW is not the same thing as actual equality of opportunity in LIFE. And what really irks me is when people like GWB and William Kristol (and you?) spout this BS, when in fact, if they were born in poverty and raised in the circumscribed world of the ‘hood, they would be one of the vast majority of those people who would never be able to escape. Because they don’t have that very rare something that Beamon had.
In other words, it’s a ruse. And the tip-off is when they say things like “Bob Beamon offers people something the Left never has—he believes.” An inane and vacuous statement if ever there was one. And the proof is this gem: “The Bob Beamon’s of the world have done more good for more people than any radical leftest agenda.” Ok, let’s do the math, shall we, oh great educator? You’ve got one guy on Beamon’s done-good list. For the sake of argument, let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and say there are a hundred more – or let’s really go out on a limb and say a thousand. How many do you think benefited from Affirmative Action? Let’s start counting, beginning with Justice Thomas…
Reply to this | Hide 5 replies | Report thisBy tdbach, May 9 at 4:46 am #
(90 comments total)
Cyrena
Nice to have you on my side for a change! We really do agree on most everything - except on primary candidate and a few tangential issues therefrom. A lot of emotions seem to bubble from this campaign.
Of course, I don’t think I’ve been the least bit hysterical in any of my posts. I’m the very picture of calm and thoughtfulness. Really!
Report thisBy cyrena, May 8 at 5:23 pm #
(4071 comments total)
Re: Nonsense
Well, I at least agree with you here tdbach.
How do you manage to be reasonable (like in this post) and reference the reality, and then come up with hysterical accusations like Iran threatening Israel or anybody else?
Very odd.
Report thisBy The Charters Of Dreams, May 8 at 1:16 pm #
(4 comments total)
Re: Nonsense
“I may send you that email, but I’m not sure I have the time or inclination to get into a one-on-one argument. To be honest – and don’t take this as an insult; I’m sure you’re a nice guy – I’m really not very interested in what you have to say, because it’s an old, old song. So I’ll answer here.”
Thanks for your response below Tom.
- Cheers,
Report thisChristopher
By tdbach, May 8 at 4:47 am #
(90 comments total)
Christopher
I may send you that email, but I’m not sure I have the time or inclination to get into a one-on-one argument. To be honest – and don’t take this as an insult; I’m sure you’re a nice guy – I’m really not very interested in what you have to say, because it’s an old, old song. So I’ll answer here.
The phrasing of your response sparkles with loaded words, which you have conveniently put in quotes. Let’s pick these little adornments off and see what’s left.
Most people indeed are ordinary; it’s the very definition of the word. That isn’t to say alike, by any stretch; the gradations are virtually infinite. Nor is it to suggest that ordinary people are incapable of doing something extraordinary - they are just incapable of leading extraordinarily successful lives. That takes sustained extraordinary effort, focus, luck - ambition.
Dreaming big should be encouraged in every child, in everyone so inclined. How else can you really discover what you are capable of? Where the Left parts ways with the right is that we don’t mistake dreams for reality. I don’t think most thinking people on the Right are really as confused on this as they pretend to be either, if you push back a little. They know everyone can’t rise to CEO, but they endorse the dream because, well, because it puffs themselves up ("Look at me and what I’ve accomplished!") and conveniently blames the suffering of those whom the steam-engine of the marketplace has used up, run over, or shoved aside in its relentless quest for profit on the sufferers: they could have been riding in first class if they had only worked harder and believed in themselves!
And now, to fall happily into that old liberal trap, I agree that everyone is special, which is why society needs to treat all its members with dignity, and not insult them by suggesting that the only difference between an out-of-work auto assemblyman and George W. Bush is that Bush works harder and smarter. That really is a fairy tale.
Our system - really any system - simply cannot function with all chiefs and no Indians. An architect doesn’t build a house, a builder does. And a builder can’t build the house alone, either. He needs carpenters and plumbers and electricians. He also needs grunts to carry the lumber up to the roof and move gravel and dirt into place. And when his market dries up, or when he foolishly overestimates the market, he needs to lay off some grunts and maybe some of his tradesmen.
But if he’s a conservative, he doesn’t want to sustain his castaways with unemployment and food stamps until he or a smarter builder needs them. He doesn’t want to spend his hard-earned dollars on taxes to retrain them for work in more stable, prospering markets. That’s their tough luck. If only they had dreamed…
Tom
Report thisBy The Charters Of Dreams, May 7 at 5:21 pm #
(4 comments total)
Re: Nonsense
So—most people are “ordinary,” not really capable of extra-ordinary acts and actions. Is that your basic position?
Dreaming “Big” is really for children—if not outright fools—who are setting themselves up for disappointment.
Not everyone is “special.” Is that your position? Everyone wants things, great things, but there’s only very few individuals that that can achieve these things. Most will fail. The right just spins this “fairytale” so they can place the blame for failure on the individual, not on the “system” or wider factors. Is that that your position?
I’m genuinely interested in what you think. If you want, please write me at .
Thanks tdbach
Report thisBy Peter RV, May 6 at 3:09 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
The Charters of Dreams:
“The liberal blogsphere has largely accused HRC of being a Neo-Con, but Neo-Cons generally believe that Iran cannot be rationally deterred and that leaves the U.S. and it’s allies no choice but to launch a pre-emptive war with the goal of regime change”
Insanity of warmongers is reaching alarming proportions.
I think it would be much cheaper to change the regime in Tel-Aviv, but if you are gang-ho with your preventive war on Iran, I propose using Israeli infantery to meet the Revolutionary Guards on the battlefield. A good hand-to-hand combat could have a sobering effect on our over- belligerant darling ally.
Reply to this | Report thisBy The Charters Of Dreams, May 5 at 8:10 pm #
(4 comments total)
The liberal blogsphere has largely accused HRC of being a Neo-Con, but Neo-Cons generally believe that Iran cannot be rationally deterred and that leaves the U.S. and it’s allies no choice but to launch a pre-emptive war with the goal of regime change.
HRC, instead, is arguing for deterrence, probably because she understands that this neo-con position is the real incentive for Iran to build nuclear weapons.
For a fuller discussion, see
Deterrence Works you Silly Little Liberal Nimrods.
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisBy tdbach, May 8 at 1:30 pm #
(90 comments total)
Re:
You miht be suprised to learn that I mostly agree with you on this, CofD.
Cheers,
Reply to this | Report thisBy Fadel Abdallah, April 28 at 5:33 pm #
(365 comments total)
My Alternative Plan to Hillary's Obliterating Iran!
My Alternative Plan to Hillary’s Obliterating Iran
First, a publicity campaign comparing the Jewish Holocaust that will never be forgotten with the Afro-American and Native Americans Holocausts that should not be forgotten either. Rev. J. Wright is the most qualified and most eloquent to lead this campaign; he has already started.
Second, a financial plan for reparations should be prepared, with every family of these two victimized groups receiving at least one million dollars, so they can be financially uplifted and they can build businesses and create dignified jobs.
Third, a similar economic uplifting plan for poor Americans, of all backgrounds should be devised and implemented.
Fourth, outlaw all racial and ethnic census and classifications. Just one nation of all nations.
Fifth, all this compensation for both groups should be borne by well-to-do Americans, not as charity, but as an overdue duty, especially the wealthy ones. And the cost of this reparation plan can be easily born by the government at less than one year cost of the Iraqi war. So, it’s doable.
Sixth, two huge memorials should be built to commemorate the victims of the Native Americans and the Afro-Americans.
Seventh, a formal apology by the U.S. Congress and Government should be issued to both these groups.
My sense of justice tells me that this is the minimum that can be done to heal the wounds of the past, and to start this nation on the path of healing and rebirth. Though I do not belong to one of these two victimized groups, nor I am a victimizer, being a recent immigrant myself (30 years), I am willing to accept a special tax to help finance this plan if necessary. However, I think the financial aspect of the project is the least problematic. The problem will remain with creating a noble political and social good will and sincerity to attempt to right great historical wrongs.
Finally, unless and until a plan of this nature will be enacted, with good faith and sincerity, America will continue its downward movement towards destruction; all the signs are already there!
Reply to this | Hide 7 replies | Report thisBy PatrickHenry, May 4 at 6:00 am #
(1074 comments total)
What goes around comes around
The irony of life:
Prior to the Jewish holocaust there was another caused by jews which directly relates to this nation, America.
http://www.iamthewitness.com/books/Walter.White/Who.Br ought.the.Slaves.to.America.htm
Reply to this | Report thisBy cyrena, May 4 at 1:16 am #
(4071 comments total)
Reply to Fadel's alternative plan part 1
Part 1 of 2 response to Fadel
This is a great plan Fadel. It has the same components of the Truth and Reconciliation Plans that have actually been successful in other nations devastated by fascism and ethnic struggles resulting in these various Holocausts.
I’d like to have some hope that it could happen one day, but I don’t know. I’m convinced that the truth part of it..just the acknowledgement of what everyone already knows, would have to come first, if that could be managed at all.
That was one of the most important realizations to come out of the Aspen Institute Conference back in 1988. When “a group of academics, lawyers, clerics, and activists from countries as varied as Uganda, Argentina, South Korea, Chile, South Africa, Brazil, the Philippines, Guatemala and Haiti” gathered there, it was to ‘try to puzzle through one of the most complicated issues facing the polities all over the world, as they tried to move from dictatorial to democratic systems of government --- the question of what to do with the former tortures still in their midst”
Now you might say that’s not what you’re addressing here, but in reality, it’s pretty much the same. There was just what now seems like a brief moment in time, (like just before you joined us 30 years ago) when there was some hope of resolving what has been a history of social and economic injustice founded on racism. That came from those efforts of Martin Luther King, and the hundreds of thousands of people who assisted in that movement. But, it was short lived, and has been in a decline ever since. And what we have now are the equivalent of tortures still in our midst. In fact, they haven’t even been banished from the controlling regime yet, which at least was the case in these other societies that were finally attempting to move from the dictatorial system of government to a democratic system. (The dictators had been removed, but their security and military apparatuses still retained enormous power, and were not about to allow for any ‘settling of accounts’)
Such as it remains here, and overwhelmingly, the very ones (the Corptocracy) that HAVE all the money and power, aren’t about to give up a dime of it. Can you imagine of Murdoch, or any of the others ever even being willing to pay their own fair share of taxes, let alone any sort of reconciliation expenses that might balance things out in our system?
To be contd.
Reply to this | Report thisBy cyrena, May 4 at 1:14 am #
(4071 comments total)
Reply to Fadel's alternative plan part 2
Part 2 of 2 response to Fadel
That’s not to say that it isn’t a wonderful idea, but I think we might have to first settle for just an awareness (by ALL) and the open and formal acknowledgement of what has been perpetrated against these groups for nearly 300 years. That is at least what came from that conference. After much deliberation, it was obvious that the GOALS involved an intertwined demand for Truth AND Justice. In the end, they realized that the truth (and it’s formal acknowledgement) was the more doable of the two, at least for starters.
So maybe that’s what we can and should make a short term goal. This reminds me of a question that came up in the first election debates..the question of reparations for African-Americans. Among all of the candidates, (all democrats) Dennis Kucinich was the only one who supported a system of such cash reparations for African-Americans. (over a century after being promised that 40 acres and a mule). Native Americans of course had agreements and treaties that were long ago violated, and they’ve yet to recover much of anything at all, though a handful of tribes are finally realizing SOME use of the .000000001 fraction land that they were able to salvage.
Obama’s response was probably more realistic, since it involved a matter of FINALLY funding schools and all of the other much needed infrastructure and bureaucracy required to make education and a everything else related to an upgraded standard of living available to those groups that have been historically oppressed, exploited and marginalized. Realistically speaking, that’s far more doable than getting the oppressors to part with enough money to hand out to those who can be so identified as belonging to those groups.
And Fadel, as for Chalmers, I have a feeling that when you say that you usually see eye-to-eye, you’ve missed a huge percentage of his posts. Chalmers is the essence of perfidy personified, and his inappropriate response to your post, (about wanting to run all white people out of America, and the fact that Farrakhan and Wright would love it) speaks directly to his mental dysfunction. Believe me, if you’d followed his stuff, you’d see the bi-polar/schizophrenic nature of it.
So, I wouldn’t expect much in terms of any reasonable response from him, and it would probably save you some grief to disregard him entirely. He’s fine with obliterating Iran anyway. If Hillary says it’s the thing to do, then Chalmers is all for it. If you don’t agree, he’ll accuse you of being racist toward white people.
(As if all white people are ever gonna leave the US. Right…as soon as the moon falls out of the Universe).
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, May 4 at 1:56 am #
(2900 comments total)
You think you are making a statement???
Of course, Jeremiah Wright is three quarters white anyway. That does make it rather difficult for him.... and also for others like Carla Coco-Boutte, Disabled Airline worker - see video (scroll down) http://www.workingtv.com/rxexpress.html
I really don’t know how they reconcile this “black” thingy, uhh. Perhaps that’s why they are always complaining? If anyone ever really wakes up to them, its over. Carl is also a fanatical Code Pink volunteer.......
Sadly, though, the big problem now is that the white supremacists have gotten hold of all this and are ready to beat it up into something none of us want to see. It will be a testing time soon for Americans as to whether whites have really learned to assimilate themselves.
As with the Iraq-Iran-Afghanistan issue, the supremacists are also militarists and they love to use terms like “Haji” in a derogatory manner even though they might not know what it means. But then that was the same in Vietnam when “slopes and gooks” were their favorite terms.
Denigrating peopel before attacking them is their game and the psyops and propagandists use them as a tool. Scratch a white person and you’ll most likely find a Nazi. The problem today is that you all fear them as much as they use fear to manipulate others..... and you will not discuss any of it objectively.
Soon it will be too late. Here they are now using truth to their own advantage - “twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools”, uhh http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LnE08gAL4c
Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, April 29 at 2:32 am #
(2900 comments total)
Re: My Alternative Plan to Hillary's Obliterating Iran!
Sounds like an agenda to get rid of white people from America, Fadel Abdallah. As I said, its a pity that the Chinese didn’t take the opportunity 500 or so years ago when Cheng Ho was sailing the Pacific......
Reply to this | Hide 2 replies | Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, May 3 at 11:38 pm #
(2900 comments total)
Re: Re: My Alternative Plan to Hillary's Obliterating
Uhh, Fadel Abdallah, again you have missed the point entirely - by focussing on yourself instead of what I said........
.......after all, what’s wrong with “get rid of white people from America”? Louis Fararkan and Jeremiah Wright would love it, ha ha!
Report thisBy Fadel Abdallah, April 29 at 12:01 pm #
(365 comments total)
Re: Re: My Alternative Plan to Hillary's Obliterating
Douglas Chalmers,
I am shocked at your interpreting my post as an “agenda to get rid of white people.” I am shocked because most of the time we see eye-to-eye and we write in support of justice, truth, the oppressed and disadvantaged people and against Zionism, neocons and the military-industrial complex.
I would really appreciate if you can explain to me how and why you read this into my post. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
Report thisBy bozhidar bob balkas, April 28 at 4:12 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
nobody in her right mind would accept an admixure of euro-khazaro-semitic people still living in 4000 bc.
Reply to this | Hide 3 replies | Report thisand what’s worse, not being an usual nation, khazars latched onto judaism.
the IT, the judaism/zionism, die grosste SCHREKENHEIT der alles zeiten, became their nationalism?
and israel, ooh, weh, sooo tiny.
danke schoen!
By Douglas Chalmers, April 28 at 7:19 am #
(2900 comments total)
Re: khazars latched onto judaism.....
How much of the OT is thus really Khazar history supplanted into the fake state of Israel and re-written? The Khazar fortress at Sarkel, the Ashina clan were considered to be the chosen… and the kaghan was the incarnation of… the sky-god....., etc etc, on and on, blah blah......
Reply to this | Hide 2 replies | Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, May 3 at 11:47 pm #
(2900 comments total)
Re: Re: khazars latched onto judaism.....
Would have to go to Ethiopia to find “semites” unless you want to accept all of the Arab Palestinians, Lebanese, etc etc etc as “Semites” too, bozhidar bob balkas.
But, even then, Ethiopia is only a Greek name and it is not what those people use to refer to themselves. They have their own major tribal groups..... and on and on it goes.
Perhaps that IS where Yahweh is - and maybe always was???
Report thisBy bozhidar bob balkas, April 29 at 8:01 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re: Re: khazars latched onto judaism.....
we do not know what hap’d to israelites after their kingdom was destroyed by assyrians 728?bc. it seems that some were slain and some taken captives as a useful property.
Report thisin time some may have escaped northwards and much later westwards. it seems they were forbidden to couple up with anyone who wouldn’t accept judaism.
as to how many khazars, slavs, germans, et al israelites have married, perhaps nobody knows.
it is puzzling to me how/when/why this new nation became known as jews.
the new nation or people had very scant connection to judeans or even any semitic people. perhaps, the new people began acquiring the name “jews” after jesus’ death because they shared with the judeans same religion.
i’ve met a few jews who look polish: blueeyed, round slav faces, lightskinned; possibly with not a drop of semitic blood.
how abt we name this admixture of many ethnoses something else than jews? how abt KHASH? kh for khazars, s for slavs, and h for hebrews.
shephardim, on the other hand, being pure semites, we may continue to call “jews”.
since yahweh was of darker tincture than Khash, even he must be mad at this mad people.
it also seems that most Khash didn’t go to palestine. now their dream of a zionist state (not yet obtained) is becoming jewish nightmare; it appears to me, jews are used as cannon fodder for more wars. more can be said. thank u.
By finished last in my class, April 28 at 3:53 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
hi folks! i got some good news for u: i finished last in my class. and now i give u even better news: the crooks never got to me. now, if that doesn’t cheer u up, i don’t know what will!!
Reply to this | Report thisshould we flog a blind horse for eating some dung along some weeds, and a few straws?
we canadians and americans have been eating that stuff for at least two centuries.
hey, said a little girl, But emperor has no clothes on? thank u.
By bozhidar bob balkas, April 28 at 3:34 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
at least 5bn people wish jewish state be destroyed.
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisit will be destroyed and 10bn of us will be jubilant.
when a zionist quotes ahmadi or any nonzionist, i do not evaluate as true.
ahmad; oh ah mad!? u’d have to be stupid or moronic to threaten or attack israel.
in any case u said the truth that most of us would rejoice when that cancer is eradicated.
please ahmad don’t talk. we know what we need to know.
u know, there is a maker. ahmad, thank u.
By Noaman. A, April 30 at 12:08 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re:bozhidar bob balkas Khazarians and Sphardiems
If you wish to go into ancestral origin of the current Jews, you may reffer to Shlomo Sand’s book,"Why and When the Jewish People were Invented”.In it, you will find some answers as to where the Khazars who were converted to Judiasm on the 8th century, had gone after the demise of their empire in the 13th century.The auther further explains the origins of the current Sphardeims,Eastern Jews, and where they actualy came from, only to show how foolish the world was to believe the Zionist narrative on how these Khazarians are the true descendents of Ibraham and Moses, nor there was a promise to return to the holly land, simply because there was no exile to begin with.In his answer to the question as to who are the true descendents of old Judiasm, the auther admits that Palestinians are more likely to be the ones whom we can call the true descendents of the Tura’s eara.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Ashish, April 27 at 2:03 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Hillary-nijad is such a hypocrite
She is such a hyprocite. She has no clear conviction. She says what the audience wants to hear.
1. On one hand, she criticize Bush for Iraq war, but she voted in favor of it. Now she says she would not have voted “yes”, if she knew that the evidence were lies.
2. But, last year she repeated her own accepted mistake by voting to band the Revolutionary Guards as terrorists.
3. She says to end the war, but then her withdrawl plan (of troops) calls for leaving about 50,000 soldiers on bases in Iraq indefinitely.
4. She is so vehement in her opposition to the war, but did not make a single statement in support of the anti-war demontrators, let alone go alongside them.
She contradicts herself so much that it is unbelievable how she is among the frontrunners.
Unfortunately, Obama is not much different either. Except for the fact that he has opposed the Iraq war from the begining.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Fadel Abdallah, April 27 at 6:51 am #
(365 comments total)
Hillary is a war-monger at heart. Her voting for the Iraq war is a clear proof of that; her false declared regrets about that not withstanding.
Obliterating a nation of 70 million for the sake of Israel should be reason enough to automatically disqualify her from running for the highest office in this sad country of ours.
But who cares any how?! For after 8 years of war-mongering by the neocons without being challenged in any serious way by the people, one can be justified to say that most Americans are either war-mongers at heart or are willing accomplices through their silence. And if you hope to get elected, then Hillary, the evil opportunist, has to play the winning card of war-mongering! Sad!
Reply to this | Report thisBy Peter RV, April 27 at 5:50 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Non Credo,
Reply to this | Report thisIf Barack does that he has lost me, for sure.
By Non Credo, April 27 at 4:59 am #
(1106 comments total)
Playing "Can you top this"
Both Hillary and Barak have been playing a game of “Can you top this”, (or maybe it’s a game of “chicken") trying to outdo each other in declarations of devotion to Israel and hatred of Israel’s rivals.
This outlandish statement by Clinton, expressing her willingness to “obliterate” Iran, is just the latest round.
So now the ball is in Obama’s court. What will he say now? “I promise to nuke BOTH Iran AND Syria, twice EACH — no matter WHAT they do!”?
And Israel, the pampered bitch of American politics, just stands by, primping as she enjoys watching the candidates destroy themselves, their party, and their country in fighting for her repulsive favors.
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisBy PatrickHenry, April 27 at 5:16 pm #
(1074 comments total)
Re: Playing "Can you top this"
I believe through their proxies in the media in the U.S. they are the ones enflaming the discourse by making mountains out of molehills via soundbites and the continuous rehashing of meaningless issues.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Jessie Carter, April 26 at 8:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
If Hillary Clinton’s comments about bombing Iran sound irresponsible that is not an oddity in a country that supports a continuous position of being the world’s policemen. The sacrificing of US lives and bounty for the supposed idea of EMPIRE seems to be a folly that has been the centerpiece of most of our recent governments. Mrs. Clinton’s diatribe suggests a continuation of not only a policy toward Israel, but a commitment that finds the United States as a dupe for a world that conveniently puts up with the silly verbiage spewed from the lips of every American leader. Now why do you think these “America speaks” rants are tolerated by the world? Is it fear of the US military might or fear of American financial power or the rightness of America’s convictions? I think we need to go beyond so closely examining each word spoken about military actions and start looking at the very basis of these acts by people seeking to keep the United States embroiled in military conflicts. Did we not sacrifice our manufacturing capabilities during the 1940s in order to supply military material for Europe? Does anyone not see this sacrifice as the beginning of the end of our COMMERCIAL manufacturing capabilities? Did we not gladly fight proxy wars in Korea and Vietnam? Should we not ask ourselves as a nation for whom were we proxy? Currently are we not fighting intractable wars for which the preceding question could be a concurring qualifier? May I suggest that during this election cycle that we take the time to quietly examine our juvenile ravings over power and carefully look at how the aftermath of being a colony has exemplified itself in this nations twentieth and twenty-first century military actions. No EMPIRE sacrifices its very existence. Only colonized people deluded into subservience by praise that is meant to keep them in that position could see themselves in such a false light. The tragedy is how do we fight the urge to pretend that we are something that we are not.
Reply to this | Hide 3 replies | Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, April 27 at 7:18 am #
(202 comments total)
Re:
Douglas Chalmers is correct when he states it is the insanity of the ego. Jessie Carter’s comment about colonized people deluded into subservience is completely on the mark. In fact it is the fury of that delusion that is so perilous. The reason the Middle East’s continuous conflicts are never solved is because the very foundation was built on the rotten brick of robbery. Not only the catastrophe that befell the Palestinians from the formation of Israel, but even further back, when the western colonial powers carved out the land and resources to suit their needs: Great Britain, France, and finally the United States. Such cavalier treatment of other peoples and cultures created conflicts where none had existed before. After what the CIA did to Iran in over throwing their legitimate government back in the early 1950’s, it is not surprising their is animosity towards the United States. But also should be remembered that the hostage crisis of !979 ended with all of the embassy persons safely returned. Adding insult to injury, the United States assisted Saddam when Iraq started a war with Iran. At one point the propaganda was such that the United States attempted to blame Iran for Saddam’s use of poison gas. And no one seems to remember when the US Navy shot down an Iranian passenger airplane.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Non Credo, April 27 at 3:57 am #
(1106 comments total)
Re:
Jessie writes:
“The tragedy is how do we fight the urge to pretend that we are something that we are not.”
That is so true.
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, April 27 at 4:20 am #
(2900 comments total)
how do we fight the urge to pretend
Its quite simple, really. You just ahve to want to stop.
The real problem is that people want to continue....... its the insanity of the ego.
Report thisBy Ostrogoth, April 26 at 3:30 pm #
(57 comments total)
Wildness of my claims? Huh? Israel’s apartheid regime has long plotted the destruction of Iraq and Iran to eliminate obstacles to Israeli expansion. What you are seeing in Palestine is a small taste of what Israel has planned for the rest of the ME. Right now Israel and its powerful US lobby, including Christian Zionists, are howling for our current thug leaders to attack Iran. Big Oil and the MIC aren’t seeking to destroy Iran. Zionists are, and they’ve never denied it. The Zionists are much more dangerous to us than the Iranians. Stop deluding yourself and others.
Reply to this | Hide 3 replies | Report thisBy tdbach, April 28 at 6:37 am #
(90 comments total)
Ostrogoth
We are obviously never going to agree entirely. Zionists - at least a majority of Zionists - have no ambitions of occupying and controlling the greater Middle East. Their aim is a completely safe, stable Jewish homeland, and they will stop at nothing to ensure that. They are advocates of pre-emptive military incursions, and I would agree that the current administration has bought into that philosophy. The reason they have gone in and out of favor among Jews, both in Israel and abroad, is that most Jews agree with the Zionist aim, they just feel alternately appalled at (when they feel peace is attainable through negotiated settlement) and grateful for (when they are under siege from terrorists and explicitly threatened by neighboring states) their methods and resolve. For better or worse, since the formation of the modern Israel under UN/British force, we have committed ourselves to that same aim, of a safe Jewish homeland. What we have failed to do is be as strongly committed to a safe and prosperous Palestinian homeland. ( I personally see only one possible, lasting solution: a dual federacy of Palestinian and Jewish rule over the same territory, with representation based not on geographical entities but ethnic/religious alignment, with Jerusalem as the capital. )
As I’ve said, Palestinian freedom fighters and blowhards like Ahmadinejad do themselves no favor by threatening the very existence of Israel. They only strengthen the Zionists’ hand both internally in Israeli politics and among allies abroad. And to demonize Zionists as more powerful and evil than they really are, as you and many other here do, does the same thing. Zionists need to be made obsolete as a military and political force in the region and relegated to cult status, like the polygamist groups here. But, in my opinion, you are only delaying that prospect. Your mileage may vary.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Ostrogoth, April 26 at 3:34 pm #
(57 comments total)
Re:
Whoopsy, this post was meant as a reply to one of tdbach’s posts below. grrr....
Reply to this | Hide 1 reply | Report thisBy Non Credo, April 26 at 3:57 pm #
(1106 comments total)
Re: Re:
Ostrogoth:
It’s a flaw in the website setup.
If you start a reply to a particular post, but then choose to “preview” your reply, it will then be posted as a new item at the top of the page, instead of being positioned lower down as a reply to the particular post.
Report thisBy Non Credo, April 26 at 3:18 pm #
(1106 comments total)
A scary dynamic at work
I have a theory that we have a kind of self-reinforcing and very evil dynamic at work here, one that thwarts the will not only of those of who oppose the “special relationship” with Israel, but also the will of many, perhaps even most American Jews.
I don’t think most American Jews really want a US war with Iran, but they help make it inevitable anyway. Let me explain.
American Jews — even many who consider themselves “liberal"— are, in my experience, not quite right in the head when it comes to Israel. They don’t rationally evaluate candidates when it comes to Israel. It’s more like they sort of “sniff” them, responding to the scent in a very primitive and paranoid part of the brain.
This crude defensiveness has the following result: they often go with the candidate who seems to have the most reflexive, instinctive, brutal partiality in favor of Israel and against any possible enemy of the Chosen State.
When it comes to vetting candidates, many Jews consequently gravitate toward the candidate who seems most passionately belligerent on Israel’s behalf, even if that candidate is to the right of their own policy views. They consider that “playing it safe”. I think they figure it’s always better to have the most radical pro-Israel fanatic in office. They can always try to curb the enthusiasm of such a person later. Better to err on the side of extremism in defense of Israel.
As a result, in our elections, you have the candidates falling all over themselves to outdo each other in bloodthirsty “pro-Israel” protestations. Inevitably, the craziest “pro-Israel” fanatic wins. And if that fanaticism is sincere, rather than feigned for political gain, we get outright lunatics like Cheney and Bush running the country.
So we’re all reduced to guessing how “sincere” Hillary, McCain, and Obama in their crazy “pro-Israel” pronouncements.
Reply to this | Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, April 26 at 2:26 pm #
(202 comments total)
Sorry Frank. but Ahmadinejad doesn’t quite fulfill your US boogie man test. Grant that he is a dumb misinformed Tehran local, but what you don’t seem to realize that he is not charge of his country. In a theocratic state, the grand council of clerics is in charge. So all of his rhetoric may make you feel it is justified to attack a nation that is not a threat to this country, but this is folly. As far as denying holocausts, I notice that the United States government has cordial relations with Turkey, a nation that has never admitted to the holocaust committed against the Armenian people in 1916.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Frank, April 26 at 9:44 am #
(195 comments total)
What a crock of ‘scheer’ BS. It should read “Neither the Japanese then nor the Iranian people now had the will or courage to hold their leaders accountable”.
Iran has elections which reflect the complicity of the populace. Whether by ballot or by revolution, they could change the regime if they really wanted to.
What Hillary expressed so ineloquently was the US cold war doctrine of deterrence called Mutually Assured Destruction which prevented such a nuclear exchange from ever happening between the US and the USSR. Making it clear to Iran what the consequences of such an attack on Israel would be is just a reiteration of long standing doctrine on nuclear war.
Non-Credo, what Ahmadinejad has said about the holocaust and Israel:
“They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred and place this above God, religions and the prophets.”
“We ask the West to remove what they created sixty years ago and if they do not listen to our recommendations, then the Palestinian nation and other nations will eventually do this for them.”
“The real Holocaust is what is happening in Palestine where the Zionists avail themselves of the fairy tale of Holocaust as blackmail and justification for killing children and women and making innocent people homeless.”
“The West claims that more than six million Jews were killed in World War II and to compensate for that they established and support Israel. If it is true that the Jews were killed in Europe, why should Israel be established in the East, in Palestine?”
“If you have burned the Jews, why don’t you give a piece of Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to Israel. Our question is, if you have committed this huge crime, why should the innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime”
“Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation’s fury.”
“Remove Israel before it is too late and save yourself from the fury of regional nations.”
“The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land. As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map.”
“If the West does not support Israel, this regime will be toppled. As it has lost its raison d’ tre, Israel will be annihilated.”
“Israel is a tyrannical regime that will one day will be destroyed.”
“Israel is a rotten, dried tree that will be annihilated in one storm.”
Reply to this | Hide 3 replies | Report thisBy jackpine savage, April 27 at 5:40 am #
(667 comments total)
Re:
Frank, you don’t keep up on international news so much, do you? The Iranian parliamentary elections happened not long ago, and most of the opposition candidates were disqualified before anyone could even vote for them.
Of course, the same thing happens here, just with more subtlety. It works out well, our political system gets the end result it’s looking for AND our leaders/media can castigate other countries for their lack of democracy.
And what about Americans holding their leaders accountable...then or now?
Reply to this | Report thisBy Non Credo, April 26 at 5:03 pm #
(1106 comments total)
Re:
It is still clear that Ahmadinejad, in looking forward to Israel’s demise, is predicting the collapse or defeat of a bad regime, not an elimination of the Jews, by nuclear or any other means.
For example, on your list you have him saying ,"If the West does not support Israel, this regime will be toppled. As it has lost its raison d’etre, Israel will be annihilated.”
That remark is about the end of a a REGIME, not the annihilation of an ethnic group or the physical destruction of a country.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Ostrogoth, April 26 at 12:31 pm #
(57 comments total)
Re:
HRC’s “obliteration” rhetoric could be disregarded as posturing intended to deter Iran from attacking Israel, but her comments seem more sinister in conjunction with her prior endorsements of war crimes against both Iraq and Iran. Why the need to deter Iran? The Iranians, including Ahmadinejad, have never threatened to attack anyone. In contrast, Israel has a large nuclear stockpile and advanced weapons delivery systems, plus every intention of attacking its neighbors, including Iran, in furtherance of its Zionist, expansionist agenda. So if HRC merely wanted to prevent war, she would have threatened to obliterate Israel if it attacked Iran. Her comments and voting record seem less designed to deter war than set the stage for the cold-blooded murder of millions of innocent Iranians.
Reply to this | Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, April 26 at 7:55 am #
(2900 comments total)
jackpine savage, April 26: “If we wanted to rid the world of nuclear weapons, we might start by decommissioning ours....”
As long as people still think that aggressive posturing is clever and that building nuclear umbrellas or whatever is good for employment, it is impossible to achieve any real or lasting progress never mind peace.
But supporting the military-industrial complex is no kind of answer to the needed solutions for global warming and climate change. Here we are with the economic recession and the food crisis and the GREAT USA FUCKWIT wants to go off and bomb Iran!!!
The writing is on the wall that the wrong kinds of expenditures are leading to disaster. Now you want to add nuclear contamination and mass murder as well??? So too do the unthinking Neocons in France and even still in Britain.......
The quandary of the disappearing bees which left crops unpollinated in America recently will be nothing to what comnes next if this military madness is allowed to continue as the excuse for solutions which really need global CO-OPERATION!!!
Reply to this | Hide 3 replies | Report thisBy jackpine savage, April 26 at 8:26 am #
(667 comments total)
Re:
yes...i think.
I think that the point is that people will notice recession and food crises a little less if we go off and bomb Iran.
I’m not sure if when you wrote “you” in your third paragraph if you were