The media is in a frenzy about Iranian “suspected” nuclear weapon development, with virtually every article and broadcast also referencing Israel’s view.
A free copy of The Catholic Orangemen of Togo for every one who first points out each mainstream media reference to Israel’s own massive illegal arsenal of nuclear weapons.
I don’t anticipate giving away a single book.
The shill for Israel, Wyre Davies speaks of ‘Israel’s top-secret {nuclear} research facility’ at Dimona here but you don’t get the full picture on the nuclear weapons arsenal.
.
‘Uzi Even worked at Israel’s top-secret (nuclear) research facility at Dimona in the Negev Desert for several years.’
.
9 November 2011 Last updated at 15:57
How will Israel try to stop Iran’s nuclear progress?
By Wyre Davies
BBC News, Jerusalem
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15662122
Thanks, Wiz. Think Suhayl deserves your “sorry” more than I do..just saying.
Two areas of interest re. the current financial crisis;
(1) Socialised banks. That is, not government-controlled cash cows for lobby groups to rob, but mutuals. The worst thing Thatcher ever did IMO was to encourage the privatisation of the mutual building societies. Which somehow managed to do banking AND mortgages without inflating a property bubble for the hedge fund and equity slimesters.
.
(2) Identify the very fat cats who are making a fortune out of shorting the Euro/£/$, as well as those betting on the failure of Greece/Italy/you name it; pull them in and roast them over a slow fire until they sign over their dishonest gains. It’s been estimated that enough bubble-generated money to cover the Greek deficit has been exported to foreign property markets – by Greeks.
“Iranians would want to get killed for ayatollas or for Ahmedinijad?
Revolutionary bunch you were refereeing to have long gone.
So I suggest you to ask Iranians (not Iranian regime) whether or not they need nuclear weapons (that is quite expensive) or whether they want government that improves their life and allows them freedom of choice and better social standards?”[sic]
,
Karimov is exporting some specimens these days.
,
Uzbek the Analyst is telling us all; Iranians will not fight! (That is post the carnage that has been unfolding in the area for the last decade, during which millions of souls have been killed, millions more maimed, and more millions made into refugees, evidently these will not be an incentive for every Iranian to come out fighting to death.)
,
Uzbek the Pollster is telling us all based on his comprehensive polling results, he knows what Iranian people want! Not the bomb because;
,
Uzbek the Nuclear engineer, knows that Iranians are churning out nukes! (Based on a feeling in his water.) evidently.
,
Uzbek the Historian pontificates, the revolutionaries in Iran have “long gone” (apparently thirty years is many generations these days.)
,
The emergent pattern of Uzbek’s posts consist of; baseless assumptions, unsubstantiated assertions, customarily followed by his comprehensive denunciations. These are traits of simpletons, and morons, and frankly I have much more pressing tasks than to attempt to either, educate, , or humour him. I hold that Uzbek explain to others about publishing these sentences, and also the reasons for doing so, and his intentions for doing so.
He sounds awfully similar to ziophile trolls and keyboard warriors fighting the good war, and spilling the goyem blood.
Whoops, sorry, Wiz, the reference to Suhayl above was prompted by something nasty called Observer, not you. I shouldn’t have confused it with you, but I did.
Komodo: But I’m not an antisemite, Canspeccy. Much as you would like me to be one. So I guess I’ll take my principled stand on that, while continuing to make it clear that I think Israel sucks onions. Clear?
…However, I know you are taking the piss, and I know that you would not suggest anything detrimental to Zionism, and those too are reasons to dismiss you as an agent provocateur and clown.
I think you are missing something about Canspeccy which has been known about by others for sometime. CanSpeccy likes to attach absurd definitions to words in a Humpty Dumpty like manner and then extrapolate bizzare conclusions about others from his own daft definitions, i.e There has been a lot of genocide going on in Leicester recently. OR Liberal democrats are more fascist than the Nazis if you think about it. OR Liberals like to throw people in jail for merely questioning history therefore there is no such thing as liberty.
.
When he says that you are, according to his definition, an anti-Semite, what CanSpeccy is really trying to say is “Goober Gobble, Goober Gobble, ONE OF US! ONE OF US!”
@ Passerby
.
Your ‘barking’ does not help to strengthen your arguments but make you to look stupid at least. If you have arguments contrary to mine please reveal them and let discuss this as civilised and open minded individuals. Until you change your attitude I have nothing more to add.
.
Good luck with accomplishing your ‘more pressing tasks’.
@ Komodo,
.
Your point about Socialised banks. How do you suggest for banks to run if not to invest in order to return profit? Banks are institutes that holds someone’s money in return for profit (it least this is my understanding of banks). Who will keep money in the banks (savings) if there will be no profit? How banks will return profit if they do not invest someone’s money into something including this all horrible short-selling business? Where banks will get money to finance housing projects? These are the basic questions I think that need to be answered or at least thought through before any suggestions are made.
Of course Suhayl deserves apology but it is unlikely to come from someone who uses such racist and ‘dirty’ accusations. I think it was one of Stalin’s generals who said once that ‘when I have no more arguments I take out my nagan (pistol) and start shooting’.
I agree with you that we are now seeing a clear division between political minds, ie national Military, global economics, Islamic groups on the one hand and people, thinkers, worshippers, humans, on the other. It’s not like you to oversimplify. In Iraq, the first group murdered many of the religious scholars who were alerting the people to the divide and rule tactics being deployed against them.
I have no way of knowing whether this is true in Afghanistan/Pakistan. If it is the case, that’s what the British did in order to cut off the head of Islam in (greater) India. Why would the Deobandi group in the UK be monolithically supportive of the Taliban, and real-politic supporters of UK politicians, if they knew that the US was targetting their own righteous men?
Because they know their religion can survive the limited resources their enemies have to attack them?
So, just because people of political imaginations make alliances, doesn’t mean they have the same long-term aims.
That’s fine for childish political minds which look to short-sighted, short=term gains. They think they can put Islam up by political alliances. But I believe fundamentally that God will only give power to the Muslims when they practise their religion strictly, and unite with their natural friends, instead of allowing themselves to be divided by the carrot and stick of UKUSIS power, meted and doled out to them.
@ Anno.
You said
“But I believe fundamentally that God will only give power to the Muslims when they practise their religion strictly, and unite with their natural friends,”
.
It is somewhat interesting to know who these ‘natural friends’ are? Do not you think that dividing the world into Muslims and Non-Muslims is somewhat that Muslims do first before anything else and that being a Human first of all is more important than anything else?
Thanks for that, Angrysoba. I had realised that Canspeccy was coming at the subject from off the wall, but the suggestion needed attention anyway. True, I haven’t had much to do with him.
And it isn’t just his definition, is it?
He suggested provocatively….
Sorry you received that abuse Suhayl.
Komodo
–
You and others on here should really have realised that, Stephen, Canspeccy and passerby, are just a kind of semi sophisticated hasbara, their mission is to disrupt this blog.
Komodo said: “I reject the definition. I shall continue to reject the definition. Your suggestion is a poisoned pill, designed to associate Quakers with neo-nazis for the purposes of more effective demonisation. They’re all the same, those Quakers… holocaust-deniers, eh?”
Modo, I understand that your old lizard brain doesn’t cut it when it comes to dealing in syllogisms, but for anyone with a functional mammalian neo-cortex, there is no question that widely accepted Jewish authorities include criticism of the state of Israel under the term anti-Semitism.
This is acknowledged by Chomsky, an authority in such matters, surely, in the quote I provided above. Moreover, this is a functional definition as applied by lawmakers in wonderfully politically correct Canada. Thus, for example:
“the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism (CPCCA) released a detailed report on July 7 that … focused a disproportionate amount of effort and resources on what it calls a so-called “new anti-Semitism”: criticism of Israel.” (Source).
So, yes, if you criticize Israel, you are in the same camp as Adolph Hitler. Likewise, if you are a German, or if you like Wagnerian opera.
That Zionists such as Abba Eban and the Jewish lobby in the Canadian parliament wish to conflate criticism of Israel with putting people in gas ovens is, of course, disreputable, as Chomsky notes. But it is done and it has become the basis of law in some jurisdictions. If you doubt this will happen in the UK and elsewhere, I am surprised at your gullibility.
And of course I understand your disappointment at the implications. Calling someone an anti-Semite will no longer have the force it used to. It becomes, potentially, a label of honor.
And where will the lib-lefty be without there arsenal of racially charged epithets? They will be forced to rely on their knowledge of facts and powers of reason, which as we have seen in your case, can be rather slight.
Thanks, all. Your warm (or even scaly reptilian!) solidarity is very much appreciated.
.
Yes, I think Glenn was correct: As well as the demonic mitochondrial hum of Can Speccy, like Captian Howdy in ‘The Amityville Horror’, Steelback-Apostate-Juniper-Tungsten et al is/are with us again. But where is John Paul… Jones?
“their mission is to disrupt this blog.”
.
Wow, didn’t know I had a mission.
.
But if I had, I’d think of it more in terms of discovering whether a liberal-lefty was ever capable of engaging in a dispute without resorting to ad hominem abuse, and if so how they would make out. So far, I have no positive evidence.
Thank you SS for so promptly confirming my thesis about your typical mode of vigorous — um, not debate — emission of epithets.
Only just read it, that was a bit of a low blow on Suhayl, and so inapropriately wrong, what a numpty.
Komodo “The great thing about the interweb is that we’re all the same size, shape, colour, whatever”.
Why is that so great?
Anyway, I happen to know that Canspeccy (and I’m sure she won’t mind me sharing this) is a housewife, mother and part time nail beautician from Hastings. Hey Sandra! How’s the gazebo?
Don’t worry Observer I don’t worry about being insulted by the ignorant and ill informed with a one sided view of the world – in fact I’m quite used to it. One of the very few things on which I agree with Margaret Thatcher was that I don’t mind being insulted as I know I am winning the argument.
Yes, Canspeccy. I looked at your blog and I am now more or less clear where you stand. In the middle of the pavement, pressing EDL (CDL?) leaflets into the hands of any passers-by with slow reflexes. No thanks. Have a nice day.
Technicolour:
‘Komodo “The great thing about the interweb is that we’re all the same size, shape, colour, whatever”.
Why is that so great?’
.
All pixels are equal, and I am an egalitarian.
…but thanks for the info on Canspeccy. Plausible, at least.
Komodo
–
You and others on here should really have realised that, Stephen, Canspeccy and passerby, are just a kind of semi sophisticated hasbara, their mission is to disrupt this blog.
.
Boooooring! If anyone disgrees with me they must have been paid for with the Zionist shekels! insert *loopy-swivel-eyes* emoticon here.
Suhayl: Yes, I think Glenn was correct: As well as the demonic mitochondrial hum of Can Speccy, like Captian Howdy in ‘The Amityville Horror’, Steelback-Apostate-Juniper-Tungsten et al is/are with us again. But where is John Paul… Jones?
.
I think Captain Howdy was from the Exorcist. just being my usual pedantic self.
But if I had, I’d think of it more in terms of discovering whether a liberal-lefty was ever capable of engaging in a dispute without resorting to ad hominem abuse, and if so how they would make out.
.
The usual CanSpeccy schtick. Those lib-lefties are smearing me with ad hominems. Boo hoo hoo! I’m going to cwy!
Canspeccy
Your stuff about Chomsky and anti-semitism is pure nonsense. It can’t be read any other way. It’s already been answered and debunked above. I’m forced to conclude that you’re just dim.
Rastapopoulos say:
.
Canspeccy
.
Your stuff about Chomsky and anti-semitism is pure nonsense.
.
Nonsense? Pure? It was a direct quote. Read it again:
.
“There have long been efforts to identify anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism in an effort to exploit anti-racist sentiment for political ends; “one of the chief tasks of any dialogue with the Gentile world is to prove that the distinction between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism is not a distinction at all,” Israeli diplomat Abba Eban argued, in a typical expression of this intellectually and morally disreputable position (Eban, Congress Bi-Weekly, March 30, 1973). But that no longer suffices. It is now necessary to identify criticism of Israeli policies as anti-Semitism – or in the case of Jews, as “self-hatred,” so that all possible cases are covered.”
.
Chomsky, Necessary Illusions, 1989
.
Is Chomsky an idiot. Is that what you’re saying?
And is the “the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism (CPCCA) just talking rubbish when, according to the Al Jazeera report I linked to above, they speak of a ‘“new anti-Semitism”: criticism of Israel.”’
.
I think what must be bothering you is that Chomsky effectively gutted the anti-Semitism charge by showing that it can mean virtually anything. And for liberals and lefties anti-Semite has for so long has been the dynamite name to call.
.
Oh well, guys, there’s still racist (for whoever happens to be trashing a liberal in argument). And EDL pamphleteer (WTF is the EDL, not a Canadian organization I’m familiar with), that’s a new one on me. But it seems weak.
.
How about this: anti-self exterminatist, referring to those who oppose the extinction of their own race? It has a zing to it. And it goes along with your Craig Murray anti-Zionist line.
In no way would I want to claim a book price I already have both books, but this small resumee shows clearly that Israels nuclear development has evovled, by hook or by crook, with the help of Eisenhower, Norway and France.
If Golda had it her way in 1973, she would have lobbed those nukes and we all be speaking hebrew now.
I shall leave you with the word of the author;’To have or not to have nuclear weapons is a question of human security, as far as the people of the region are concerned, and not one of European racial privilege.”
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/11/2011111075527560230.html
Okay, so which of you people are supporters of Iran getting the bomb?
.
Out of those people, how many have been sworn opponents in your lifetime of ANYONE having the bomb?
.
How many feel that Israel having the bomb is a more dangerous proposition than Iran having the bomb?
Ah, angrysoba, you’re right, I got my demons confused! The legions of Hell will be angry! “How dare he? I’m not Capt’n Howdy, I’m Major Piggie!”
.
You’re correct, too wrt our very own Casaubon. Time to move en masse to Leicester, methinks!
.
In answer to your very simple triad:
1) No.
2) Yes.
3) It is equally dangerous.