Even Keith Weissman, former AIPAC lobbyist, says Netanyahu’s Iran talk is a shuck and jive

by on May 21, 2009 12
0sharesFacebook
0tweetsTwitter
0stumbledStumbleUpon
0sharesReddit
0recommendGoogle

Important piece, picked up by Dan Luban, in which Keith Weissman– formerly of the AIPAC two, indicted under the Espionage statute for allegedly passing secrets to Israel, an indictment now dropped–states that Iran will likely get nukes regardless and it is "sophistry" on Netanyahu's part to insist on the Iranian track when he could do far more for Israel's security by dealing with the Palestinians. More to come later. Got to masticate this one.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Iran, Israel Lobby, Israeli Government

{ 12 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. RowanBerkeley says:
    May 21, 2009 at 4:00 pm

    Your use of the expression "get nukes" is alarmingly imprecise, and suggests that you take it for granted they are planning to build nuclear weapons, which is not what Weissman told Douglas Bloomfield, according to the JPost. He says this, which is ambiguous enough: He believes Iran has the know-how to build a nuclear device, but he doubts it's made the final decision to go ahead with it. Iran may be "a few years or more" away from having an actual weapon and the means for accurate delivery. "However, they would be crazy to test a weapon," he said. "That would essentially unite the world against them. Right now we can't get Russia and China to seriously help us deal with Iran, but if the Iranians tested a weapon, that would change in a flash. I don't think the Iranians are that stupid." http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=124221...

  2. thedhimmi says:
    May 21, 2009 at 5:35 pm

    Weissman makes a lot of sense. It's unfortunate he has been limited in expressing his views, due to the phony case that tied him up for years.

  3. RowanBerkeley says:
    May 21, 2009 at 5:39 pm

    What he's saying is basically completely commonplace.

  4. Ed says:
    May 21, 2009 at 5:49 pm

    For Netanyahu and the American Zionists, best case scenario is a US war against Iran and ultimately, the entirety of Islam in the near term. However, short of this, the Zionists at the very least have succeeded in using the "Islamic threat" to distract Americans form the systematic and socially-engineered transformation of America from a Christian-ethos nation into a Judaized, militant, "Judeo-Christian" nation. Whether the world war against Islam comes next year or next decade, the Jewish Apparatus and its treacherous gentile partners are well on their way to accomplishing the subordination of Christianity in America to the Jewish ethic and value system, which is just another milestone in their fascist, Jewish-supremacist long-game.

  5. hass says:
    May 21, 2009 at 6:36 pm

    "President Bush's demand that Iran halt all nuclear enrichment before we would talk with the regime was an excuse not to talk at all," Weissman said THis is quite revealing. The Iranians had made several compromise offers that would have address any legitimate concerns about nuclear weapons proliferation (for example, the offer to open their nuclear program to multinational participation, a suggestion endorsed by a special committee of the IAEA and a few American experts too) but these Iranian offers were dismissed without consideration, and instead the demands on Iran were constantly increased. This suggests that the whole nuclear weapons thing is just a pretext, and a cover for another agenda, just as "WMDs In Iraq" was a distraction.

  6. rfjk says:
    May 21, 2009 at 6:36 pm

    That Netanyahu was "shucking and jiving" I never believed otherwise. In fact, it can be taken as a measure of just how weak he and his government actually are.

  7. hass says:
    May 21, 2009 at 6:38 pm

    Nothing "phoney" about someone handing secret government documents to a representative of a foreign government. If he had given the information to someone from Iran, would you say the same thing?

  8. thedhimmi says:
    May 21, 2009 at 8:30 pm

    Obviously you know nothing about the case. There were no secret documents handed over to a foreign government. Idiots like you make statements without any knowledge of the facts.

  9. hass says:
    May 21, 2009 at 9:48 pm

    Yeah sure — I guess a classified Presidential Directive and other sensitive documents that Franklin gave the AIPAC staffers who then passed them onto Israeli handlers was just dandy. In fact the AIPACers don't deny doing so — they just say that passing classified US documents to Israel is "routine" and so should not be prosecuted. And, the charges against them were only dropped because they threatened to further damage US national security by exposing more classified information during their trial, not because there was no substance to the charges.

  10. Christian-socialist says:
    May 22, 2009 at 3:27 am

    I don't know why Israeli-leaders and US imperialist leaders are so anti-scientific, even in serious matters like Nuclear Bombs. We have to be truthful and evidence-based. The real evil state in the Middle East which wants to nuke all other states is Israel. Israeli fascists have 300 nuclear bombs, and US Imperialism has 10,000 nuclear bombs. US Imperialism killed 1.3 million iraquis and Iran hasn't killed anybody. Let's be scientifical and truthful. The deceiptful argument that US government authorities love to use like: "I believe Iran has nuclear ambitions" is not an evidence that Iran has nuclear bombs. I believe i can walk on water, and I believe that pigs can fly. .

  11. Paul says:
    May 22, 2009 at 11:45 am

    Netanyahu has got a lot of balls to come here and tell the president to get serious with Iran. Last time I checked, Iran is not the problem. Even after the new president is elected the Neocon wishes are still being executed. What is the return we receive from Israel? Why does Congress protect Israel every turn in the road? Here is a president who is trying to make significant steps for peace and the Israeli leaders balk at his efforts.

  12. Huh? says:
    May 22, 2009 at 3:47 pm

    So explain to me this great difference between "Christianity in America" and the "facist, Jewish-supremacist long-game."

Leave a Reply