Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,507
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    For discussion>>>


    Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet: Jeffrey Blankfort

    Interview by Kourosh Ziabari

    Jeffrey Blankfort is an American photojournalist, radio producer and Middle East analyst. He is a well-known pro-Palestinian activist whose articles and writings have appeared on Counter Punch, Voltairenet, Palestine Think Tank, Dissident Voice and many other publications.

    He currently hosts radio programs on KZYX in Mendocino, CA and KPOO in San Francisco. Blankfort was formerly the editor of the Middle East Labor Bulletin and co-founder of the Labor Committee of the Middle East. In February 2002, he won a lawsuit against the Zionist organization Anti-Defamation League (ADL) which was found to have been spying on the American citizens critical of Israel and its expansionistic policies.

    Jeffrey joined me in an exclusive interview to discuss the influence of Israeli lobby on the decision-makers of the U.S. government, Israel’s illegal, underground nuclear program, the prospect of Israeli – Palestinian conflict and the imminent threat of an Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
    Blankfort is quite outspoken in his criticism of the apartheid regime of Israel and believes that Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of our planet.

    Kourosh Ziabari: In your article “The Israel Lobby and the Left: Uneasy Questions”, you elaborately explore the dominance of Israeli lobby over the U.S. administration and cite good examples of the influence of well-off Zionists on the multinational companies and mainstream media in America. My question is that, what are the root causes of this enormous power and immense wealth which the Zionists have possessed?
    How did the Jews take over the vast resources of power and money that has made them capable of framing, modifying and overturning the political equations in the United States?


    Jeffrey Blankfort: That question requires a long and complicated answer. In short, an important, well organized segment of the American Jewish community emerged after World War II that has been dedicated to the establishment and prospering of a Jewish state in historic Palestine in which the lives and well being of the indigenous Palestinian Arabs were of no consequence.

    That this segment did not and has never represented the majority of American Jews has been more than been made up for by its concerted activity on Israel’s behalf in every critical sector of U.S. society and at every level of the nation’s political life.

    Its success would not have been possible, however, were it not for the fact that within its ranks have been a sizeable number of wealthy Jewish businessmen who have been quite willing to expend the funds necessary to either purchase the support of the U.S. Congress as well as virtually all of the state legislatures or intimidate Israel’s would-be critics into silence.

    Well before the birth of the first Zionists, Jewish bankers and capitalists had established themselves in Europe and the United States so it was not surprising that a number of them, beginning with Lord Rothschild in the early part of the century, became supporters of the Zionist project. Now, far and away, they make up the largest segment of individual donors to both political parties.
    The media, as could be expected, was one of its primary targets, and that avowedly pro-Israel interests, although not exclusively Jewish, such as Rupert Murdoch, now thoroughly dominate it at every level is, unfortunately proved on a daily basis.

    While there should be no question that this Israel support network, euphemistically described as a “lobby,” has been a major force in shaping U.S. Middle East policies overall, and the determinant factor in dealing with the Israel-Palestine conflict, its power has its limits. While it was able, through its agents in the White House and the Pentagon, to push the U.S. into a war on Iraq, it has yet to get Washington to bomb Iran or, apparently, to sanction an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities. It is clear that there are important elements within the Pentagon as well as the intelligence agencies which know that an attack by either the U.S. or Israel on Iran would more likely than not lead to a global catastrophe.

    KZ: In your articles, you’ve alluded to the conflicts and struggles between the U.S. and Israel administrations during the past decades in which the U.S. Presidents, starting from Richard Nixon, tried to curb the expansionistic policies of Israel and bring about an improved living condition for the oppressed nation of Palestine. Should you believe that there have been such efforts on the side of U.S. administration, what has led to their failure, having in mind that they’ve repeatedly proclaimed their commitment to the security of Israel?

    JB: There has not been the slightest interest on the part of any US president, I suspect, in improving the living conditions for the Palestinians. Halting Israeli expansion and getting Tel Aviv to withdraw from all the territories it conquered in 1967 has been seen as being in the U.S. national interest.

    All the past efforts have failed because none of the presidents have been willing to spend the domestic political capital that would be necessary to force an Israeli withdrawal and particularly so when they know their efforts will be opposed by the overwhelming majority of both houses of Congress irrespective of party affiliations as well as by the Zionist dominated media.
    The only one who made a serious effort and who was willing to confront the Zionist network and Congress was George Bush Sr., when he denied Israel its request for $10 billion in loan guarantees in 1991 and again in 1992 but even he was eventually forced to surrender.

    KZ: Israelis are used to employing the label anti-Semitism to defame and vilify whoever dares criticize their belligerent, aggressive policies and actions. They accuse whoever criticizes them of being anti-Semitist. This makes the politicians and opinion-makers hesitant and demoralized in talking of Israel negatively. Is there any solution to reveal the futility of anti-Semitism label and educate the public that the criticism of Israel is different from criticizing Judaism?

    JB: The allegation of “anti-Semitism” leveled against critics of Israel does not carry the weight it once did but it still is extremely effective, particularly, when the accused is employed by the mainstream media as we have seen recently in the case of Helen Thomas, Octavia Nasr and Rick Sanchez, and in the film industry which has long been a Zionist bastion and which was brought into existence by Jews in the last century, although none at the time were Zionists.
    The power of the accusation of anti-Semitism to bring public figures to their knees will continue to exist until there is a sufficient number of prominent Americans who are willing to challenge it. When that will be I won’t begin to speculate.

    KZ: Although undeclared, it’s confirmed by the Federation of American Scientists that Israel possesses up to 200 nuclear warheads. Being a non-signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Israel has never allowed the IAEA to probe into its nuclear arsenal. We already know about the destiny of Mordecai Vanunu who swapped his freedom with the expression of truth. What’s your viewpoint about the destiny of Israel’s nuclear program? Will Tel Aviv continue enjoying immunity from responsibility?

    JB: As long as the Zionist support network controls Congress and as long as no American president as the courage to even mention the existence of Israel’s nuclear weapons, and while the U.S. continues to hold the purse strings to the UN, Israel will continue to enjoy both immunity and impunity. Had the leadership of the now non-existent anti-nuclear movement in the US, like the “peace movement” not been also Zionist-dominated, there might have been some debate on the issue but because it was, the subject was considered off limits.

    KZ: Let’s turn to Iran. Iran’s is being portrayed by the U.S. mainstream media in a distorted and hypocritical way. Many Americans who even hadn’t heard the name of Iran before are now exposed to a horrifying and dreadful image of the country presented to them by the Zionist-led media outlets. They aren’t aware of the historical civilization of Iran and its unique cultural, social features. How is it possible to unveil the concealed realities of Iran for the Americans who don’t find the proper opportunities to get familiarized with the misrepresented Iran?

    JB: Most American would have a problem finding Iran or any other country in the Middle East, or for that matter, anywhere in the world on a map. They are, for the most part, what can be called “geographically challenged,” as well as historically challenged. There is no antidote to that on the horizon which is why Washington is able to get away with making war on countries and peoples that have never done them harm. If there was a military draft as there was during the Vietnam War, neither the war in Iraq or Afghanistan would have gone on as long as they have and there would be opposition to an attack on Iran.

    When Nixon cleverly halted the draft of 18-year olds in the early 70s, that took the backbone out of the anti-war movement and that is the reason that as hard pressed as the U.S. is today to maintain an army large enough to fight multiple wars, Washington will not bring back the draft. Hiring private contractors became the alternative. Without the fear of 18-year olds that they will be taken into the army, there is no anti-war movement and there is none worthy of the name at this moment in the United States.

    KZ: Many people around the world have come to believe that the media in the United States are unrestrictedly free and can express whatever they want to, without any impediment or obstruction imposed on them by the administration. It’s almost accurate to say that the U.S. government does not have any direct involvement in the media-related affairs; however, there seems to be an implicit pressure on the media not to cross the red lines and violate the unwritten laws, including the criticism of Israel. Can you elaborate on this more precisely?

    JB: It is not the government that prevents criticism from Israel in the media but fear of the repercussions that are guaranteed to follow any genuine criticism be it written or in cartoon form in the U.S. media, even when that criticism is leveled by a Jewish journalist. There are several organizations, most prominently the Anti-Defamation League, CAMERA, and HonestReporting which are able to unleash at a moment’s notice a torrent of emails and letters to the editor, and in certain cases, visits to the offices of an offending newspaper, to make sure those in the media know what they can and cannot write. Since there is no corresponding pressure from Israel’s critics in the public, most editors choose to avoid a fight.
    There was a time when a number of columnists in the mainstream press did write critically of Israel and got away with it. But that was 20 years ago and they are no longer around

    KZ: As the final question, what’s your prediction for the future of Israel? Will it continue to determine the U.S. foreign policy and rule the American politicians? Is it capable of maintaining the blockade of Gaza? After all, will Israel succeed in surviving politically?

    JB: As long as Israel’s supporters, or agents in the U.S., are able to control the U.S. Congress and intimidate whoever happens to be president and as long as those same forces dominate the media there will be no change in the U.S. or in the situation in Gaza. The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, while slowly growing in the U.S., does not have the intensity that it has elsewhere and its targets are limited to what Israel and U.S. companies do in the West Bank so, realistically, there is unlikely to be any meaningful pressure coming from the U.S.
    What Israel does, however, may produce changes that are unpredictable at the moment. Having twice been defeated by Hezbollah, Israeli officials keep threatening another war on Lebanon and since the U.S., Europe and the UN have let them get away with all their previous wars on Lebanon, they are likely to try again.

    Unlike the Palestinians, the Lebanese are able and willing to aggressively fight back as the Israeli soldiers know all too well, from their resistance to occupation and their halting of the vaunted Israeli wehrmacht in 2006. Should Israel find a way to attack Iran, the repercussions from that might be sufficient to send Israel on the road to what will ultimately be viewed as self-destruction. At the moment, thanks to the unconditional backing by the U.S. for all it crimes, and given its arsenal of nuclear weapons, I consider Israel to be the most immediate threat to the future of the planet.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Rutland
    Posts
    603
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    He is a well-known pro-Palestinian activist whose articles and writings have appeared on Counter Punch, Voltairenet, Palestine Think Tank, Dissident Voice and many other publications
    nothing like a bit of unbiased journalism then
    Vote BNP

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    582
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    Actually I don't think Israel's nuclear arsenal is illegal, as it's not a signatory to the UN's nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Furthermore given Iran's recent comments as to "the complete and utter destruction of Israel", and its shift towards nuclear capability, I think Israel concern is more than warranted. Also I never got the impression that Israel was ever defeated by Hezbollah, given it had the crap blown out of it till aside from its leadership, it was non-functioning, certainly its military wing was decimated.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Devon
    Posts
    5,935
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    Quote Originally Posted by DC View Post
    Actually I don't think Israel's nuclear arsenal is illegal, as it's not a signatory to the UN's nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Furthermore given Iran's recent comments as to "the complete and utter destruction of Israel", and its shift towards nuclear capability, I think Israel concern is more than warranted. Also I never got the impression that Israel was ever defeated by Hezbollah, given it had the crap blown out of it till aside from its leadership, it was non-functioning, certainly its military wing was decimated.
    UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Rwanda wasn't singed to the Genocide convention, so that was OK was it?
    Israels nuclear program IS illegal, not least because not being signed to the NPT, and having a protectionist agreement with the US, they refuse to be monitored or inspected. Many of their facilities are outdated and should have closed years ago. They've repeatedly incarcerated, kidnapped and tortured suspected wistle blowers that have worked at their nuclear facilities.
    Irans rhetoric is just that, empty rhetoric without the capability to carry it out. Israel has violate international law by stating an intention to use pre-emptive strikes against any of it's nieghbors in the region that develop nukes. They asked Bush during the transition period for permission to attack Iran, Bush said no. The intention and desire from Israel to attack Iran as soon as possible is a reality. Threatening nuclear attack is an international crime, and the perminent members of the UNSC are mandated to punish and prevent it, which they have not.

    Shift towards nuclear capability?? Evidence please!! As it stands they could't produce enough nuclear energy to light a bulb, they're no nearer nuclear capability than Hawii.
    What is more, Iran has so far been in full compliance with it's NPT obligations. Iran is in compliance of NPT by having all facilities disclosed and open for IAEA monitoring. On Monday September 21, 2009 Iran disclosed to IAEA per NPT terms of 180 day notification of a new nuclear energy facility that was about 18 months away from operation.
    I notice that when demaogues like you spout this rubbish about Iran, you fail to mention that fact that Iran has a legal right to develop civil nuclear energy, and has since 1979 been delibebrately and illegaly prevented from doing so, by the US, at the behest of Israel. You never mention the fact that US reneged on a multi billion $ contract to deliver nuclear energy to Iran, and never returned the money. You never mention the fact that the US is in violation of it's NPT obligations by manufacturing more nuclear weapons and threatening to use them. It's also violatd the NPT by providing Israel with the means to develop and acquire nukes. The UK has also violated the treaty, that scum bag crook Geoff Hoon said he would use nukes against Iraq.
    The UK and France are out of NPT compliance by not assisting Iran for nuclear energy development and then accepting the reasonable terms of full monitoring of nuclear refinement that has had a perfect history for safety and compliance for over 40 years. Israel is not signatory to NPT; they ironically choose what they accuse of Iran: a secret nuclear weapons program estimated at 200 warheads. Israel has also been found by the UN’s Human Rights Council to be in numerous violations of War Crimes against Gaza.
    There are numerous indications of the US illegal handling of their own nuclear weapons......
    Recently and disturbingly, was the US Air Force admission that they “mistakenly” transported six live nuclear warheads attached to ready-to-launch cruise missiles to the US military base that is the jump-off for US supplies to Middle East Operations. This could be a veiled threat of nuclear war against Iran rather than explained by the long chain of continuous “mistakes” required for such an event to occur.Nuclear weapons are protected by detailed protocol and lethal force; they go nowhere by mistake and had a 50 year perfect record for their handling.

    President Obama's UN speach on Wednesday September 23 was full of lies of omission and commission. He claimed Iran was “in pursuit of nuclear weapons” without proof and all existing reports and IAEA inspections confirming Iran is only in pursuit of their legal right to nuclear energy. Mr. Obama continued: "But if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards, if they put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and the security and opportunity of their own people, if they are oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms races in both East Asia and the Middle East," he said, adding, "Then they must be held accountable." President Obama then asked the world leaders to demonstrate to Iran and North Korea that international law is not an "empty promise." "We must insist that the future not belong to fear," he said.
    President Obama is a lying sack of spin, along with the Republican leadership for their silence in the face of these transparent lies. The US is out of compliance of the international standards of NPT, not Iran. The US and Israel threaten regional stability, security, and opportunity for Iran. The US is unaccountable, holding NPT as an empty promise, and actively instilling fear for the future.
    Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon told Reuters: "I think the fact that such brutal thugs, such barbaric dictators like Ahmadinejad, speak in front of the world assembly is a real low point
    Israels foriegn minister claimed "without a doubt" the Islamic Republic is pursuing nuclear weapons, and, "Without wasting time, we must work towards the overthrow of the mad regime of Teheran.”
    The truth of the matter is, Israel is the biggest rogue state on the plant, backed by the only rogue super power on the planet. The two of them have saught to overthrow the Iranian government since 1979.
    "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours ." Steven Roberts

    The likelyhood of you being observed is directly proportionate to the stupidity of your actions.

    Barack Hussein Obama, the president that got Bin Laden!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    582
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveUK View Post
    UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Rwanda wasn't singed to the Genocide convention, so that was OK was it?
    Israels nuclear program IS illegal, not least because not being signed to the NPT, and having a protectionist agreement with the US, they refuse to be monitored or inspected. Many of their facilities are outdated and should have closed years ago. They've repeatedly incarcerated, kidnapped and tortured suspected wistle blowers that have worked at their nuclear facilities.
    Considering that one of the major aims of the UN was the prevention of human rights abuses, all member states are bound to protect human rights, as defined by the Human Rights charter. This isn't often the case obviously, however that doesn't make them any less illegal. Rwanda, or at least it's prior entity, was a member of the UN, and hence had a legal obligation to protect human rights (however in practicality during the Genocide that responsibility fell to the rest of the UN as the state collapsed). This is in contrast to the non-proliferation treaty, which has a voluntary membership. Hence the development of nuclear weapons by a state that is not part of the treaty, is not illegal. Just one of the many fun ways the UN fails to uphold justice and good sense in the world, its rules are voluntary. As to your criticisms of the Israeli nuclear industry, I'd have to see hard evidence, considering the only thing we know about the Israeli nuclear capabilities is that they 'probably' have nuclear weapons, so I don't know where you're getting inside information on the state of their weapons from.

    Irans rhetoric is just that, empty rhetoric without the capability to carry it out.
    Judging from their apparently hostile nuclear development, and their research into long range ballistic missiles, that rhetoric may soon be far from empty.

    Israel has violate international law by stating an intention to use pre-emptive strikes against any of it's nieghbors in the region that develop nukes.
    Please quote me the Government statement which Israel declared a first strike policy against other nuclear armed states, and which international law it violates.
    They asked Bush during the transition period for permission to attack Iran, Bush said no.
    Link please.

    The intention and desire from Israel to attack Iran as soon as possible is a reality.
    I don't think they should really wait around for a nuclear armed state, which has declared its intention to attack, to make the first move.

    Threatening nuclear attack is an international crime, and the perminent members of the UNSC are mandated to punish and prevent it, which they have not.
    Please quote me the threats to use nuclear attacks.
    Shift towards nuclear capability?? Evidence please!! As it stands they could't produce enough nuclear energy to light a bulb, they're no nearer nuclear capability than Hawii.
    Yet. But to ignore its growing nuclear development is simply ignorant, and at odds with the international community you so love.

    What is more, Iran has so far been in full compliance with it's NPT obligations. Iran is in compliance of NPT by having all facilities disclosed and open for IAEA monitoring. On Monday September 21, 2009 Iran disclosed to IAEA per NPT terms of 180 day notification of a new nuclear energy facility that was about 18 months away from operation.
    Then why do they remain under UN sanctions?

    I notice that when demaogues like you spout this rubbish about Iran, you fail to mention that fact that Iran has a legal right to develop civil nuclear energy, and has since 1979 been delibebrately and illegaly prevented from doing so, by the US, at the behest of Israel.
    I don't think Israel has asked the US to protect it from nuclear armed states, and I seriously doubt that Israeli pressure is what is driving US foreign policy against Iran.

    You never mention the fact that US reneged on a multi billion $ contract to deliver nuclear energy to Iran, and never returned the money. You never mention the fact that the US is in violation of it's NPT obligations by manufacturing more nuclear weapons and threatening to use them. It's also violatd the NPT by providing Israel with the means to develop and acquire nukes. The UK has also violated the treaty, that scum bag crook Geoff Hoon said he would use nukes against Iraq.
    The UK and France are out of NPT compliance by not assisting Iran for nuclear energy development and then accepting the reasonable terms of full monitoring of nuclear refinement that has had a perfect history for safety and compliance for over 40 years.
    None of this is relevant. The fact remains that Iran is developing a growing nuclear energy sector, and has at the very least been hostile to international attempts to monitor and observe it.

    Israel is not signatory to NPT; they ironically choose what they accuse of Iran: a secret nuclear weapons program estimated at 200 warheads.
    Therefore its nuclear capabilities are not bound or limited by UN 'Law'. Iran, as a signatory to the NPT, is.

    You do realise that Goldstone later withdrew hist support for the UN resolution 'adopting' his report, and later stated that it was possible parts or the entirety of the report could be incorrect. There are also numerous criticisms of the UNCHR, which advised on the adoption of the report, including the ignoring of evidence showing Hamas' use of human shields.

    There are numerous indications of the US illegal handling of their own nuclear weapons......
    Recently and disturbingly, was the US Air Force admission that they “mistakenly” transported six live nuclear warheads attached to ready-to-launch cruise missiles to the US military base that is the jump-off for US supplies to Middle East Operations. This could be a veiled threat of nuclear war against Iran rather than explained by the long chain of continuous “mistakes” required for such an event to occur.Nuclear weapons are protected by detailed protocol and lethal force; they go nowhere by mistake and had a 50 year perfect record for their handling.
    Again, not really relevant.

    President Obama's UN speach on Wednesday September 23 was full of lies of omission and commission. He claimed Iran was “in pursuit of nuclear weapons” without proof and all existing reports and IAEA inspections confirming Iran is only in pursuit of their legal right to nuclear energy.
    My understanding was that these same reports criticised Iran for failing to fully disclose its nuclear research, hence incomplete reports.

    Mr. Obama continued: "But if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards, if they put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and the security and opportunity of their own people, if they are oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms races in both East Asia and the Middle East," he said, adding, "Then they must be held accountable." President Obama then asked the world leaders to demonstrate to Iran and North Korea that international law is not an "empty promise." "We must insist that the future not belong to fear," he said.
    President Obama is a lying sack of spin, along with the Republican leadership for their silence in the face of these transparent lies. The US is out of compliance of the international standards of NPT, not Iran. The US and Israel threaten regional stability, security, and opportunity for Iran. The US is unaccountable, holding NPT as an empty promise, and actively instilling fear for the future.
    Irrelevant, what does the US position on the NPT have to do with anything?

    Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon told Reuters: "I think the fact that such brutal thugs, such barbaric dictators like Ahmadinejad, speak in front of the world assembly is a real low point
    Israels foriegn minister claimed "without a doubt" the Islamic Republic is pursuing nuclear weapons, and, "Without wasting time, we must work towards the overthrow of the mad regime of Teheran.”
    The truth of the matter is, Israel is the biggest rogue state on the plant, backed by the only rogue super power on the planet. The two of them have saught to overthrow the Iranian government since 1979.
    First of all, both are democratic (or at least Israel is, I personally view the US as more of an aristocracy). Secondly the definition of a rogue state is one which disregards other nations in its international actions. This is not the case with either (The US has many Free Trade agreements, has conceded in a variety of ways, such as to the Kyoto Treaty, as does Israel). In particular Israel has sought, over the last 40 years, to normalise its relations with its neighbours, including Egypt, Jordan and yes, even the PLO. It has surrendered Gaza, the Sinai, and parts of the Golan heights, and is now moving forward to handing over control of major West Bank cities to the PLO, these are not the actions of a rogue state.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Pixels on your screen
    Posts
    6,687
    Thanks
    1,012
    Thanked 950 Times in 699 Posts

    Re: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    "Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet"
    Not in my opinion.

    How about the UN getting hold of the real genocide criminals:
    Sudan's president Omar Al-Bashir is responsible for thousands, maybe millions of deaths in Darfur.

    The world had a good opportunity to detain him in Kenya, but they did not.
    International Court Urges Arrest of Sudanese Leader - BusinessWeek
    So Islam as usual in the form of Al-Bashir gets a pass, but Israel is seen to be a threat to the future of the planet?


    Why not boycott Israel if you hate the Jews so much and switch off your computers?
    Save us all £22,000,000 a day. Leave the EU.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,507
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    Quote Originally Posted by DC View Post
    Actually I don't think Israel's nuclear arsenal is illegal, as it's not a signatory to the UN's nuclear non-proliferation treaty. .
    Why aren't they? If other nations are obliged to, why do they exempt themselves? Usually, if a nation is suspected of having WMD, and will not declare it, nor permit inspection of them, they are seen as a rogue state, and possibly disabled, by force.

    What is the difference?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,507
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    Why not boycott Israel if you hate the Jews so much and switch off your computers?
    Absurd comment which I had hoped we would not see on here, and which, DC has managed to avoid.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Pixels on your screen
    Posts
    6,687
    Thanks
    1,012
    Thanked 950 Times in 699 Posts

    Re: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    Israel, if it were left alone to carry out its own business, without attacks from its neighbours, would not be a threat to anyone at all.
    However, Israel is seen to defend itself when under attack, using diverse methods and innovative responses.

    Unfortunately, we live in a world that loves losers, even when they are wrong.
    The world seems to hate strength for some strange reason, and Israel has a great deal of that.
    Why so much fuss over a country the size of Wales with a population of around 7 million?

    Why not go after the real genociders?:
    Al Shabaab executes teenage girls accused of spying - Telegraph

    Now if Israel had killed those girls it would have been much further up the headlines.
    Why the double standards?
    Save us all £22,000,000 a day. Leave the EU.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    582
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Israel is the most immediate threat to the future of the planet

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Napier View Post
    Why aren't they? If other nations are obliged to, why do they exempt themselves? Usually, if a nation is suspected of having WMD, and will not declare it, nor permit inspection of them, they are seen as a rogue state, and possibly disabled, by force.

    What is the difference?
    Possessing or intending to possess WMDs is not enough to qualify a state as rogue. A nation needs to be seen as acting aggressively and confrontationally to the rest of the international community. Israel's problems are located only within the middle east, and these days only with a few countries that the rest of the International community also has issues with (like Iran and Syria). Israel has also been willing to conform to international standards in a wide range of areas including trade and research. It's current Likud Government, I'll remind you, while it may seem as the more hawkish, is actually unusual for Israel, it usually has a far less conservative coalition in power. Now onto NPTs specifically, being not-party to the NPT means that those states are not usually given aid in nuclear research, even peacefully, and states think twice about selling nuclear materials to them. Granted, much like most of the UN's supposed authority to protect human rights and peace, the NPT is essentially just for show.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •