An Israeli Insult

a reply to: Jobeycool

If Israel are the holy moral arbitrators of who get nukes then why are they not signed up to the same WMD treaty's they demand other are? Or the same treaty's all the other nuclear powers are?


O thats right they are nation of hypocrites.

Do as I say not as I do right?

a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

You say where's the proof? You provide none, yourself.

Nice video re Halliburton? Surely, the warm-hearted left just gave Halliburton a 'pass' on the evidence(?) and did nothing. Didn't charge them, no trial, no fine. REALLY? Trash binned.

IEDs from Iran? Not even the elected Democrats question that one. Plenty of data out there with the PROOF. You dig it up. Your not worth my time.

I certainly hope the 92 million include the young and old. If not, we're already screwed. It's the highest 'percentile' in history. percentile. Google the definition..

Obamacare? Keep pushing that one. it just got the Democrats wiped out on every level of Gov't in the nation. Keep pushing it. It only reinforces the opinion that Democrats will NEVER admit making a mistake.

Obama makes Bush look good. Obama makes the hunchback of Notre Dame look good. I've wasted enough time pointing out your self-righteous pap. Have a nice day.....

a reply to: crazyewok

Not really. Israel has had the ability to wipe any nation in the Middle -east off the map for decades.(conventionally as well)

Hard to argue against the fact that they haven't done so to anyone. In fact, have only gone to war when attacked at some level. Even then, they've allowed the attacking nation survive as a nation. I wouldn't have myself. I'd have made sure that there was no chance of it happening again.

Israel deems Iran to be a threat to their national security, be it via Hamas through weapons supply, financing or whatever means. Plenty of rhetoric from the past Iranian president indicating Israel's destruction is high on their wish list.

Not an unreasonable response if one approaches it from their viewpoint.

Frankly, anyone who thinks Iran should be allowed nukes is hugely mistaken. The proliferation of nuclear weapons must stop. PERIOD.

Frankly, the U.S. should have stopped Pakistan, India AND China, as well.

Arrogant? Perhaps. A survival of the race issue is my view of it.

Very, VERY difficult to undo those that already have them. Stopping further spreading is the first step. No matter who's next on the list.

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
But then nothing new from republicans. Their behaviour the last 8 years has been shocking to us in Europe.

Oh, the humiliation!

ALL of America is concerned with nothing more than what a bunch of people that can't exist without our help "feel" about Republicans.

Harte

I have to agree with everything Netanyahu is saying. Iran does sponsor terrorism and if they get nukes it will only guarantee nuclear war. You have to be a special kind of stupid if you don't see that.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Still doesn't address at all why Israel has not signed up to the same Nuclear and WMD the USA/UK/France?Russia and China have

Until they do they are a nation of hypocrites with there own illegal WMD's/

a reply to: crazyewok

Sorry I didn't get to your reply sooner.

I have no idea about what the status is for U.K. papers or media in general.

One of the posters provided a link in rebut to that article. it didn't really disagree with the article beyond saying the information on the number of groups applying Sharia law was hard to verify but 'rapidly expanding'.

It largely implied that the Sharia law was being viewed in the U.K. legal system as falling within the Arbitration legislation and therefore acceptable under British law.

So all I can say is that article is not bunk based on rebuttal arguments.

I view it as a first step, so to speak. Of course, it's entry would be reasonable and limited. No other way it could be done.

I have to say, When Benji entered the building, you would have thought Jesus himself walked in. LMAO!

Don't look now, but McCain just snapped on his butt sucking goggles. I swear he looks more drunk today than Joe Biden. ~$heopleNation

Yeah, powerful speech by a thug.

Thugs are good at that.
He made some very good points - but I think his 'deal' should go both ways - no help for Iran, AND NO HELP for Israel, either.

We have propped them up long enough. Let him take on the Middle East himself.

"Make Iran act like a normal country" indeed. Make ISRAEL act like a normal country, too! Join the club of countries willing to let their nukes be inspected. Sit down, shut up, and listen while other country's leaders are speaking at the UN. How DARE they, anyway? If I were in some 'neutral club' and a member got up and walked out when I stood to take the podium, I'd be royally pissed. The arrogance of Israel astounds me.

Every country for themselves. Israel is capable of, and willing to, stand alone, are they? That's what he said. Then LET THEM.

Good cop/bad cop a la global thuggery. This was a pure propaganda Islamophobic speech, every bit as much as others use Antisemitic propaganda in speeches.
They're equally appalling.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: crazyewok

Sorry I didn't get to your reply sooner.

I have no idea about what the status is for U.K. papers or media in general.

One of the posters provided a link in rebut to that article. it didn't really disagree with the article beyond saying the information on the number of groups applying Sharia law was hard to verify but 'rapidly expanding'.

It largely implied that the Sharia law was being viewed in the U.K. legal system as falling within the Arbitration legislation and therefore acceptable under British law.

So all I can say is that article is not bunk based on rebuttal arguments.

I view it as a first step, so to speak. Of course, it's entry would be reasonable and limited. No other way it could be done.

From what I understand its a volentary system.


I as a non muslim would not be subjected to it at all.

Any muslim that does not want it or does not agree with its ruleing can take it to a normal UK court.

These unofficial courts basicaly have no official power than what one gives it. And the ruleings are limited too as they can override UK law, so handing out lashes and executions are forbbidon.

I have no problem with this in a free socity. As long as they are not forced on anyone and abide by UK law I see no problem.


Its a huge step from saying britain is under shira law or subject to it. No one is under or subject to it as its purely down to the individual and the court has no official power.

a reply to: crazyewok

I agree! I'm not saying nor even implied-I don't think- the U.K. being 'under' Sharia Law.

I don't like the speed, the underlying intent, or the potential down the road.

It does violate separation of church and state in a sense though and that one is a tough nut to sort out.

Looking at the overall world view and seeing countries suffering from this clash of cultures where none existed mere years ago makes me less than welcoming...LOL

All I'd like from you and the rest of the Brits is an acknowledgement that this merits attention and are aware of the possible downsides of the trend. That would make me feel more at ease knowing that you people are on top of it and watching closely...

Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken Join Growing List Of Democrats Skipping Netanyahu Speechy.

I know it's over. I haven't watched it and am not sure that I will. I know exactly what he said and why.

As to the rest...warmongers and the MIC can go screw themselves.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Israel is capable of standing on their own...but don't forget the $300 million we have asked the great USA taxpayers to send us for missile defences.

a reply to: sueloujo

but don't forget the $300 million we have asked the great USA taxpayers to send us for missile defences.

Sorry - who is "we"?

It's shocking to read how many people are fond of the idea to support Iran. You guys are idiots! You have no sense of reality and no idea what really is happening. All of you should be sent to a battle field so you get first hand experience what it really means to be in a war. The last thing we need on this planet is a nuclear armed Iran who is going crazy and become a second North Korea.. and on top that position has already been filled by Putin himself...

However I also agree that Netanyahu's outcry has been the same for the past decades and sure enough it's a repeating pattern and becomes annoying after a while.

But, either way, supporting a nuclear armed Iran who is known to be one of the main supporter of terrorism in the world is just foolish. That's like giving Hitler the nuclear bomb...

a reply to: flyandi

Good start, calling those don't agree with you an idiot.

Everything is pointing to them getting the energy and not the bomb, and those are not interchangeable.

Also, when is the last time Iran has attacked these mortal enemies that won't rest until they are wiped off the face of the earth?

originally posted by: sueloujo
This might sound stupid but how is Netanyahu able to address congress in the first place? Is this not undermining the U.S. somehow?
"netanyahu to lay out elements he knows from deal with Iran in speech to Congress" per senior Israeli official on plane.

So he is saying that the U.S. itself does not know the full story or understand and they did the deal? How demeaning is that?

I would not expect any other world leader to have the audacity and this man seems to think it is his right.

I agree what would Netanyahu say/do if the situation were exactly reversed and some person in his government overstepped their bounds and invited president obama?

What I always wonder when listening to the news is why zero people speak of what the American public feels on these issues. It is all about our sick government and never do they speak of the peoples views anymore!

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: beezzer

I just have issues with countries with nukes telling others they can't have them.

Perhaps there might be nation-states that shouldn't have them.

Or should everyone have a nuke?

Why is it that THE WORLD does not make these decisions together but it always comes down to the overriding power of a couple of nations?

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: flyandi

Good start, calling those don't agree with you an idiot.

There is nothing to agree on?! A nuclear Iran is just not acceptable .. again History is starting to repeat itself.. there were people in the US and all over the world agreeing with the Nazis and look what happened in the end .. does anyone still agrees with the action that the Nazi's took?

I am not saying to compare Iran to Hitler-Germany but the danger of having another rouge government trying to do similar things in the world is just unacceptable. I am very aware that there is a lot of issues in the world and we have lot of small rouge governments in the world creating horrific crimes (like in Africa) and we need to combat these situations as well BUT this would be on a much larger scale.

Yeah it's a bit fear-mongering but the issue with this is that you never know and if it comes down to these scenarios then I don't think political correctness can play a role.

a reply to: flyandi

And what about israel stockipe of WMDs and its refusal to not let inspectors in and and sign onto the same wmd treatys every other nuclear power is part of?

Do they get a free pass?