It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Douglas Murray - Israel & Nuclear Iran

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Sintabon3
 


So you admit israel is working with arab terrorists to destabilize iran? I think that is called aiding terrorism and is usually considered illegal.

Murray himself said the house and country has no say, although he is lying becaus if that were the case he wouldnt be publicly speaking about how necessary it is to go to war.




posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sintabon3
reply to post by filosophia
 


My point is that he was refering to Lebanon whyle speaking about democracy, and not Iran as you claimed.


if Lebanon doesnt want democracy it shouldnt be forced onto them. As i said im an american and i want a republic, not democracy, and the british, u.s. , and israel government wont let that happen, so should iran invade america to bring me republic values?



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by Sintabon3
 


Oh so someone must have misquoted the prime minister of israel, but they couldnt possibly have misquoted the prime minister of iran. There are plenty more quotes where that comes from, plus its the israelis ACTIONS that speak the loudest, i.e. illegal settlements and killing a protester with a bulldozer
edit on 15-2-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


You provided no link to your quote correction, as well the revised quote doesnt make sense since it is also cut off, something about use of force, but only if necessary, and then saying they dont want to expel arabs from their land, but guess what, they did!
edit on 15-2-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


I have disgust enough about Irans did or didnt say...so I will come at this from a different angle, Hassan nasralah, Head of hezbolah, Proxy of Iran in lebanon In hes own words: "If the jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them wordwide (Daily star Oct 23 2002)

"If we searched the entire world for person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind Ideology and religion, we would find anyone like the jew...Notice...I do not say I sraeli. (New Yorker, Oct 14, 2002)...

I would say the two share the same goals views and Ideology If we are in quotations though....and you claim there was expeltion, consider Two weeks pre-invasion, on May 1, 1948, Arab League secretary-general Abdul-Rahman Azzam Pasha declared: "If the Zionists dare establish a state, the massacres we would unleash would dwarf anything which Genghis Khan and Hitler perpetrated." Lest any doubt linger, Azzam reiterated his message the day seven Arab armies attacked: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." ...

The Jews saved themselves from a second Holocaust, the Arabs waged war, The Jews mnaged to protect themslevs.
edit on 15-2-2012 by Sintabon3 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Bare with me here...Lebanese Indeed want democracy, Instead they got a civil war, and today An Iranian Proxy Embeded deeply in their politics.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


I admit Israel works with other Arab countrys such as Khatar Saudi Arabia and the emirates...but you can keep on trying to take my words out of context, if that makes you feel better.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sintabon3
reply to post by filosophia
 


Bare with me here...Lebanese Indeed want democracy, Instead they got a civil war, and today An Iranian Proxy Embeded deeply in their politics.


bare with me here: you can't claim to speak for an entire country and not use one single outside source.

Bare with me here: i indeed want a constitutional republic, instead i have civil war between the government and patriots, a globalist proxy embedded deeply in my politics (federal reserve)



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sintabon3
reply to post by filosophia
 


I admit Israel works with other Arab countrys such as Khatar Saudi Arabia and the emirates...but you can keep on trying to take my words out of context, if that makes you feel better.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

israel is working with more than just arab countries, try terrorist groups to assassinate iranian scientists. Killing a scientist is terrorism no matter how you spin it.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Sintabon3
 


I cant comment on every single thing an arab has said save that they have a right to say it. I am merely pointing out the absurdity of saying we must have war with iran because their leader supposedly said 'wipe israel off the map' if that were the case the world should wage war on israel for wanting and succeeding in exterminating arabs from their lands.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
Douglas Murray

-begins his speech with an ad hominem attack against his three opponents and correlates their views to the downfall of England as a whole.

-provides no contrary evidence or evidence of any kind, not even a quote.

-called iran a regional stabilizer but hypocritically ignoring the manufactured CIA arab spring

-says iran wipes out best chance of democracy, ignoring the fact that iran does not want a democracy and they have a right to pick their fom of government.

-continuosly brings up this two choice game: war with iran, or iran with a nuke. He wants war, thinks it is moral, so my question is, will this war monger put his life where his mouth is and fight himself?

-doesnt want iran 'regime' to be stong, so he is an iranaphobe.

-iran is violating every right of british students. No evidence of this remarkable claim, just authoritarian assurances that iran is violating ALL rights.

-he is glad this 'house', i.e. the debate has no say, is also glad that britain has no say if iran is attacked or not. In oher words it is a foregone cnclusion, the debate is just lip service.

-invokes the victim card fear mongering as only evidence of irans hostility, ignoing the murder of iranian scientists.




edit on 15-2-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


It's sad how on a generational level people forget things.

This is exactly the sort of talk that allowed Hitler to rise to power, perhaps it is best to not jump the gun and wait and see, it is the higher moral ground to give the benefit of the doubt, Unless of course it's 1939 and your Poland or 2012 and Israel and will personally pay the price for that excessive trust.

Israel and America have fundamentalist "elements" within, they have policies which are easy to disagree with, take actions that are less than desirable at times.

Iran is a Fundamentalist State it is ruled by fundamentalist belief, if you understand those beliefs you know that there is only one outcome, You might think I referenced Hitler but because of the Jewish Holocaust, I did NOT, the Hitler reference is because during the march on Russia Hitler had the insane belief that the Norse Gods were going to dispatch the Russian winter and well, we all know how that turned out.

You can never trust Mystical thinking, it borders on the insane if not breeches it entirely, The Ayatollah and the president of Iran believe some Mahdi is going to come, they will use those Nukes

In the end, sadly the bulk of the Iranian Youth population is sane, intelligent and much more modern than their parents, if you had value for their lives, if you had value for what Iran might be in the near future you would have no support for Iran, If Israel takes out their Nuclear ambitions, certainly handfuls of innocents will die, but the bottom line here is, war with Israel is no more winnable for Iran than War with Russia would be for the United States it is another example of MAD but scaled down in size, you believe your dealing with people who think logically as you do and your mistaken, Iran will be obliterated when it uses one of those weapons, all those young people will die as will all the young people in Israel, they believe the destruction will beckon in the Mahdi, it is an insane belief system with no bearing on reality, the world economy will plunge the regions oil won't be sent for years to come the entire worlds progress will be held back and no one will appear


gl2

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
In the eyes of all governments and intelligence professionals of the world, Israel made a very stupid mistake when its Prime Minister, Benyamin Netanyahu, suddenly and without evidence, announced that “it was clear” Iran was behind two attacks on diplomatic personnel in India and in the former Soviet state of Georgia. Netanyahu, derided as a liar by Nicolas Sarkozi (a remark caught on tape for the world to hear), has also apparently lost the confidence of other western leaders. So, just when Israel is making a conspicuous propaganda play for a war-like attack on Iran---even though evidence of Iran nukes is sorely lacking, the Israeli government doesn’t even bother to wait for evidence before it denounces an Iranian role. That kind of mistake arouses suspicions in the mind of any experienced intelligence analyst.

Clearly, when a government of the sort makes a premature, apparently unbased remark, the question of a false flag attack, i.e. in the Operation Northwoods style, is on analyst’s minds. The level of corruption within the Mossad and in Netanyahu’s government is so high that an attack by Israeli agents on the wife of a diplomat in India is not out of the question. If an actual Near East government were to attack, it probably wouldn’t waste its weapons on the spouse of a diplomat. Netanyahu, whose profile in the Mossad tracking of the 911 suspects looks very bad, may want to create a “hot war” atmosphere in order to rile the Israeli public in favor of a pre-emptive bombing of Iran. Meanwhile, Iran’s nuclear industry is deeply burrowed underground and, even using a US supplied bunker buster bomb, it seems doubtful that Israel could ever stop Iranian science from progressing.

US military brass and western leaders clearly fear a reckless provocation by Israel. Common sense tells us that while withdrawing from (Iran-influenced) Iraq the US will not agree to an Israeli attack in the absence of real, hard evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons capability. Remember, for years, Israel has been saying that Iran was just months from having a nuclear bomb, yet no credible international inspection agency now thinks that Iran has a bomb capacity (years later). Iran isn’t even refining its uranium to weapons-grade purity.

Meanwhile, US policy makers don’t want a relatively small, partly corrupt government in Israel to foul relations with the various nations that will react if Israel bombs Iran. The US can’t afford to see both Iraq and Afghanistan heat up again, just when US budgets and relations require a down-scaling of tensions in the region.

By reacting so quickly without clear, demonstrable evidence, Netanyahu’s government has actually piled suspicion on itself, rather than Iran. In either case, Mossad scheming in narcotics networks and with terrorist groups in South Asia left Israel open to attack by any number of state or sub-regime actors. Rather than jump into Netanyahu’s tiny, ill-prepared boat, other nations must step further back from what appears to be a severely corrupt circumstance.

Background: A US defense source stated that the "sticky bombs" used against Iranian nuclear scientists (one of whom, a young married father, was merely a theoretical scientist---not an enrichment industry fixture) were done by Israel's Mossad using anti-Iran MEK (Iranian Khalq operatives secretly working in Iran against the Iranian government). The sticky bombs are magnetic devices thrown to adhere to a car as a motorcycle passes. And that was the kind of bomb seen by witnesses in attack by motorcycle on that wife in India, also the kind of bombs reportedly found in Thailand just days ago. Meanwhile, the Mossad is trying to convince us that Hezbollah in Thailand was owner of those Thai bombs. Yet more ironically, Thailand recently voted to recognize Palestine. For information of how, in the past, Israel has attacked Jews to drum up war anger against other countries, see: www.inminds.com...



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


There is no such thing as terrorism, war is war and you fight with the methodologies you have available, there are no terrorists only combatants, that word no matter which side in the debate is using is no more than a dehumanizing term for your enemy, killing scientists is a part of war, period.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by lordnightstalker
reply to post by filosophia
 


There is no such thing as terrorism, war is war and you fight with the methodologies you have available, there are no terrorists only combatants, that word no matter which side in the debate is using is no more than a dehumanizing term for your enemy, killing scientists is a part of war, period.


I agree with you, meaning Israel is no better than Iran, Americas heroic wars are also no different from terroristic attacks, and Hitlers wars was just part of the dangers of war.

Meaning I'm not buying the rhetoic that iran is a threat to the world. Any county could be a threat to the world.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by lordnightstalker
 


You are using the same guilt trip as murray, if we dont stop iran now, holocaust 2.0. It is calling iran guilty for something they have not done, its called pre-crime. Hitler was supported by the same globalists that are in power now. AshkeNAZIS, palestianian genocide.

America is run by fundamentalist biggots as well, so why should i care about irans religious mess when americas religious mess is bad enough?

Mysiticism of the ayatollah? I study mysticism and believe me the ayatollah is not the top of my mystical bookshelf.

I support the iranian people as i supported the iraqi people, but nato didnt, they murdered 1.5 million iraqis under bush, and now under obama libya is destabilized.

Your mistake is assuming i support iran, i merely dissuport the globalist mega bankers.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Sintabon3
 


Well that's nice to see someone in Britain has some common sense when it comes to this issue. Thanks for posting that great speech. People need to understand that Iran is playing games with the UN and the world. Their leaders are hell bent on war, to try and unite the Middle east under the Persian empire of old.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


Your right any nation can be a threat to the world, any place that follows any ism or ideology and instills leaders and places power in their hands has that potential.

But your operating from emotion and a sense of fair play which is just as bad as operating from a POV of mysticism.

Is Israel or America or Russia or China an actual threat? Not really, these nations while having their points one might critique while having their own ism's to deal with are : MATERIALIST nations to one degree or another, the bulk of their people's care for trade and science, consumerism, money (while we can bash much about that trend) it is not a set of philosophies by which genocide is appropriate, it doesn't including the burning of cities to the ground or the decimation of populations, when America goes to war, it seeks out specific targets, eliminates opposition and seeks to open up markets for Capitalist ventures, Israel wishes x amount of space on their borders and to drive the Palestinians out...not eliminate them, Russia wishes energy exports, China wants a return to the Middle Kingdom or Greater Global influence it feels it deserves by population and historic territory

None of the above Nations is operating from mystical doctrine, they have goals they are goals capable of being negotiated and the interests lie within the realms of prosperity for all even if there is debate

Is it possible for any of the above mentioned Nations to destroy the world on any given morning YES

The probability of that however due to philosophy and Materialism on any given day is around .00001 %

Now Iran, now balance of power, absolute authority in the hands of only several men all of whom believe in a religious doctrine of conversion not unlike the West several hundred years ago, take stock in mystical thinking and have a psychological mindset that can rationalize the destruction, absorption or inhalation of those who do not convert and believe irrationally that "salvation" will come despite their actions

The probability of using that power goes way up.

so it is not the same.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by lordnightstalker
 


You are confusing the terms mysticism and religious. Iran is operating from a RELIGIOUS standpoint, not a mystical one.

Religion: a centralized orthodoxy emanating from one government or holy book.

Mysticism: any of the broad, generalized philosophical works pertaining to individual salvation through INDIVIDUAL means.

Religion = collectivism
mysticism = individual gnosis.

Iran is operating by the quaran, a religious book. Just as europe operates from the bible and israel from the torah.

Meanwhile, Plotinus is a mystic, with no collective religion following his thoughts, it is up to the individual to sort it out. So in conclusion religion controls the masses, mysticism liberates the mind.
edit on 15-2-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-2-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


Religion: lets all dress the same, celbrate the same holidays, read the same book, and have the same houghts about that book

mysticism: I am going to meditate in the woods till i gain enlightenment, who cares what society thinks.
edit on 15-2-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


When in Fail argue definitions

Religion is a set of customs or beliefs, use whatever word you'd like to describe it, the small handful in charge in Iran truly believe and guide their actual actions based upon a conviction that "mystical forces" are relevant in wartime.

The Israeli Govt is religious but not like that, the US govt has elements within but counterbalanced and in fact led by rational thinkers and on both parties side, they are Materialists which as I said is nothing to brag about but none the less requires stability to achieve aims. You rattle on about bankers, bankers need people to spend money their actions may be greedy but nuclear Holocaust has no preceptive benefit, the opposition believes it will summon their messiah, one might not be wonderful but it's a world i'll be alive and allowed to be myself in, ny far the lesser of two evils

The Ayatollah will Use those bombs, he is reason to believe the destruction will usher in a new age just like Hitler had reason to believe that march on Russia would be met by intervention of a Mystical source. Both are of course equally insane in practice.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by lordnightstalker
 


Like we never heard jews being called the chosen people, or Americas policy of manifest destiny? Get real. America and Israel are just as religious as Iran. Bush said God told him to invade Iran, and let's not forget Israel cites a rligious text for why they deserve Palestine. This is pot calling the kettle black.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Why do people constantly believe this nonsense? Iran DOES have the right to have nuclear weapons. I mean, well, lets see, you have Pakistan (nuclear) bordering them. They HATE Iran, and would, given a reason, destroy the Shia nation without a problem. They should have a means to defend themselves if need be. Then on top of that, you have United States military bases surrounding Iran in EVERY direction. THEN, you have Israel, With over 300 nuclear weapons, AND the capability to reach Iran. Israel has won every war it has been involved in with each of it's surrounding countries. Usually within a matter of days. Israel is perfectly capable of defending themselves from anyone around them. And Iran knows this. Iran never said they wanted to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. They said they wanted a regime change in Jerusalem. So? We do it all the time.

Iran is not a threat, but our friendship with Israel is. We seem to be the only people who don't know history. The Israelite went to modern day Israel, and MURDERED the people who were already there (the Philistines) It's in the bible, old testament, Also many other historical documents. The British government gave them the land and created the nation of Israel. Taking the land from the Philistines. This is why no arab nation acknowledges Israel as a nation. They have been guilty of many acts of violence and genocide throughout the ages. But we back them up and support everything they do. If we attack Iran because Israel doesn't like them, We will have Russia, and China on us. We have become bullies, controlled by a tiny nation hated by many countries.

It is really complicated to go into all the details, but people should read their history on Israel. It is very relevant to understand many of the problems in the middle east. And our relationship with them is toxic. They do have a right to exist, but so do the people whose land they occupy.

Bottom line, We are forcing Iran to pursue nuclear weapons, and forcing them into a corner with sanctions, and saying we, and Israel, will destroy them. That is a threat they SHOULD take serious.



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
FINALLY, this remarkable gem:

" when israel strikes, the entire world will condemn israel openly, but in secret they will say 'thank god for israel'

The saudis, the egyptians, the libyans will all say 'thank god for israel' "





May God curse me and my family before I say those words.

If it was: the whole universe in peril or I must say those words -- then I would be all "to hell with the universe".



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join