Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal

page: 11
81
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 

Dear Corruption Exposed,

I am truly grateful for your courteous and thoughtful reply. I may have to make room for you on my heroes list. (Unless that would be seen as an insult.) You've also sparked a new thought, but I'll save it to the end.

I'm sorry I missed your Pakistan - India post. I promise I'll go back to it. But my major concern with them is the possible diversion of weapons to other groups or nations.

they will not allow inspections, yet they are threatening another nation for the same reason. In my opinion this is the action of a hypocrite.
I'm afraid my thought on that issue may be seen as a mere talking point, but no one (until you, I hope) has given me a reason to discard it. That "talking point" is Iran's violation of its treaty obligations. They have received the benefits of civilian nuclear power, without following through on their part of the bargain. Israel doesn't have any treaty obligations, so it is not breaking them. Iran could withdraw from the treaty if they wanted, then inspections wouldn't be a question, but they haven't. It's not hypocrisy, but it is dishonesty.

We may very well end up agreeing on the WMD issue. Currently, I don't know enough to know which of the three options is true. You may very well be correct. But I don't think the players, or the situation, are similar enough to think that's what's going on here.

Israel has not proven itself to be a very trustworthy nation so my opinion is that the hardline extremists who are running Israel cannot be trusted with their arsenal, . . .
My worry is that the same sentence could be written about Iran, with the exception that we don't have absolute proof that they have such a weapon, nor how close they are to having one.

My concern with Israel's possession of nuclear weapons is that they have used veiled threats of an offensive nature various times so I do not see their arsenal as a completely "defensive" nature.
I think we can agree that in that part of the world, just about everyone is threatening everybody else, veiled or open.

Here's my new thought, but I can't articulate it clearly, so you'll have to warm up your ESP machine and I'll take off my tin foil hat. We agree that nuclear war is a terrible thing, but so is war in general. I asume that the difference between the two is that a nuclear war ends more quickly and kills more innocents, but either one is to be avoided if at all possible.

Let's now assume that Israel gets rid of all of it's nuclear capability and invites inspectors to check every square inch to prove that they have none. Have we just increased the risk of a conventional war greatly? My belief is that if each side was using muskets (or their modern equivalent) Israel would quickly be out-flanked, surrounded and overwhelmed. I don't see why that wouldn't happen. The only possible, and rather feeble ally for Israel would be the US. Would they divert what remains of their force to enter into a new land war? Could they do it in time?

My first thought is that Israel's arsenal may be preventing a war and if we can put it off long enough Ahmadinejad might be over thrown, and skillful diplomacy might provide safety through the region. It's a small hope, but it's all I currently have.

With respect,
Charles1952




posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 02:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by MrInquisitive
 

Do you have time for a question or two from someone who isn't very knowledgable about the issues, and hasn't even read the thread?

I was struck by this comment:

And Israel now is indignant now that the IAEC may be forced to demand inspections of Israel's nuclear program. This is the point of this thread. Israel lies to the international community, breaks international laws, but then wants the international community to come down hard on Its rivals that MAY want to have their own deterrent against the aggressive, militarily powerful and nuclear-armed powers, the US and Israel.
I thought, AHA! I've found the point of the thread, but it confuses me.

I know Israel doesn't talk about it's weapons program, and conducts clandestine operations, but are there other lies Israel tells to the world? And what laws has it broken? I've heard about the blockade, but that was declared legal by the UN.

I thought that part of the problem with Iran was that it was violating its treaty obligations for inspections. That, coupled with its rhetoric, has many nervous.

Any help would be appreciated.

With respect,
Charles1952


Charles1952,

Thanks for your question. I'll try to do right by it. First off, I will freely admit that I am not going to cite sources for the litany of offenses I am going to list. I don't have time for that, but I did a little googling and will provide a few links to articles. But I also recommend you -- and anyone else -- do some of their own research with an online search of pertinent topics; it is very easy to find this stuff. That said, to the Israel supporters who will likely criticize me for not providing citations on the level of a scholarly journal level, I have yet to see defenders of Israel provide good sources for their many claims justifying or denying the actions of Israel.

But before I get into it, I want to state that I am putting this reply in this thread because that is where the question was asked. It is also germane to the topic of Israel not wanting to have the same standards applied to it as it demands upon other countries. In particular, defenders of Israel generally make the claim that Israel only does what it has to in order to protect itself against its evil neighbors who are capable of anything. I am here documenting Israel's and proto-Israel's criminal deeds to show that Israel cannot claim the moral/legal high ground.

I am going to start with issues that predate Israel as a state, but are germane because it shows the type of militancy/terrorism that Zionists have used in the past, but criticize other groups/peoples for using.

Do a search on the King David Hotel bombing, which occurred in the 1946. The hotel was headquarters for the British Palestine administrative offices. The attacked was carried out by Irgun, a right-wing Zionist organization. 91 people were killed. There was also an incident where British territorial police were killed and then booby-trapped in order to kill first responders and more British forces. Look up the Stearn Gang too. They were another Zionist terrorist organization; I believe former Prime Minister Shamir was a member and that he has even admitted as much. I realize these examples are not crimes by the state of Israel, but they show the foundation on which Israel started and how its neighbors in the region might have taken a page out of the Zionist play book on how to fight for political power and land rights.

Next, look up the founding of Israel; it was created by fiat of a UN General Assembly resolution: all Arab countries voted against it, the US and a majority of other nations voted for it, and Britain and a handful of other countries abstained. My point in bring this up is that Israel was created by a UN resolution, but has since ignored any and all UN resolutions regarding its conduct and control of occupied territories. A country that owes its existance to the UN but ignores its other mandates is a country that only abides by the rule of law when it is in its favor, i.e. it is a rogue state. And of course the more compelling UN Security Council resolutions have always been vetoed by the US, the enabler of this outlaw state.

During the founding of the Israeli state in 1948, the Israelis ethnic cleansed their territory of 700K+ Palestinians. This started with the massacre in a couple of Arab villages, which lead hundreds of thousands to flee for fear of the same. The Arabs call this the Nakba. Google it. Of course, defenders of Israel will deny it, but even some high-placed Israel politicians and generals as well as scholars have acknowledged that it happened. Those who deny it are no better than Holocaust deniers.

My reply will continue in a follow up post as this has reached the text limi



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


This is a continuation of my reply to Charles1952. The explanation for why this is pertinent to this thread is in my previous post.

Early in WWII, there was an incident involving Jew on Jew terrorism, The Patria incident. A boatload of European Jew refugees bound for Mauritus. Zionists in Palestine wanted them to stay in Palestine, but the British who controlled the country didn't. An explosive was affixed to the ship by a Zionist group, the idea being to damage the ship so the Brits would be forced to the refugees stay in Palestine. The explosive was too big and the ship sunk, killing at least 209 of its passengers. Well-intended terrorism? Maybe. But deadly and illegal none the less. Google "Patria incident" or some similar such phrase for more info. Another good phrase to google is "Zionist political violence". But let's move along.

In 1954 the Israeli Air Force hijacked a civilian Syrian plane in order to obtain hostages to trade for captured Israeli spies. I acknowledge that this is a poorly documented episode. Here is one link to a forum on the topic:

Syrian plane hijacking I

and here is another link:

Syrian plane hijacking II

My point here is, again, who started the use of under-handded/illegal tactics in the Middle East?

But let's jump ahead to the 1967 war. Look up "USS Liberty". It was a US naval surveillance ship that was in waters off of Israel and Egypt. The ship, although plainly marked with US insginia, was attack for something like a three hour period, with 34 killed and more wounded. The Israeli government claims it was a mistake, but pilots who partook in the attack claim otherwise -- that it was known this was a US ship.

Why was it done and why didn't the US retaliate? It is speculated that the Israelis were worried that the ship would pick up IDF radio traffic concerning the preemptive air attack on Arab airbases, which began the 1967 war, thus it was a way to hide evidence of a war of aggression on Israel's part.

Why didn't the US do anything? Well Israel was an "ally" of the US, so it wouldn't look good if the US made a stink about it. Similarly, during the Iraq-Iran war an Iraqi plane attacked a US ship in the Persian Gulf (USS Vincennes ?) and crew were killed. At the time Iraq was sort of our friend, because we hated Iran for kicking us out of the country and taking hostages. We were giving economic aid and intelligence to Iraq. Again, can't make a big stink with an "ally" killing a few military personnel. We only make a big deal out things when an "enemy" of ours does something.

Let's jump ahead to the 1980's. During the Lebanon civil war there were incidents involving the massacre at UN refugee camps for Palestinians -- the Sabra and Shatila camps -- by Christian Phalangists. A 1982 international committee found that the IDF was complicit in the attacks for not having stopped them. The commander of the IDF forces in the area was Arial Sharon, later Prime Minister. A subsequent Israeli investigative committee, The Kahan Committed found that the IDF forces were aware of the massacre but did nothing to stop it, and laid the blame personally on Sharon; however, no criminal charges were filed. And the guy goes on to become Prime Minister. This is Israeli justice.

Now I am just going to give a litany of other items without going into as much detail. Again do some follow-up research on them if you want to know the truth of the matter.

First and foremost is the continued occupation of Palestine and the Palestinian people, in contravention of the Geneva Convention and various UN General Assembly resolutions (remember Israel owes its statehood to such a resolution). And there is the continued confiscation of Palestinian property and land, and the continuing building of illegal settlements on this land. Of course, the pro-Zionist MSM news sources have completely dropped the terminology and call it -- at best -- disputed land. It is, in fact, ethnic cleansing. The US and NATO went to war with Serbia over ethnic cleansing, but we cover Israel's butt on this.

(continued in next post)
edit on 3-9-2012 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-9-2012 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


This will be the last section of my reply to Charles1952's question.

There is the history of illegal use of force on Palestinian and/or Lebanese civilians, including the use of flechette, white phosphorous, and cluster munitions. There was one particular case of a Palestinian militant whose apartment building was bombed with a 2000lb bomb, killing at least 12 innocent people, most of whom were children. During various episodes of warfare by Israel against Palestine and Lebanon hospitals and UN facilities have been attacked. It is also well documented that the IDF uses Palestinian civilians as human shields. Just google these topics; however, here is a link to the illegal use of flechette munitions:

IDF use of flechette munitions

Amongst Israel's illegal, out-of-country assassinations, there is this case:

botched Mossad assassination

in which the Mossad targeted the wrong person as one of the perpetrators of the 1972 Olympic terrorist attack.

Here is an article about Israel's illegal use of resources of the occupied territories, this case involving the Dead Sea and the Jordan river:

Israel's exploitation of the Dead Sea


To me one of the most egregious cases of Israeli criminality is the crushing of Rachel Corrie, a US citizen, by an IDF bulldozer. Rachel and peace activists were protesting against the illegal demolition of the homes of families whose sons are militants -- perhaps even suicide bombers. By the international law, it is illegal to carry out collective punishment for the actions of individuals, such as guerillas/militants/terrorists/freedom fighters. And that is what the demolition of such homes is. It is similar, albeit it not as deadly/violent, to the NAZIs rounding up and killing villagers where there had just been a guerilla attack.

Do google Ms. Corrie's case. There are photos which show her in an orange vest and with a megaphone, standing up to the bulldozer. She was run over twice. There is no way the driver could not have seen her. Just recently a sham investigation was concluded by the Israeli judiciary and they found no blame on the part of Israel or the IDF, or even the bulldozer driver. Never mind that the IDF refused to let the bulldozer driver be questioned by the investigating commission. Link:

Rachel Corrie verdict

There are also several cases of US and UK peace activists being shot in the head at point-blank range with rubber bullets or regular munitions. I forget their names. Again no punishment has occurred to the IDF perpetrators nor has their been an apology or compensation to the families by the Israeli government.

I'll stop there, but rst assured there are plenty of more cases that I could write about. Now some will say, "Well the US does bad things too, but you aren't getting on the US's case". I complain a whole lot about the US and its policies and actions. I make no claims about the US having the moral high ground -- anything but.

The point of this thread is about how Israel is indignant that the international community may insist upon it opening itself up to the outside inspections of its nuclear program. And defenders of Israel claim that it is a law-abiding country, supposedly unlike Iran, and that Iran should be forced to have nuclear inspections and that Israel shouldn't, in part because it needs nuclear weapons to exist. They also cite the fact that Iran has signed the NPE while Israel hasn't, so Israel doesn't have to bow to international law on this matter. Well, if Israel hasn't signed this treaty, where does it get of demanding things of another country in this regard, including threatening military action against it? Clearly Israel and its defenders insist upon a double standard. I and most of the world reject this notion.

Hope I went some way to answering your questions, charles1952.


edit on 3-9-2012 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by MrInquisitive
 




You don't have to live in Israel to be a pro-Zionist, all you need to do is support the notion that it is/was right to take land from other people and make the country of Israel with it, and to support the continued existence of this contrived country. This you seem to do; at least you defend its actions.


How can you claim this is a contrived country??

There is a difference between a nation and a country.

The Jewish people are a nation FAR FAR MORE than the palestinians are - and in fact, they are the contrivance of Arabists, not the Jews; But the Jews are a nation without a land - or rather, a nation that has been severed from it's land by the political powers for 2000 years. But did they forget? Or was their daily prayers a reminder of Jerusalem - of never forgetting, or believing in their redemption from exile. This is a people that WAITED and ANTICIPATED its return to no place else but Israel, aka Palestine, earlier known before Hadrian renamed it (to spite the Jews) as Judea.


It's a contrived country because it was created by the fiat of a UN General Assembly resolution, which all the surrounding countries voted against. And though Israel legitimacy was enshrined by the UN resolution, Israel fails to obey any of the the succeeding UN resolutions regarding its illegal behavior, i.e. occupation of Palestine and its people and the ethnic cleansing there of.

The Jewish people lost their country, Judea, when they had very bad idea of revolting against Rome in 72 AD, and were then scattered to the four winds. And back before King David those same lands had been occupied by other peoples but David and his tribe waged a war of ethnic cleansing and genocide against them in order to take hold of Judea and Samaria

As far as I am concerned, all the remnants of European Jewery and any Jews living in the Middle East who wanted to go, should have been brought to the US after WWII. We had the land and resources for them -- we had stolen it from the native Americans of course. By your rationale, I guess you're willing to give all of North America back to the native peoples, as that is what analogously happened with the founding of modern Israel.

How are the Palestinians a contrivance of Arabs/Arabists? Do do realize they are descendants of the Philistines, a Biblical people. They have been there since way back when -- and they had the good sense not to challenge Imperial Rome, hence weren't all sold into to slavery or exiled.

You Zionists/Israel defenders like to make big claims but you always fail to back it up with any documentation.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 04:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


You are a full blown propagandist. I wouldn't be surprised if you're getting paid to do this.

Why does Israel have nukes? To threaten? Or to dissuade others from threatening them?

The former! That's a fact.

Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, and so on, has threatened or is currently threatening Israel with existential destruction. And you seek to enable them by criticizing Israel for it's much needed nuclear arsenal!

And to boot - you support Iran - a maniacal Islamist Shi'ite Regime, in their desire for nuclear energy: ignoring calls, made almost weekly now, for Israels destruction; ignoring the Shi'ite doctrine of the Imam Mahdi and the portents which precede his coming. Some of which have already been met (internecine fighting between Muslims, sufferring in Iraq, war in Syria)

You are nothing but a propagandist bent on bending information.


Who's threatening who? Seems Israel is the country spoiling for an attack against Iran, not vice versa. Saudi Arabia offered a peace deal to the Bush II regime that would have the Arab nations recognize Israel for return of lands occupied by Israel. Israel would have nothing to do with this and went about systematically destroying the infrastructure of the occupied lands and undercutting the Palestinian Authority -- possibly even poisoning Yasser Arafat. Israel also continues its confiscating of Palestinian land and creation of illegal settlements of Israelis on this land.

And just how is the Iranian government a maniacal regime? Yes, they oppress their people, but so do many others, including Russia, yet we see to be ok with Russia having nuclear weapons and clearly they have never used them during war, unlike one democratic, capitalist nation I can think of -- which, in fact used them on a primarily civilian target, rather than a military one.

You say that Israel has nuclear weapons to deter attackers. Can't argue that, but can't you understand that Iran may well want the same, given the fact that the US and Israel are threatening it militarily, the US has military bases surrounding it and a fleet off Iran's coast, the US and Israel are conducting a major espionage war against Iran, and Israel is supporting the MLK, an anti-Iranian government terrorist organization. There is also the fact that the US supported Iraq against Iran during their war, and also shot down a civilian airliner during that time, killing over 300 civilian passengers? The US also overthrew a democratically elected government in Iran in 1953 and installed the repressive Shah regime -- which was far worse than the current one in terms of violence and oppression of its people.

Iran has very good reason not to trust the US and to want a deterrent from US aggression. Just look at what happened to Iraq when the US invaded. I'm sure no Iranian wants that, and likely feel that if nukes are necessary to protect against it, so be it. It is the US and Israel that have been attacking countries in the Middle East. Not Iran, which hasn't started a war for hundreds of years. You are the propagandist.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 04:32 AM
link   
reply to post by OrionHunterX
 


No, I didn't know that, and I doubt the whole rest of the world does either. But by all means, I stand corrected on that point, i.e. that China has been involved in the nuclear proliferation biz with Pakistan. Probably are also partly responsible for N. Korea's. Thank you for supplying the requested citation as a backing up of your statement regarding PRC nuclear proliferation.

That said, this point is a secondary one to the main issue of whether or not Israel should be held to the same level of inspection rigor that it and the US want of Iran. What China has done has no bearing on what should be expected of Israel with respect to having Its nuclear program inspected by the IAEA.
edit on 3-9-2012 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 04:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
I have a question. Why does Israel have a delegate at the IAEA when they are not a member and are not bound to it?


Exactly.....they are not bound to it.....why indeed.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by libertytoall

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Please cite sources in these unfounded claims. Please tell us precisely which Muslim countries' leaders are calling for this extermination of Jews.


Is Mohammed a good enough Muslim leader?

"The eleventh century saw Muslim pogroms against Jews in Spain; those occurred in Córdoba in 1011 and in Granada in 1066.[60] In the 1066 Granada massacre, a Muslim mob crucified the Jewish vizier Joseph ibn Naghrela and massacred about 4,000 Jews."



And where exactly in the Koran does it call for this extermination? Could you please provide the passage # and even the quote if you have it?

The Hadith says "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews , when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews."

(According to Schweitzer and Perry, the hadith are "even more scathing (than the Quran) in attacking the Jews")

"The Quran associates Jews above all with rejection of God's prophets including Jesus and Muhammad, thus explaining their resistance to him personally. (Cf. Surah 2:87–91; 5:59, 61, 70, and 82.) It states that they are, together with outright idolators, the worst and most inveterate enemies of Islam, and thus will not only suffer eternally in Hell but in this world will be the most degraded of the Peoples of the Book, below even Christians, everywhere."

"During his wanderings, Maimonides also wrote The Yemen Epistle, a famous letter to the Jews of Yemen, who were then experiencing severe persecution at the hands of their Muslim rulers. In it, Maimonides describes his assessment of the treatment of the Jews at the hands of Muslims:

... on account of our sins God has cast us into the midst of this people, the nation of Ishmael [that is, Muslims], who persecute us severely, and who devise ways to harm us and to debase us.... No nation has ever done more harm to Israel. None has matched it in debasing and humiliating us. None has been able to reduce us as they have.... We have borne their imposed degradation, their lies, their absurdities, which are beyond human power to bear.... We have done as our sages of blessed memory have instructed us, bearing the lies and absurdities of Ishmael.... In spite of all this, we are not spared from the ferocity of their wickedness and their outbursts at any time. On the contrary, the more we suffer and choose to conciliate them, the more they choose to act belligerently toward us"

en.wikipedia.org...


I meant CURRENT Muslim leaders, not one's from 1000 years ago. So again, name one contemporary leader calling for the extermination of the Jews. Not ones out of the past.

You made your point about historical violence and oppression of Jews by Muslims. I'll just point out that most religious/ethnic minorities have been treated badly and/or demonized by the majoirty. Pray tell, just what did the Catholic conquistadors and the Protestant/Catholic N.A. settlers do to the pagan native peoples?

I don't doubt that there were some pogroms against the Jews by Muslims in the past -- just as there were pogroms by Russian Orthodox, Catholic and Protestants against the Jews (Spanish Inquisition and the Holocaust, maybe?). For that matter there were the religious wars between the different Christian sects. Ever hear about the atrocities of the Thirty Years War, or what the Catholic French did to the French Huguenots and the proscriptions of Protestant England against Its Catholics? How about Christian-on-Muslim violence, i.e. the Crusades? There's a whole lot of Hindu-on-Muslim violence and vice versa, and I'd imagine Buddhist-on-Muslim/vice versa violence has occurred too. Peoples of just about all religions have had religious wars or pogroms against peoples of other religions, but no one is complaining about them. Rather it is only about the Muslims -- and in particular Muslims living in or around petroleum-rich lands. Funny that.

And if you want to portray the beliefs of everyone in a religion by that religion's holy book, then check out the Book of Ezekiel in the Old Testament. It goes on an on about the Jewish god admonishing the Jews to kill/exterminate the Canaanites and such.

You want to paint Muslims and their religion as particularly odious, and use that as a reason for how to do with majority-Muslim countries in terms of international relations, and use it as a reason not to allow them the same rights of "better", more "righteous" Judeo-Christian nations, and claim that these Muslim countries have it in for the Jews in particular. Just about every religious/ethnic group can make a similar stereotype about their least favorite people. It is not reason enough to justify a foreign policy of one nation towards another. However, I acknowledge that such hate-filled bigotry has always been used for just that, and that is what is being used now in the propaganda war by the US and Israel against Iran.

edit on 3-9-2012 by MrInquisitive because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by dontreally

BTW - only decent and just people are allowed to have 'unfair' means at their disposals. In such a world as the one we live in, it is imperative - apparently lost on you - that Islamists not have nuclear weapons. Especially when Shi'ite Islam, the state religion of Iran, believes inducing a state of chaos will precipitate the coming of their messiah - the 12th Imam.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Personally, I don't think anybody should have nukes. Having so many just seems like a really bad idea.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Originally posted by libertytoall

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Please cite sources in these unfounded claims. Please tell us precisely which Muslim countries' leaders are calling for this extermination of Jews.


Is Mohammed a good enough Muslim leader?

"The eleventh century saw Muslim pogroms against Jews in Spain; those occurred in Córdoba in 1011 and in Granada in 1066.[60] In the 1066 Granada massacre, a Muslim mob crucified the Jewish vizier Joseph ibn Naghrela and massacred about 4,000 Jews."



And where exactly in the Koran does it call for this extermination? Could you please provide the passage # and even the quote if you have it?

The Hadith says "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews , when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews."

(According to Schweitzer and Perry, the hadith are "even more scathing (than the Quran) in attacking the Jews")

"The Quran associates Jews above all with rejection of God's prophets including Jesus and Muhammad, thus explaining their resistance to him personally. (Cf. Surah 2:87–91; 5:59, 61, 70, and 82.) It states that they are, together with outright idolators, the worst and most inveterate enemies of Islam, and thus will not only suffer eternally in Hell but in this world will be the most degraded of the Peoples of the Book, below even Christians, everywhere."

"During his wanderings, Maimonides also wrote The Yemen Epistle, a famous letter to the Jews of Yemen, who were then experiencing severe persecution at the hands of their Muslim rulers. In it, Maimonides describes his assessment of the treatment of the Jews at the hands of Muslims:

... on account of our sins God has cast us into the midst of this people, the nation of Ishmael [that is, Muslims], who persecute us severely, and who devise ways to harm us and to debase us.... No nation has ever done more harm to Israel. None has matched it in debasing and humiliating us. None has been able to reduce us as they have.... We have borne their imposed degradation, their lies, their absurdities, which are beyond human power to bear.... We have done as our sages of blessed memory have instructed us, bearing the lies and absurdities of Ishmael.... In spite of all this, we are not spared from the ferocity of their wickedness and their outbursts at any time. On the contrary, the more we suffer and choose to conciliate them, the more they choose to act belligerently toward us"

en.wikipedia.org...


I meant CURRENT Muslim leaders, not one's from 1000 years ago. So again, name one contemporary leader calling for the extermination of the Jews. Not ones out of the past.


"On January 9, the Mufti Muhammad Hussein presented the murder of Jews by Muslims as a religious Islamic goal while celebrating the 47th anniversary of the PA's Fatah faction."

" 73% of Palestinians think it is authentic, and where they live Islamic jihadists are indeed killing Jews.

""Palestinian Television continued over the weekend to re-broadcast excerpts from a Friday sermon in the Zayed bin Sultan Aal Nahyan mosque in Gaza. Translation supplied by The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI): 'The Jews are Jews, whether Labor or Likud... They do not have any moderates or any advocates of peace. They are all liars... they are the terrorists. They are the ones who must be butchered and killed, as Allah the Almighty said: 'Fight them: Allah will torture them at your hands, and will humiliate them and will help you to overcome them, and will relieve the minds of the believers...' "

"Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leaders quote Prophet Muhammad at al-Azhar conference: "O Muslim, this is a Jew behind me, come and kill him"

"MODERATE" MUSLIM TUNISIANS GREET HAMAS LEADER WITH CHANTS OF “KILL THE JEWS!”

"Muslim Brotherhood spokesmen, as well as Palestinian guest speakers, made explicit calls for Jihad and for liberating the whole of Palestine. Time and again, a Koran quote vowing that "one day we shall kill all the Jews" was uttered at the site. "

"Iran Ayatollah: “Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel…”

youtu.be...
youtu.be...
youtu.be...

I don't know how anyone can see Israel as the aggressor. Look at the mentality all around them..
edit on 3-9-2012 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   
I heard something like Iran, on average, starts a war every 100 odd years and the US start a war, again on average, every 1.5 years?

Yet we don't question the US's stockpile of WMD's..

On top of that the US has been trying to keep Iran and North Korea apart for years, yet now that the UN has backed Iran into a corner they've had no choice... This is a problem that occurs a lot when there's an 'intervention', The taliban may not have gathered any power what so ever if the US hadn't gone on a witch hunt for them.

Stop foreign intervention unless it's a more competent UN peacekeeping corp. It has an opposite effect where ever the west stick there fat noses.



posted on Sep, 3 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by iRoyalty
I heard something like Iran, on average, starts a war every 100 odd years and the US start a war, again on average, every 1.5 years?

Yet we don't question the US's stockpile of WMD's..

On top of that the US has been trying to keep Iran and North Korea apart for years, yet now that the UN has backed Iran into a corner they've had no choice... This is a problem that occurs a lot when there's an 'intervention', The taliban may not have gathered any power what so ever if the US hadn't gone on a witch hunt for them.

Stop foreign intervention unless it's a more competent UN peacekeeping corp. It has an opposite effect where ever the west stick there fat noses.


I would argue if the US did not get involved in many of it's conflicts the world would be a more dangerous place. There's a reason "the west" and more specifically the USA has so many bases across the world. If they didn't the world would ignite like a big powder keg. If the US ever butts out of it feel free to live on the DMZ between North and South Korea. The only thing that has kept that area from all out chaotic war is the intervention of US forces.
edit on 3-9-2012 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by libertytoall

I would argue if the US did not get involved in many of it's conflicts the world would be a more dangerous place. There's a reason "the west" and more specifically the USA has so many bases across the world. If they didn't the world would ignite like a big powder keg. If the US ever butts out of it feel free to live on the DMZ between North and South Korea. The only thing that has kept that area from all out chaotic war is the intervention of US forces.


Glad to see you've drunk the military-industrial-complex kool-aid. I think millions of Iraqis and Afghans would beg to differ with you about the US keeping the world safer and more peaceful. Moreover, you know who the biggest arms exporter is? The US. And the amount sold tripled from $20 billion to $60 billion from 2010 to 2011. You don't think selling arms around the world helps to produce powder kegs?

The "peaceful" US helps to maintain peace throughout the world, huh? What a load. We destroyed Iraq. 40 years ago we destroyed much of Viet Nam. We destabilize governments we don't like and install oppressive dictatorships that will do business with American corporations. We use depleted uranium (DU) munitions -- which are de facto dirty bombs and hence, by the US government's own definition, WMDs. The US accused Jose Padilla of planning on making a dirty bomb and charged him with some crime of intent to use a WMD. But the US has sewn Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan with them. The US marines destroyed the town of Fallujah as an act of collective punishment in retribution for three US mercenaries killed there. That town now has astronomical birth-defect rates -- likely caused by DU munitions. Never mind that the US forced the people out of that city and then went on to destory it, in contravention of International laws.

Never mind all the kidnapping, torture and murder of supposed "terrorists" -- some of whom, including murder victions, have since been proven to have been innocent -- by the US. This includes innocent citizens of other countries, including Canada, who have been kidnapped and then sent to countries we know torture, including Syria.

You're either ignorant, deluded or a Pentagon/Langley sock puppet, if you think the US is a force for peace and good in the world.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by libertytoall

"On January 9, the Mufti Muhammad Hussein presented the murder of Jews by Muslims as a religious Islamic goal while celebrating the 47th anniversary of the PA's Fatah faction."

" 73% of Palestinians think it is authentic, and where they live Islamic jihadists are indeed killing Jews.

""Palestinian Television continued over the weekend to re-broadcast excerpts from a Friday sermon in the Zayed bin Sultan Aal Nahyan mosque in Gaza. Translation supplied by The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI): 'The Jews are Jews, whether Labor or Likud... They do not have any moderates or any advocates of peace. They are all liars... they are the terrorists. They are the ones who must be butchered and killed, as Allah the Almighty said: 'Fight them: Allah will torture them at your hands, and will humiliate them and will help you to overcome them, and will relieve the minds of the believers...' "

"Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood leaders quote Prophet Muhammad at al-Azhar conference: "O Muslim, this is a Jew behind me, come and kill him"

"MODERATE" MUSLIM TUNISIANS GREET HAMAS LEADER WITH CHANTS OF “KILL THE JEWS!”

"Muslim Brotherhood spokesmen, as well as Palestinian guest speakers, made explicit calls for Jihad and for liberating the whole of Palestine. Time and again, a Koran quote vowing that "one day we shall kill all the Jews" was uttered at the site. "

"Iran Ayatollah: “Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel…”

youtu.be...
youtu.be...
youtu.be...

I don't know how anyone can see Israel as the aggressor. Look at the mentality all around them..
edit on 3-9-2012 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)


I guess I should have said more explicitly Muslim political leaders -- as in leaders of the country. I could go and grab quotes or videos of Israeli Rabbis calling the Arabs insects and vermin, but this proves nothing more than that there are some vary hateful rhetoric by the special interests. This comment pertains to the first video and the quotes you provided. Never mind that I a going to take the translation of this video -- obviously by a pro-zionist source -- with a grain of salt. Like UFO videos, I don't take everything on Youtube as ground truth.

The same goes for the second video of the Palestinian's kid show, in which they are talking hateful rhetoric. But assuming the translation is true, I have no problem with it since the IDF has no problem bombing apartments full of children and using children as human shields, so the Palestinian children should be taught who their enemy is. I'd assume if the European Jews in WWII had tv/radio broadcasting available to them, you would be ok with them having children's programming that taught the children to fear and hate Nazis. I'd assume the children of most all of occupied Europe in WWII were told/taught to hate and fear the Nazis/Germans. Well Palestine is an occupied territory and the IDF actually practices techniques developed by the Waffen SS when putting down the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. It's fair game for an oppressed people to teach their children to fear and hate their oppressors -- seems only natural, in fact.

As for the third video, it's just some American ex-Pentagoner who is now a media consultant saying how bad Hamas is and that all Hamas wants to do is kill Jews. These same media consultants all claimed that Iraq had WMDs too, so we know what the words of such propagandists are worth. I really don't understand why you included this video as evidence.

I'm still looking for you to provide me with one quote of a political leader of a Muslim country calling for the killing and/or extermination of Jews. No doubt some spout some nasty rhetoric, but then what country is currently calling for an attack on Iran? Think its The Jewish state of Israel.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrInquisitive

Originally posted by libertytoall

I would argue if the US did not get involved in many of it's conflicts the world would be a more dangerous place. There's a reason "the west" and more specifically the USA has so many bases across the world. If they didn't the world would ignite like a big powder keg. If the US ever butts out of it feel free to live on the DMZ between North and South Korea. The only thing that has kept that area from all out chaotic war is the intervention of US forces.


Glad to see you've drunk the military-industrial-complex kool-aid.

I don't deny their is an enormous military-industrial complex. With that comes higher risk of abuse but overall the US military has kept the world more peaceful. The Iraq war was a prime example of abuse of the system taking place but you can't wash away all the good that's been done because of a couple rogue leaders.


I think millions of Iraqis and Afghans would beg to differ with you about the US keeping the world safer and more peaceful. Moreover, you know who the biggest arms exporter is? The US. And the amount sold tripled from $20 billion to $60 billion from 2010 to 2011. You don't think selling arms around the world helps to produce powder kegs?

I think that depends if these are sales to legitimate places or not. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Oman are responsible for the majority of those sales and the sales consisted of warplanes and missile defense systems. In this case I don't see it as a good example of producing a powder keg. I mean most of it was missile defense.. Can you come up with something better?


The "peaceful" US helps to maintain peace throughout the world, huh? What a load. We destroyed Iraq. 40 years ago we destroyed much of Viet Nam. We destabilize governments we don't like and install oppressive dictatorships that will do business with American corporations.

Don't they have to be somewhat oppressive if the people are being somewhat rebellious and violent? Iraq and Vietnam aren't the only wars the US has been in. Did you forget saving the world in WWII? How about countless missions in south America and Africa to remove brutal drug lords and murderous dictators? How about Korea? How about stopping Saddam in the first Gulf war from taking over Kuwait? When Turkey invaded Cypress? The Congo? The Philippines, Panama, or Columbia? Countless rescue operations in Africa? I think you get the point..


We use depleted uranium (DU) munitions -- which are de facto dirty bombs and hence, by the US government's own definition, WMDs. The US accused Jose Padilla of planning on making a dirty bomb and charged him with some crime of intent to use a WMD. But the US has sewn Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan with them. The US marines destroyed the town of Fallujah as an act of collective punishment in retribution for three US mercenaries killed there. That town now has astronomical birth-defect rates -- likely caused by DU munitions. Never mind that the US forced the people out of that city and then went on to destory it, in contravention of International laws.


Myth one: DU is dangerously radioactive
Loads of people claim that depleted uranium is very radioactive. This is not true. Whilst normal uranium is dangerous, depleted uranium is certainly not dangerous. It can be held in the hand for a long period of time without causing any damage, and if eaten it passes through the digestive system normally.

Myth two: Depleted uranium is highly genotoxic
This is not true. Whilst depleted uranium is genotoxic, so is the lead that normal bullets are made from. Lead is actually more genotoxic than depleted uranium.

Myth three: the World health organisation deliberately left facts about the genotoxicity of depleted uranium out of its report on the substance. This is a lie. The report mentions the genotoxic characteristics of depleted uranium twice.


blah blah blah kidnapping Canadians and sending them overseas for torture etc..

Could you provide some evidence of that?



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by MrInquisitive
 





As far as I am concerned, all the remnants of European Jewery and any Jews living in the Middle East who wanted to go, should have been brought to the US after WWII.


Lets just look at the situation of the Palestinians.

Are they a nationality? No. They are another subgroup of Arabs, who in fact didn't exist 60 years ago. 60 years ago, as Zuheir Mohsen noted


Between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese there are no differences. We are all part of ONE people, the Arab nation. Look, I have family members with Palestinian, Lebanese, Jordanian and Syrian citizenship. We are ONE people. Just for political reasons we carefully underwrite our Palestinian identity. Because it is of national interest for the Arabs to advocate the existence of Palestinians to balance Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity exists only for tactical reasons. The establishment of a Palestinian state is a new tool to continue the fight against Israel and for Arab unity.

A separate Palestinian entity needs to fight for the national interest in the then remaining occupied territories. The Jordanian government cannot speak for Palestinians in Israel, Lebanon or Syria. Jordan is a state with specific borders. It cannot lay claim on - for instance - Haifa or Jaffa, while I AM entitled to Haifa, Jaffa, Jerusalem en Beersheba. Jordan can only speak for Jordanians and the Palestinians in Jordan. The Palestinian state would be entitled to represent all Palestinians in the Arab world en elsewhere. Once we have accomplished all of our rights in all of Palestine, we shouldn't postpone the unification of Jordan and Palestine for one second.


He points out a fact. Have you read From Time Immemorial by Joan Peters? Whatever you think about her conclusions, it is indisputable that much of those who today call themselves Palestinians have roots in that land that go back no further than the 1920s or 30's; a great deal of illegal immigration (facilitated by the British) into the western Palestinian mandate (or what was left after the trans-jordan was created for the Arab residents of Palestine), the portion occupied by the Jewish Agency, happened once Jewish funds started developing industry and commerce in the area. Arabs recognized this and took many of those jobs which industry created specifically for the persecuted Jews of the pale of settlement - it was this time when Jews of Poland, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Romania were dealing with frequent pogroms.

In any case, you don't care about that, of course. The Arabs have a "Right" in your mind, to historical Judea, regardless of the religious feelings Jews have held and fostered for Israel for some 2000 years of exile: Galuth - by the way, is how Jews - before their emancipation from the ghettos (that was really nice of Europe, by the way) refer to their time amongst the nations: it was always correlated to their exile from their homeland, from Israel. Unfortunately, however, nobody who isn't Jewish or doesn't sympathize with Jews as they do with the 60 year "Palestinians" feel the same.

So in your mind, the Jews could be 'relocated' to a place they had no desire at all to go to. They wanted Israel. Early Zionists - and Herzl himself - courted the idea of establishing a state in Uganda (which the British controlled) but the early Zionists lambasted any proponent of that measure. The Jews had NO RIGHT to that land - rightfully did they feel that way. But Israel, regardless of the duration of their absence (by the way, Jews have always lived in Israel since their exile, in Jerusalem, Hebron, Gaza, Ashkelon, and Tiberias) has always been held to be rightfully theirs. And you know what? I support their claim.

The Claim of Arabs - and lets not kid ourselves... Palestinians are Arabs. They share the same language, the same culture - particularly with the Syrians, Lebanese and Jordanian Arabs - and same basic religion - Islam. Arabs want state number 23. Jews - even Sephardic Jews - Kurds, they can be ignored. It's not an issue.

It's absurd that the Palestinians have as many proponents as they do. But then again, this world is ruled by corrupt moral relativists.






How are the Palestinians a contrivance of Arabs/Arabists? Do do realize they are descendants of the Philistines, a Biblical people.


Are you joking?? The Philistines were an AEGEAN people - from CRETE. This is a fact: Link




They have been there since way back when -- and they had the good sense not to challenge Imperial Rome, hence weren't all sold into to slavery or exiled.


Now you're inventing history?? LOL!!! Holy crap that is funny. Anyone who knows anything of history knows that after the advent of Islam the Arabs MOVED INTO historical Judea, displacing the local populations.

In any case, the historical philistines weren't even around by the time the Romans came around. To claim that todays Palestinians are Philistines, is a coarse and obscene lie - a myth that you're trying to give justification to by repeating over and over again.
edit on 4-9-2012 by dontreally because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
To just highlight the Jewishness - and Hebrew foundations of - the land of Israel, just look at these Arabizations of Hebrew names:

Town Names Betray Their True History
Finally, Ettinger says that almost all Arab localities in Judea and Samaria have retained Biblical Jewish names, thus reaffirming their Jewish roots. Examples include the following:

* Anata is Biblical (and contemporary) Anatot, the dwelling of the Prophet Jeremiah.
* Batir is Biblical (and contemporary) Beitar, the headquarters of Bar Kochba, the leader of the Great Rebellion against the Roman Empire, which was suppressed in 135CE.
* Beit-Hur is the biblical (and contemporary) Beit Horon, site of Judah the Maccabee's victory over the Assyrians.
* Beitin is biblical (and contemporary) Beit El, a site of the Holy Ark and Prophet Samuel's court.
* Bethlehem is mentioned 44 times in the Bible and is the birth place of King David.
* Beit Jalla is biblical (and contemporary) Gilo, in southern Jerusalem, where Sennacherib set his camp, while besieging Jerusalem.
* El-Jib is biblical (and contemporary) Gibeon, Joshua's battleground known for his command to stop the sun and moon (Joshua 10:12).
* Jaba' is the biblical (and contemporary) Geva, site of King Saul’s son Jonathan’s victory over the Philistines.
* Jenin is the biblical (and contemporary) Ein Ganim, a Levite town within the tribe of Issachar.
* Mukhmas is biblical (and contemporary) Mikhmash, residence of Jonathan the Maccabee and site of King Saul's fortress.
* Seilun is biblical (and contemporary) Shilo, a site of Joshua's tabernacle and the Holy Ark and Samuel's youth.
* Tequa is biblical (and contemporary) Tekoa, hometown of the Prophet Amos.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Has anyone ever considered that Israel might not have Nuclear weapons and just perpetuates the idea for it's own gain. I'm not really clued up on this so forgive me, but it could be a bluff on a huge scale, they won't confirm or deny they have them to my knowledge, and because they haven't signed the non-proliferation treaty, they don't have to answer to anyone. So could they be bluffing?






top topics



 
81
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join