Iranian nuclear scientist ‘assassinated by Mossad’

We will never know the real truth in this case. This could have been an accident. This could have been murder - the murderer could have been someone the scientist knew who did not like him for whatever the reason. This could have been an assassination - from Israel, the USA, or any other country with a spy in their program that wanted to cause problems. Regardless of what "really" happened this will be blamed on the Jews because that propaganda fits best for everyone involved.

"And yet everybody forgot that Isreali nuclera program was also ILLEGAL according to international rules - even if they were supplied vital technology from all sides, from France to USA - and that they have NEVER signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty and never the UN inspectors entered Dimona reactor in Israel"

Kreese, you are contradicting yourself, you said Israel's Nuclear Weapons are illegal, but how can they be illegal if they never signed a non-proliferation act? Who's rules are you trying to force Israel to live by?

And terrorism, which definition are you using? The wilkipedia site you quoted states in the second sentence that currently there are over 120 definitions of terrorism, so why doesn't the entire world believe what you think is a terrorist? Answer, because the world knows the UN sucks and stands for nothing. Hence, why each culture has their own individual definition of what a terrorist is based on past experience. Not just one superior John Kreese definition, thus the reason why there isn't a John Kreese dictionary.

[edit on 5-2-2007 by Low Orbit]

I support Israel in this if they actually did it. They have enemy's on all sides with Iran trying to unite them to "wipe Israel off the map" .

Originally posted by johnny bravo
I support Israel in this if they actually did it.

You support murder? I suppose it should be a legal solution to killing anyone who thinks differently as you, eh?

They have enemy's on all sides with Iran trying to unite them to "wipe Israel off the map" .

No other country said this. The phrase itself is mistakenly understood as "Wipe of the face of the Earth." There's a difference between a map and Earth.

[edit on 5-2-2007 by DJMessiah]

Originally posted by DJMessiah

They have enemy's on all sides with Iran trying to unite them to "wipe Israel off the map" .

No other country said this. The phrase itself is mistakenly understood as "Wipe of the face of the Earth." There's a difference between a map and Earth.

[edit on 5-2-2007 by DJMessiah]

I don't understand how that makes a difference.

Originally posted by DJMessiah
You support murder? I suppose it should be a legal solution to killing anyone who thinks differently as you, eh?



No other country said this. The phrase itself is mistakenly understood as "Wipe of the face of the Earth." There's a difference between a map and Earth.

Of course they support it because its Israel dishing it out and not Israel on the recieving end. They blew up a factory on foreign soil in France when it was convenient, they assasinated and blew up hotel rooms and people on foreign soil in France, Italy, Greece and NYC, they overfly Lebanese borders at their leisure, they overfly residences of foreign Presidents in order to harrass and threaten, they assasinated Egyptian Professors in France working on Reactors in Iraq, Kidnapped Vannunu from Italy....they are Israel, they can do as they please and when they please. In their country or in other countries irregardless of damage caused or lives lost. All is forgiven.

It was not a mistaken phrase..it wa intentionally misconstrued otherwise how else can people go about blabbering and whining about how they are to be wiped off the face of the earth and throw constant pity parties.

Originally posted by Terapin


While I agree that Iran developing nuclear capabilities is troublesome, murder to achieve a political goal is reprehensible. .

Oh? what about Iran supporting Hamas and Hezbollah? a bit hypocritical dont you think?

Originally posted by XphilesPhan

Originally posted by Terapin


While I agree that Iran developing nuclear capabilities is troublesome, murder to achieve a political goal is reprehensible. .

Oh? what about Iran supporting Hamas and Hezbollah? a bit hypocritical dont you think?

Is it ok for Israel to sell Arms to countries like Angola then? Israel sells arms to many countries..whats the problem with Iran selling arms to organizations such as Hizbollah or Hamas? Should they remain defenseless and wait to be attacked by IDF/IAF? Just like they said Iran was controlling Iraq and then turn around and say they had no proof , Iran isn't controlling Hamas or Hizbollah, they may be supplying/selling them weapons but lots of countries sell weapons to different organizations.

Originally posted by Togetic
I don't understand how that makes a difference.

Iran does not want to include Israel on its map, just as how Israel chooses not to include the Palestinian lands on its own map. Iran's statement literally means that they will wipe Israel off their map.

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Originally posted by Togetic
I don't understand how that makes a difference.

Iran does not want to include Israel on its map, just as how Israel chooses not to include the Palestinian lands on its own map. Iran's statement literally means that they will wipe Israel off their map.

I for one am not in favor of Isreal expanding its borders, and think the right move on their part would be to retreat to pre '67 war lines and stop illegally occupying palestinian land and building more settlements, which they promised the US that they would do, but actually built faster. source

There is sooooo much corruption, deception, lies, rhetoric, propaganda, some sincerity and love, in the idea of Zionism and the greater interests of Israel. I will not use this thread to debate this opinion, but the evidence is plenty.

What happened to being fair? Compromising? The truth from my experience is that the Isaelies look at the Arabs not too different from how the white man looked at the african americans, sub-human. I'm not saying all or even most believe this, because I can't ever prove it, although I have seen my fair share of proof.

i.e. I run a corporation, owned by an Iraqi Jewish family (zionist), who are for the most part, very nice and loving. But as this Israeli/Palestinian conflict was controlling media we began to discuss. His biggest worries:

~ Not to let Arabs into the government because they will one day bread enough to start changing Israeli policies. They can have all the rights as citizens, but not in terms of government.

~ He said that it was okay for a million lebonese to die for the cause of Israel. They're blood is not as important in so many words.

The eerie thing is that he believed this, devoid of hate or malace. It was indoctrinated within his mind to not question it. I was amazed.

But I was also amazed that people once bought, sold, and used slaves.

Where is all the love at? And why won't people question their religions when it is lacking the love? Who believes in something that advocates anything but equality? I'm so confused.

BTW, on topic, Iran's Pres doesn't want them on their land. He said he would recognize them on German land or wherever. They have been enemies for centuries, now the biggest brother protects their enemy, and gives them their land. Who would not hate this scenario?

AAC


[edit on 5-2-2007 by AnAbsoluteCreation]

Originally posted by Low Orbit
Kreese, you are contradicting yourself, you said Israel's Nuclear Weapons are illegal, but how can they be illegal if they never signed a non-proliferation act? Who's rules are you trying to force Israel to live by

Almost everybody in the Nuclear Club signed the treaty, which means the major players are France, People's Republic of China, Russia, UK and USA. Three states - India, Pakistan, and Israel - have declined to sign the treaty. Yet only India and Pakistan confirm and admit that they have nuclear weapons. The Israeli government refuses to officially confirm or deny that it has a nuclear weapon program, the reasoning for this is due to the holocaust and Israel's control over America and its desire to ethnically cleanse the Middle East. And if Israel would be called to obey and respect the international nuclea treaties, then the IAEA would be called anti-semitic. So there you go. When the international laws or treaties are concerned, and when Israel is mentioned, there is always a Big Hole appearing, where suddenly laws and regulatons can go away. It has always been like that with Israel and it always will be like that.

And terrorism, which definition are you using? The wilkipedia site you quoted states in the second sentence that currently there are over 120 definitions of terrorism, so why doesn't the entire world believe what you think is a terrorist? Answer, because the world knows the UN sucks and stands for nothing. Hence, why each culture has their own individual definition of what a terrorist is based on past experience. Not just one superior John Kreese definition, thus the reason why there isn't a John Kreese dictionary.

Assassination of goverment sponsored scientists is NOT terrorism for you?

I wonder what you would say, if Chinese agents were suspected of killing an Ameican scientist in American lab? I wonder if you would start to open up such an unimportant topic, as if how many definitions of terrorism there are. And above all, who the funk is John Kreese?

Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Originally posted by Togetic
I don't understand how that makes a difference.

Iran does not want to include Israel on its map, just as how Israel chooses not to include the Palestinian lands on its own map. Iran's statement literally means that they will wipe Israel off their map.

I for one am not in favor of Isreal expanding its borders, and think the right move on their part would be to retreat to pre '67 war lines and stop illegally occupying palestinian land and building more settlements, which they promised the US that they would do, but actually built faster. source

The only reason Israel has the borders that it currently has is because it beat the Arab aggressors in that war. It wasn't Israel that started that war, but it did resoundly humiliate the militarys vastly outnumbering in in a week. Now these countries(and yourself) have the nerve to ask for that land back? As for wiping off the Earth or Map, as a practical matter, there is no difference. The end result is no Israel. After the holocaust, and the almost constant state of war with its neighbors, I don't blame Israel for being proactive in it's national defense, to include maintaining strategic real estate. Palestine had the option to coexist with Israel, but for them it was all or nothing, whereas Israel was willing to compromise(in fact in every matter it's always Israel that ends up compromising, as their neighbors don't want to give an inch). They're the only first world democracy in that region, filled with those that hate them and the west, so you can bet I support their right to self defense, which includes preemptive action when necessary. Are they perfect?- certainly not, but they have a better human rights record than anyone else in their neighborhood. They've shown great restraint with regards to Hamas, Hezbollah, etc..

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Originally posted by Togetic
I don't understand how that makes a difference.

Iran does not want to include Israel on its map, just as how Israel chooses not to include the Palestinian lands on its own map. Iran's statement literally means that they will wipe Israel off their map.

How then, in the same presentations, can they chant "death to Israel"? This argument smacks against my common sense. If we are to take the plain meaning of what Bush or Blair say without appealing to nuance, as so many do, isn't it inconsistent to not do the same thing here?