Netanyahu said Iran was 3-5 years away from nuclear capability– back in ’95!

Back in 1995, Benjamin Netanyahu published a scary book called Fighting Terrorism: How Democracies Can Defeat the International Terrorist Network that says that radical Islam is trying to conquer the west and extend Muslim rule. I carried a copy out with me to Jordan. From page 121:

“The best estimates at this time place Iran between three and fve years away from possessing the prerequisites required for the independent production of nuclear weapons. After this time, the Iranian Islamic republic will have the ability to construct atomic weapons without the importation of materials or technology from abroad.”

But in Jeffrey Goldberg’s scary Atlantic piece warning that Israel is preparing to strike Iran in the next year, and he can understand why, he says that Israel believes Iran is one to three years away from “nuclear breakout capability,” the point that Netanyahu warns about above many years ago.

So who do you believe? Netanyahu in ’95 or Netanyahu today? Shouldn’t Goldberg have passed along Netanyahu’s 1995 warning to readers and suggested that he’s a Bibi who cries wolf? Goldberg said he’d spent years working on the piece. Maybe he should have read Netanyahu’s back pages.

One has to question Netanyahu’s sincerity because Israel uses this alleged threat. It uses it to distract the world from its oppression of Palestinians, and from Obama’s pressure on it to stop settlement activities. Netanyahu has never wanted to stop settlement activity. He needs an existential threat to turn attention away.

I’m traveling in Jordan, but when I get back I plan to compare the Netanyahu book (published by Farrar, Straus & Giroux by the way, by Bibi’s friend the late Roger Straus.) and the Goldberg piece more closely. I notice that Netanyahu refers to “annihilation,” a recurring word in the Goldberg, and continually compares the Iranians to the Nazis. Auschwitz is the recurring point in the Goldberg. Is this paranoia masquerading as policy or simply manipulation? Israeli didn’t strike at Iran back in the late 90s; it’s always wanted us to do the dirty work.
 

These folks have been trying to wind us up for a long time.

About Philip Weiss

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

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

  1. Similarly, dissenters have predicted that the US or Israel would be bombing Iran any day now for three years, no?

    We all cry wolf.

    • To form a realistic view of Iran, its necessary to study Iran’s actions, policies, governance, inter-actions with others in the region.

      In the late 90′s, I had Iranian landlords (wife Iranian born, husband American). We had basically convivial relations. They described their experience of Iran as normal, not fanatic, civil, families, communities.

      Two years ago, an AFSC representative came to our local shul to describe Iranian life, basically a description of how Iran was benign, how the US had nothing to fear, and that even Israel had nothing to fear from Iran.

      Its false. There is much to fear. Iran does possess nuclear material that is relatively close to nuclear military capacity, that they are continuing to enrich beyond the concentration needed for nuclear power. They do possess and demonstrate long-range ballistic missile delivery capability. They train, fund and some plausibly say maintain proxy and compliant militias and/or allies on four Israeli fronts (Lebanon, Syria, West Bank, Gaza).

      And, unlike Iraq in the 90′s (and later), they are not successfully contained, but expanding their military/political influence.

      Eyes wide open. Making good choices, not compelled by aggression, nor by pollyanna eyes.

      • James North says:

        Richard: On a website where the other contributors can drive one dizzy with all their links, articles, and proofs, once again you make important assertions about matters of war and peace based on nothing more than “some plausibly say.” Who are these “some”? How do you expect us to take you seriously?

        • MRW says:

          James and others,

          Don’t miss this radio show of Jeffrey Blankfort interviewing Grant Smith on the latest (summer 2010) declassified and unsealed Senate Foreign Relations Committee documents.
          Israel Lobby’s 50 Year Campaign to Subvert Free Speech in America
          link to pulsemedia.org

        • Mooser says:

          Mr. North, what hubris! You would spit in the face of God hisownself, wouldn’t you? Links? Witty don’t need no stinkin links!

      • Antidote says:

        Israel is number 4 among nuclear powers, without ever having signed a treaty. It’s the most militaristic country in the ME, with a long history of aggression against its Arab/Muslim neighbors (unlike Iran before and after the Revolution). It’s government is currently an extreme right-wing coalition, and the political power of the ultra-right and religious, who are determined to hold on to every inch of Greater Israel, at any cost, to fulfill the destiny of the Jewish nation, as they understand it, has grown to the point where neither Netanyahu, even if he wanted to, or Obama seem able to stop them.

        Are you afraid of Israel’s nuclear arsenal being/getting into their hands?

        I am.

        • annie says:

          i am too Antidote. one of the fundamental differences between iran and israel is israel is continually pushing for war in an outspoken way. it doesn’t even have to have the means because it wants it’s bigger proxy to do it for them and has influence in all the right places. israel is constantly agitating for war in a way incomparable w/iran. ahmajinedad can make an illusion to a time when the regime in israel will be gone w/the winds of time and it becomes a bone to chew on for years and years and debated over whereas israel and so many israel supporters offer us fresh new quotes weekly, the minions never stop whereas iranians aren’t writing books and being quoted day in and day out w/new threatening rhetoric.

          i’m sick of america being israel patsy and i’m sick of the constant fear mongering from everyone from bibi to goldberg to dick witless .

        • Kathleen says:

          Setting the stage for seven years. Soon after the invasion of Iraq Reuel marc Gerecht, Bolton, Ledeen and team started repeating the “Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map” hooey. Referring to Irans nuclear program as a nuclear ‘weapons” program. This was allowed to be repeated on Terry Gross’s Fresh Air, Neil Conan’s Talk of the Nation (heard Bolton on that program repeating all of these unsubstantiated claims) Neil Conan did not challenge him once. Repeated on Hardball, this Week, by Scott Simon, Face the Nation, David Gregory, Diane Rehm. Hell it was being repeated every where. So often that the large percentage of Americans began to believe that Iran all ready posessed nuclear weapons. HMMMMMM wonder why.

          Ledeen, Feith, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Netanyahu, Wurmsers, Bolton etc know this and they know it well
          “”If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it….”

          They have set the stage.

        • Antidote says:

          It’s mind-boggling how they keep repeating lies, and the very same lies they spread about Iraq. You’d think nobody would even give them air time. Instead journalists just sit there, as if on drugs. Same in Canada. I still can’t get over the firing of Helen Thomas.

        • Citizen says:

          The average American could care less that Thomas was erased; they never even got annoyed when their former president Carter, known around the world for his efforts in behalf humanity, was smeared as a cheap jew-hater. Their famous Press mirrored them.

        • RoHa says:

          Thos of out here in the real world regard Carter as the only one who has gone from the mire of the U.S. Presidency to greater achievements.

      • eljay says:

        >> Making good choices, not compelled by aggression …

        Yes, let’s not make choices compelled by aggression. Let’s see what other nations are doing and let’s base our non-hypocritical choices regarding Iran on the benchmarks set by those nations. As examples, let’s pick…oh, I don’t know, let’s say Israel and the United States.

        Although neither is a signatory to the NPT, both have substantial nuclear arsenals. Both spend massive amounts of money every year on militarization. Both are aggressor nations with offensive (in both senses of the word) policies of “pre-emptive self-defence”. Both have been involved in regime change. Both employ torture and targetted assassinations. Both meddle in the internal affairs of sovereign states. Both have demonstrated blatant disregard for international law and human rights.

        Seems to me Iran, Israel and the U.S. are more alike than some would prefer to admit. A good choice, therefore – one not compelled by aggression (or jealousy) – would be to cease and desist with the existential threats against Iran. It’s time for “better wheels” and “new narratives”.

        Amen. ;-)

      • Shingo says:

        “Eyes wide open. Making good choices, not compelled by aggression, nor by pollyanna eyes.”

        So in spite of every Iranian you have met explaining the reality fo Iran to you, you have rejected their accounts on the basis of what you believe, which is itself based on ignrance.

        That’s eyes wide shut.

        • Your joking of course Shingo.

          The message is that Iranians are people, human beings. Israelis are people, human beings.

          The policies and actions of their government are designed for a combination of legitimate self-defense and serving their communities, and harmful to cruel extension of their power.

          To ignore that Iran is developing extensive military capacity, and executes aggressive foreign policy, and suppressive internal political policy, is ignorant. (In one meaning of the term.)

          You infer a lot about my views that are entirely innaccurate. Its sad.

        • Shingo says:

          Why would I be joking Witty?

          “The message is that Iranians are people, human beings. Israelis are people, human beings.”

          That is not a message Witty, that’s a statment of the obvious, like delcalrign the earth is rond. It doesn’t need a message.

          “To ignore that Iran is developing extensive military capacity, and executes aggressive foreign policy, and suppressive internal political policy, is ignorant.”

          Your such an isufferable pompous narcicist aren’t you? Yes Iran is developing extensive military capacity, but they are not developing nukes. No they do not executes aggressive foreign policy, they look after their interests in teh region. Israel and the US executes aggressive foreign policy, not Iran.

          Like I said, Iran has not attacked or invaded any country in 270 years. The same can not be said for Israel and the US.

          There is only one thing to infer from your views, that they are derranged.

        • Iran has attacked Israel through proxies.

          And, it is unknown if Iran is developing nukes or not.

        • Mooser says:

          Your joking

          You’re an idiot. How the hell can we take you seriously when you make the most elementary spelling mistakes over and over? Are you a cross-grained ideolog (sic)?

        • Chaos4700 says:

          Yes, Witty. And Ahmedinejad is good friends with Osama bin Laden.

          We’ve heard this story before, Witty. You guys told it in 2003, we invaded Iraq and five thousand American soldiers are now dead.

          You’re not satisfied yet?

        • Donald says:

          Israel was a close friend of the Shah regime and SAVAK, his secret police. Israel was heavily involved in the Iran/Contra affair–people gloss over this, but the attempt to make allies of “moderate” Iranians was in the hopes of changing the government, and somehow I suspect (Chomsky talks about this in “The Fateful Triangle”, I think) that the hope was to establish a pro-US/Israeli faction that would stage a coup.

        • potsherd says:

          Israel has attacked Iran through proxies. And it is known that Israel has already developed nukes, ready for deployment.

          Which country is the threat?

        • lyn117 says:

          When did Iran attack Israel through proxies? What proxies are you referring to? Please provide factual evidence that said proxy was in fact a proxy.

          If you’re thinking of Hezbollah, may I remind you that Israel invaded and occupied of Lebanon before Hezbollah existed? If you’re referring to any Palestinian group, may I remind you that Israel brutally invaded and occupied Palestine long before the Islamic revolution?

        • RoHa says:

          “And, it is unknown if Iran is developing nukes or not.”

          But since (a) the people who claim Iran is developing nukes are the same gang who lied to us about Iraq’s WMDs, and (b) there is no evidence, it would be foolish to believe that Iran is developing nukes.

        • Shingo says:

          “Iran has attacked Israel through proxies.”

          False.  Iran has never attacked Israel, directly or otherwise.  The myth that Hamas and Hezbollah exist purely to Serbs Iran’s needs was invented by Likud in order to paint Iean as a mortal enemy. 

          Of course, the fact that you’re a Likudnick at heart comes as no surprise

          “And, it is unknown if Iran is developing nukes or not.”

          On the contrary, the IAEA has continued to confirm the non divergence of nuclear material by Iran.

          Of course if it was such an unknown, why did you claim Iran was making nukes? Was that another lie you tried to sneak in under the radar?

      • Citizen says:

        What’s to fear, Witty? Iran has signed the NPT, not Israel. Iran has a right to nuclear energy for civilian purposes even more than Israel does. It’s Iran who has suffered a CIA takeover of its democratically-elected government, not Israel. It’s Iran who has no history of preemptive wars, not Israel. Iran is not continually increasing its de facto borders, it’s Israel for the last 42 years with no sign of stopping. It’s Iran who suffered the long defensive war against Iraq while Israel and the USA played both sides of the fence, bleeding both sides. It’s not Iran who is continually supplied with the most advance military arms by the only superpower on earth, but nuclear armed Israel who has advanced the threat of the Samson Option. Seems, all things considered, supporting Iran instead of classifying it as a terrorist imperial, would be in the interest of a more balanced Middle East. And it is Iran who supported and actually enabled the US coalition armed conduct, the highlight being Iran’s aid to the US in Afghanistan; it only pulled the plug on that aid, that Muslim support against the USSR and its lackies, when the US conduct indicated it would replace the USSR in Afghanistan rather than merely help the locals against a giant foreign power. Eyes wide open.

    • Richard Witty
      What will you do if the felon with a history of arson,burglary,rape,drug dealing, homicide,and breaking-in
      living next door to you periodically says that house needs to be destroyed or owner needs to be removed after citing faults with the exterior of your house,smell from your kitchen, weeds growing in your garden,and water leaking from the pipes and offers it as the reason to go after you?
      Morally and legally , you are on a solid ground to remind the hysteria coming from the felon has more relevance to law and order,to claim that it creates more challenges for the neighborhood and it infringes on your rights and your insistence has more staying power when you remind that past violence is the good predictor of future violence. Any concern of your fear being misplaced is irrelevant.

    • Chaos4700 says:

      You know, for a self-described liberal, you spend a lot of effort attacking the anti-war movement.

      • Shingo says:

        “You know, for a self-described liberal, you spend a lot of effort attacking the anti-war movement.”

        thus proving yet again, that there is no such thing as Liberal Zionism.

      • Chaos,
        I don’t consider you to be an anti-war movement, but a pro-war movement in not looking clearly at Iran’s actions, instead going pollyanish on this.

        Like Goldberg states, seeing does not compel military action, but it does require attention.

        • potsherd says:

          “we need war to prevent war.”

          What the blatherer is really saying is that he wants to kill Iranians to keep them from being able to defend themselves from him.

        • Who was it that stated “we need war to prevent war”?

        • Citizen says:

          I guess by “attention” Goldberg means keep increasing the boycotts of Iran, as the US Congress has been doing, and urging the less compliant, such as China and India to do? If BDS is an act of war against Israel, what the hell is
          all the congressional enacted legislation against Iran, not to mention more coming down the Congressional pipe daily? Is this justified? Is Iran really Imperial Japan before Pearl Harbor?

        • Chaos4700 says:

          …So I’m pro-war, because I don’t want to see US bombs (or worse, US troops) dropped on Iran?

          Like I said before, there’s a march hare and a dormouse out there somewhere missing their tea party host.

        • Chaos,
          You’re pro-war because you seek to up the pressure in a pressure cooker, rather than finding ways for Israelis and Palestinians to co-exist.

        • Shingo says:

          “You’re pro-war because you seek to up the pressure in a pressure cooker, rather than finding ways for Israelis and Palestinians to co-exist.”

          We already have a way, but Israel refuse to accept it.

        • And, what is that Shingo?

    • Citizen says:

      Witty, it’s rational to deduce that the aipacked US and Israel will be bombing Iran as soon as there’s a saleable opportunity to do so, given Netanyahu’s constant sowing of fear of Iran (despite the history of Iran). You confuse and conflate the cry of the wolf Netanyahu with those who have heard him
      for so many nights. Iran is next up on the Frum Axis Of Evil.

      • Thats a fear.

        Something to pay attention to, not to attack as it hasn’t happened.

        You attacking Israel for something it hasn’t done, is directly analogous to what you criticize, attacking Iran for somethings it hasn’t done yet (although its done a lot already).

  2. Antidote says:

    re Iran/Nazi analogy as manipulation

    Absolutely, and it is being directed at both Israelis (the fear factor: works well to counter Israeli guilt and empathy with regard to the Palestinians) and the US (bomb Iran for/with us). As to the latter point, there was a good post on HuffPo:

    link to huffingtonpost.com

    Punchline(s):

    “The obsession with Hitler is about returning to the lost glory days of World War II — to what Americans call “the Greatest Generation,” who, as 1938-ers (among many others) romanticize as proudly fighting against a clearly identifiable evil. It is about returning to a world where Americans could unify around a common purpose and a common enemy. Nazi rhetoric is about restoring honor and glory to America. When commentators compare Ahmadinejad or Khameini to Hitler, they are doing rather little to explain the true threats Iran poses. Instead, they emphasize how righteous any future conflict with Iran would be.”

  3. The manipulation and engendering of fear in a population is one of the propagandist’s major tools. Israel has never let the truth get in the way of it stoking paranoid fears, fantasising that it is on the edge of the extinction at any moment, as opposed to being the featherbedded, comfortable state with the fourth biggest army in the world, that it is. It is so ludicrous it would be laughable, were it not for the sycophantic army of rich and unpatriotic shills it commands in the US media and Congress. The exploitation of Judaism and gullibility of the American public is insufferable. Time to call the emperor’s complete lack of wardrobe, and expose his tiny impotent machismo.

  4. Shingo says:

    “Its false. There is much to fear. Iran does possess nuclear material that is relatively close to nuclear military capacity, that they are continuing to enrich beyond the concentration needed for nuclear power”

    Witty, in spite of having Bern repeatedly schooled on thus subject, youinsist on maintaining an insufferably igrorant stance.

    Iran is nowhere near making a nuke because as the US government gas stated, they have not even made the descision to try.

    The small quntiries of 20% enriched urani are for the purpose of producing fuel for the medical reach reactor, that produces isotopes to treat 850,000 Iranians. It’s a IS built reactor that requires constant refueling and the West refuse to provide the fuel.

    “They do possess and demonstrate long-range ballistic missile delivery capability”

    Which they are entitled as is Israel.

    “ They train, fund and some plausibly say maintain proxy and compliant militias and/or allies on four Israeli fronts”

    So does the US. The proxy the US maintains is called Israel.

    “And, unlike Iraq in the 90’s (and later), they are not successfully contained, but expanding their military/political influence.”

    Really? Who have they attacked or invaded in the last 270 years?

  5. Shunra says:

    For the record, I’ve been reading Israeli journalist Yossi Gurvitz for about a dozen years. Every year, come budget-planning time, he points out that the threats made by Israel’s military are pretty much identical to the ones made in budget season of the previous year. Including expected time until Iranian nuclear capability and other tropes of fear-mongering.

    I expect an angry post from him about this any day…

  6. MHughes976 says:

    I’ve been mentioning for some time that this trope about ‘they’ll have a nuke in (usually) a year’ has been in use for many years. Netanyahu is a politician and many politicians start scares. It’s more worrying that people who claim to be responsible journalists and academics lend themselves to this stuff so readily and so often. It’s important not to treat each new repetition as a true and serious declaration of intent to wage war. If that intent really arose we would have new rhetoric with the trappings of an ultimatum, which the ‘year away’ formula actually avoids.
    I’m sure that each repetition is scorned in Iran as an empty threat. Oft-repeated threats, regarded as empty by those they’re intended to frighten, must be dangerous in their own way.

    • Antidote says:

      Maybe the ‘year away’ formula falls short of being an ultimatum, and I appreciate Shunra’s comment about the Iranian threat being pushed annually around budget time in Israel.

      Note Bolton’s mid-August countdown announcement: “Israel has 8 days to bomb Iran”

      not that Bolton has ever been right about anything

  7. Shingo says:

    “Similarly, dissenters have predicted that the US or Israel would be bombing Iran any day now for three years, no?”

    Yes Witty and Istael has been one of them. In fact George Bush turned dorm Israel’s request to bomb Iean in 2008.

    We all cry wolf.

  8. Shingo says:

    “once again you make important assertions about matters of war and peace based on nothing more than “some plausibly say.” Who are these “some”? How do you expect us to take you seriously?”

    That’s just Wittydoing what he always does,making stuff up and then attributing to some imaginary source.

    I think Witty gave up trying to bd serious when he turned 21.

  9. pabelmont says:

    Israel and America have many enemies (mostly manufactured, rather sedulously, by their own unnecessary actions, including obviously Israel’s unnecessary decision to create a uni-ethnic state on the bones of other people’s de-populated country) but are not in danger of annihilation or even, realistically, of attack serious attack. After all Israel has done to Lebanon, for example, and to Gaza, why has Israel not long ago been pulverized? Not for lack of will but for lack of means.

    Possession of one or two bombs by Iran would not change that. Russia possesses many bombs and by many accounts guarded them carelessly. Pakistan, not the friendliest of friends, has bombs and has a proliferative past. If terrorists were going to get their hands on nuclear bombs, they would have done so already. The reality appears to be that Hamas and Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda have scarcely been able even to shoot down US and Israeli aircraft.

    No. what the US and Israel detest is the idea of that sort of extremely lop-sided parity in which a country they’d like to attack (illegally!) has some (if slight) ability to resist the worst they could do (nuclear attack is the worst, I’d assume).

    Israel and America have thrived on impunity and find it convenient to keep it that way. The arms manufacturers like wars, and want to make sure the wars keep on keeping on going: there is no profit in a big bang which stops business. Israel and America carefully measure the degree of their violence.

    Parity makes it possible for a populous country, like Iran, to challenge Israel to (or resist Israel during) “conventional” (as it is surprisingly still called) war.

    That’s what this is all about. That and the thought of re-capturing the glory days of 1938-1945 with someone you can call “Hitler” to keep the home fires burning. But you want to be sure of defeating Hitler without unacceptable losses. Keep ‘em disarmed while calling them big names.

    • Your comment is important, more than important Pabelmont.

      “Israel and America have many enemies (mostly manufactured, rather sedulously, by their own unnecessary actions, including obviously Israel’s unnecessary decision to create a uni-ethnic state on the bones of other people’s de-populated country) but are not in danger of annihilation or even, realistically, of attack serious attack. After all Israel has done to Lebanon, for example, and to Gaza, why has Israel not long ago been pulverized? Not for lack of will but for lack of means.”

      Not for lack of will but for lack of means.

      That is the reason for Zionism, the need for it.

      • Shingo says:

        “That is the reason for Zionism, the need for it.”

        Are you admitting that the prupose of Zionism is the desruction of it’s neighbors Witty? That’s radical.

        • “Not for lack of will but lack of means”.

          It counters the view that militants “accept” Israel and Israelis.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          Look, Witty. It doesn’t matter if Hamas stops firing rockets (they did, during the cease fire) your friends in the IDF will still blithely raze farms, shell refugee camps, set fire to hospitals and even attack UN personnel and facilities, killing hundreds of children in the process, and you support that. Openly, and repeatedly.

          Stop pretending like you want peace. You don’t. You want Israel to be a militarized, dominant, nuclear armed imperialist power.

        • I very much want peace.

          I want Israel to not need to dominate, harrass, suppress and to choose not to.

          Its not yet been confidently offered.

          You don’t offer it. I so wish you would, and prominently, so there would be other options besides opposition.

        • Shingo says:

          “It counters the view that militants “accept” Israel and Israelis.”

          That’s not the view that was presented so why the straw man?

          Israel cannot demand to be accepted without a reciprocal acceptance of Palestine.

      • Citizen says:

        So, Witty, you agree that Zionism creates its own dilemna? That’s what happens when you don’t believe all peoples have the same inalienable rights, but rather, some people are more deserving of life than others.

      • GalenSword says:

        Zionist Culture and West European Jewry Before the First World War by Michael Berkowitz discusses the “need” for Zionism.

        Western European and North American Jews never intended to emigrate to Palestine while Eastern European Jews disdained Zionism and instead were much more interested in overthrowing Czarism.

        Zionism quickly became a sort of stand-in for religious faith and commitment to Jewish Law (Jewish Sharia) as the organizing principle of corrupt Jewish social networks.

        For this reason in the aftermath of WW2, racist Jewish American Zionists did not skip a beat in demanding US support for the creation of the State of Israel even though there were only about 300,000 DPs to be sent there.

        link to eaazi.blogspot.com

        link to eaazi.blogspot.com

      • Donald says:

        Yes, Richard, that makes a lot of sense. So you’re saying there’s a need for Zionism, a movement which would inevitably incur hatred because of the ethnic cleansing required to bring the Zionist dream to fruition–the Zionists would then have to continue to kill the enemies it created through its actions and of course this means there is a need for Zionism, because of all the enemies it has created.

        • There is a need for Zionism because there is anti-semitism in the world, that is easily stimulated.

          The holocaust should have been the last expression of it, but its not the case, and dissent does not assertively confront anti-semitism in the forms that it occurs. So, Jews that are conspicuously Jews don’t have confidence in the protestations of solidarity dissent on this.

          There is a need for Zionism perpetually because the Jewish people are a people, and now a nation, now that we have a land base for the first time in a couple thousand years, even though we’ve remained a people (through persecution).

          There is a need for reform of Zionism, but Jews being Jews does not disappear, the need for self-governance does not disappear, the need for accepted institutions of our self-governance does not disappear.

          Every action of ours is a co-creation, a participation in the design of the future. Your dissent is as well.

          When you respectfully discuss the design of peace, the needs of the parties, then peace becomes possible. When complaint is the only topic, then peace becomes impossible.

          Your response is cute Donald, self-congratulatory, but denies the reality of my people.

          A similar cascade of cause would result from acceptance of the Jewish state, not in some future, not in the context of a single-state, but actually.

          There is no armed aggression by Israel on Jordan or Egypt, because they recognize Israel and have made a peace, a cool one, but a real one.

          There is armed fighting between Israel and Gaza, between Israel and Lebanon, periodically between Israel and Syria, and between Israel and Palestinian factions in the West Bank. And, because there is no diplomatic relations, no acceptance, no intention to work things out before they come to blows.

        • Antidote says:

          “There is a need for Zionism because there is anti-semitism in the world, that is easily stimulated”

          … and no more effectively stimulated than by Zionism itself. Does that make your head explode? It works on mine.

        • Donald says:

          “There is armed fighting between Israel and Gaza, between Israel and Lebanon, periodically between Israel and Syria, and between Israel and Palestinian factions in the West Bank. And, because there is no diplomatic relations, no acceptance, no intention to work things out before they come to blows. ”

          There’s fighting between Israel and the Palestinians because the Zionists stole Palestinian land, forced them from their homes, lied about it, and keep doing it.

        • eljay says:

          >> There’s fighting between Israel and the Palestinians because the Zionists stole Palestinian land, forced them from their homes, lied about it, and keep doing it.

          That’s what’s known as “nuance”. From what I can tell, it endows “generation to generation” fear-scarred members of “a nation” to commit crimes and feel self-righteous about them.

          One day, when all this is over, Palestinians will be able to breathe a sigh of relief at the knowledge that theft and destruction “is not currently necessary”.

  10. Kathleen says:

    One of the best places to discuss the situation with Iran. Well plus Mondoweiss, Washington Note and Informed Comment

    TONY BLAIR, EUROPE, AND THE PROSPECT OF A U.S. ATTACK ON IRAN

    link to raceforiran.com

    Charlie Rose allows another warmonger to get away with repeating the debunked by Prof Cole “iran wants to wipe Israel off the map” hooey.
    Flynt Leverett all ready set Rose straight once.

    link to raceforiran.com

    • Citizen says:

      Charlie Rose allowed Blair to blare his baloney and was easily subdued after each of his velvet abstract questions to Blair, including those masqarading as follow-ups.

  11. Kathleen says:

    Phil ” Israeli didn’t strike at Iran back in the late 90s; it’s always wanted us to do the dirty work.
    These folks have been trying to wind us up for a long time.”

    Flynt talks about the history of turned down negotiations with Iran over a 30 year period.

    Great spot to go listen and read what Flynt Leverett has to say about the situation with Iran, history, policy etc. Lots of Flynts writings, interviews etc
    link to newamerica.net

    Seymour Hersh
    The Iran Plans…a must read
    link to newyorker.com

    And former IAEA Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter’s book
    Target Iran
    link to amazon.com

    And here is Seymour Hersh and Scott Ritter together discussing the situation with Iran
    link to video.google.com

  12. Kathleen says:

    Not enough innocent people in Iraq dead, injured and displaced for Netanyahu, Cheney, Feith, Bolton, Reuel Marc Gerecht, Scooter Libby, Rep Ros Lehtinen and the rest of the bloody war thugs.

    Hell Americans , our media, our government, military do not seem to give a rats ass about the dead in Iraq all as a direct consequence of that pac of lies. “we don’t count”

    • Antidote says:

      Time magazine feature article suggestion: “Why the US doesn’t care about peace.” I suggest exploding missiles and butter-sticks for the stars and stripes on the cover illustration

  13. Kathleen says:

    And here is what is more than likely coming folks. Crazy Ass Rep Gohmert put House Resolution 1553 up in July
    link to suite101.com

    Text of the resolution
    link to thomas.loc.gov:
    111th CONGRESS

    2d Session

    H. RES. 1553

    Expressing support for the State of Israel’s right to defend Israeli sovereignty, to protect the lives and safety of the Israeli people, and to use all means necessary to confront and eliminate nuclear threats posed by the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the use of military force if no other peaceful solution can be found within reasonable time to protect against such an immediate and existential threat to the State of Israel.

    status
    link to thomas.loc.gov:

    You can bet your ass they will line up a vote for this war mongering legislation based on unsubstantiated claims just before the November mid term election (how can we forget the Iraq war resolution passed in the fall of 2002)

    It will end up being one of those you are either with us or against us votes.

    Call your Reps and tell them absolutely to vote no on this resolution when it comes up for a vote.

    If they are one of these co sponsors give them some hell about it. This is insane. Not enough dead people in Iraq for these people.
    co sponsors
    link to thomas.loc.gov

  14. Nevada Ned says:

    Roger Cohen of the New York Times pointed out in 2009 that “Israel has been crying wolf” about Iran’s non-existent nuclear weapons since the EARLY 1990′s, not the mid-1990′s as Phil Weiss mentioned.

    But there’s more! Roger Cohen also mentions the Iran-Contra scandal of the mid-1980′s, when Israel sold advanced American weapons to the very same Iranian regime, with the support of the US government.

    link to nytimes.com

    This inconvenient fact has disappeared down an Orwellian memory hole…

    • RoHa says:

      “since the EARLY 1990’s”

      So

      (a) either the Iranians are too lazy or too incompetent to finish a job that should have been done in 1995,

      or

      (b) they have no intention of developing nuclear weapons.

      If (a), why should anyone fear such lazy incompetents?
      If (b), why should anyone fear a weapons programme that does not exist?

      • RoHa
        You want to know why?
        Numebr one reason is earthly distraction from ongoing Israeli onslaught on Gaza/Westbank/South Lebanon. Number one reason again is money. Israel just got 32 billions dollars free money to upgrade and amass their armametariums paid by US taxpayers to scale the balance against Iran!
        Nuber one reason again is deception so that US does not engage with Iran.Number one reason again is realization of a dream of balkanization of Iran along the lines of Iraq as was envsioned by an Israeli historian and scholar in 1980s and lately by Wurmser so that israel is safe .( wasn’t that the reason offered by Phillip Zelikow on Iraq ? Question should be raised and buried why on earth Israel would insist on taking down Saddam who was weak and impoversihed and had no nukes. Sound familiar? Sounds intellectually dishonest? But it served the purpose.)

    • Israel was also helping Iran with building nuclear capable missile production in 70s (SPY TRADE by Grant Smith ).Post-Shah ,Israel continued to exploit Iranain war to its economic advantage by supplying arms.

      Israel has opnely admitted of its own crimes agianst Iranain citizen who were anti-Shah, during the period when Shah held power ( Davar-11/29/1985)

    • potsherd says:

      It’s also important to recall that Israel was arming Iran almost up to the end of the Iran/Iraq war. It was OK for Iran to have weapons if (a) Israel profited from it, and (b) they were going to be used to kill Arabs.

  15. Kathleen says:

    Israeli nukes threat to peace in the middle east
    Do you know how many letters have been sent to the head of the IAEA directors over the years about Israel’s undeclared and un inspected nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. And how they have been a continued threat to peace in the middle east?
    link to iaea.org
    Nuclear-Weapons-Free Middle East: Dismantling Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal
    link to globalresearch.ca

  16. Kathleen says:

    If you have never watched this four part report by Fox News Carl Cameron about possible Israeli spying that came out just after 9/11.

    Watch all four reports
    link to informationclearinghouse.info

  17. Kathleen says:

    link to antiwar.com
    This interview is excerpted from the September 9 KPFK Los Angeles radio broadcast. The entire show can be heard here.

    Muhammad Sahimi, Professor of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science at the University of Southern California, discusses new accusations – from the NCRI (or MEK) terrorist group – that Iran is building secret nuclear enrichment facilities near Tehran, the moderate interpretation of the accusations from the usually-alarmist Institute for Science and International Security, current claims of obstructionism that ignore Iran’s legal rights under their safeguards agreement and the limitations of IAEA authority, how numerous debunking attempts have failed to kill the “smoking laptop” narrative, how Iran’s crisis of theocracy (the government’s challenge to the ayatollah’s monopoly on religious authority) is misinterpreted by the West as an aspiring global Islamic Caliphate and why a clear understanding of modified Code 3.1 (of the Subsidiary Arrangements of the Safeguards Agreement) perfectly refutes the Qom facility “gotcha” stunt.

  18. RE: “These folks have been trying to wind us up for a long time.” – Weiss
    SEE: In the Wake of 9/11, Israel Put Iran into “Axis of Evil” « By Marsha B. Cohen, LobeLog.com, 09/10/10

    (excerpts)…In the hours immediately following the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Israeli leaders envisioned a massive U.S. retaliation in which Israel was uniquely equipped to be a partner, even a mentor, of the U.S….
    …A spate of Israeli pronouncements proclaimed Israel’s own foreign policy priorities. They drew upon a decade of Israeli assertions of Iranian complicity in all things terrorist, and warnings of imminent Iranian nuclear weaponization. A war of civilizations had begun. 9/11 was just the first strike of Islamic fundamentalists. The next might be a nuclear attack by Iran…
    …An Iran with a bomb, an editorial in the business daily Globes declared, meant that terror organizations could gain access to it. (5) Dan Meridor, an Israeli government minister without portfolio in charge of Israel’s secret services, dismissed the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and spoke to Globes instead about a wider war between the free world and countries that support terror that would span “from Ramallah to Gaza, through the Al-Biqa Valley in Lebanon, the mountains of Iran and Afghanistan, all the way to Manhattan.” (6) The war would come quickly: Yosef Lapid of the Shinui party declared in the Jerusalem Post, once Iran had a nuclear bomb in its possession “within three or, at most, five years.” (7)
    Whereas George H. W. Bush had kept Israel on the sidelines during the fist Gulf War, an unnamed “Western diplomatic source” now told the Jerusalem Post that Israel would be a full partner in George W. Bush’s anti-terror coalition. Israel might now be allowed to even “participate in attacks against Iraq, as well as Iran and Afghanistan.” (8) …
    …In late September, the Jerusalem Post offered the view of a senior IDF intelligence officer, speaking anonymously, that Iran “could have had a hand” in plotting the attacks on the U.S. “We don’t have any information to support the possibility that Iraq is part of the plot,” the officer said. “But we can’t say the same for the Iranians. They are very deeply involved in everything that carries the label of Islamic radical terrorism.” The anonymous officer declared that Osama bin Laden, Hizbullah and Hamas were all from the same school of thought, but Iran was unique as a nation state seeking weapons of mass destruction. (14) ….
    (5) Editorial, “World Gets a Warning,” Globes, Sept. 13, 2001.
    (6) Tzvi Lavi, interview with Dan Meridor, Sept. 12, 2001, “We Will Win in the End, And It’s A Pity That They Won’t Be There,” Globes, Sept. 13, 2001.
    (7) Yosef Lapid, “The Warning,” Jerusalem Post, Sept. 14, 2001.
    (8) Gil Hoffman, “Gulf War-Style Anti-Terror Coalition to Include Israel.” Jerusalem Post, Sept. 14, 2001.
    (14) Arieh O’Sullivan, “IDF: Iraq not involved in attacks; Iran maybe,” Jerusalem Post, Sept. 23, 2001.

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – link to lobelog.com

  19. peters says:

    how did they capture tony blair? he was not always a neocon. was it blackmail? filthy lucre? or was britain in the same neocon vise politically as the us? how do they get people to sell out their honor and country?

    • Chaos4700 says:

      Money, peters. The Tony Blair that came before the war hawk that is today was felled by the same dirty money lobby game that has corrupted nearly every modern American politician.

      • lysias says:

        Richard Harris, a former journalist close to Blair, suggested in his roman à clef The Ghost that Blair’s career (in the novel, the Blair-like figure Adam Lang) was advanced throughout by the CIA.

        I always found the death by heart attack at age 55 in 1994 of Blair’s predecessor as Labour Party leader <a href="link to en.wikipedia.org Smith somewhat suspicious. Polls indicated Labour under Smith would win the next election, and Smith was considerably more left-wing than Blair. But reading The Ghost certainly reinforced my suspicions.

        (I also wonder why at least part of the reason the Swiss finally got around to arresting Roman Polanski after years of not doing so was the they were particularly anxious to curry favor with U.S. authorities when their banks were under U.S. investigation, and U.S. authorities had reason to be particularly annoyed with Polanski after he made the movie The Ghost Writer out of Harris’s novel.)

        • Chaos4700 says:

          I’d need more evidence before I could buy the notion that Blair was a CIA plant, but… considering how things played out, it’s not exactly implausible.

    • Antidote says:

      “He was confirmed in the Church of England – even more unfashionable in 1974 than being right-wing Labour. In politics, the truth as opposed to the myth of Tony Blair is that he has been unusually consistent. He has always advocated a ruthless electoral pragmatism in pursuit of mild social justice. And he has always confused people with his “radical” rhetorical flourishes.”

      link to independent.co.uk

  20. Sin Nombre says:

    I think it’s also important to not the extended, clearly intended implication of Israel’s desire that we attack Iran for getting nukes. While of course the cry appears to “just” be for a one-off strike, accepting same essentially accepts the assumption that no country identified by Israel can *ever* be allowed the technology to produce WMDs, so that indefinitely it seems, we will have the periodic obligation to go bombing and bombing to keep such other countries in a kind of permanent technologically stunted state.

    Dovetails of course with Israel’s refusal to agree to a Nuke-free ME accord wherein it simply won’t agree to a nuke parity of zero and instead insists on it being the sole possessor of the ability to obliterate others.

    In any event the former point it seems to me ought to be noted more in the public debate over attacking Iran: For how many decades, it might for instance be asked, is the U.S. going to have to periodically bomb Iran … and any of the dozen or so additional states Israel identifies as a threat? Since it would seem bombing can only be temporarily effective, isn’t the clear request that we bomb at least ever couple of years or so? With each bombing teaching the targets how to make their next attempt more bomb-proof thereby necessitating each bombing to get more and more devastating and killing ever more people?

    Really, without the implication that we do indeed embark on some decades-long project of periodic and ever-worse bombings, Israel’s present request for us to bomb Iran just makes no sense. All one bombing would accomplish is not only drive the Iranian’s next attempt even more bomb-resistant, but indeed absolutely convince it that it *has* to get a Nuke no matter what so as to dissuade yet another bombing.

    Israel isn’t just asking for one attack here. It’s asking for the U.S. to keep a large swath of the mideastern world in a a sort of permanent state of stunted development. And one doubts the average American wants to sign on to such an open-ended, endless project.

    • Chaos4700 says:

      Israel isn’t just asking for one attack here. It’s asking for the U.S. to keep a large swath of the mideastern world in a a sort of permanent state of stunted development. And one doubts the average American wants to sign on to such an open-ended, endless project.

      Indeed. I foresee that the state of perpetual, needless warfare that Israel is goading the American political class into undertaking could very well be one of the largest destructive forces that leads to the US tearing itself apart.

    • Bumblebye says:

      I can’t remember the details, but a recent law in the US does make it law that they ensure Israel always has the military “edge” over its neighbors. Their jumping up and down claiming Iran will soon have nukes may be designed to test this (as well as their own military budget demands of course).

      • Citizen says:

        That law, Bumblebye, was signed into law by Bush Jr; it is a subprovision of a bill titled something more innocent having to do with navy fleets. It has made it a legal obligation of the US to assure Israel’s security no matter what the cost, and as response to anything Israel tells us makes it’s security vulnable. It’s never even discussed in the US MSM that I am aware of despite it’s facial unconstitutionality.

    • Shingo says:

      “Israel isn’t just asking for one attack here. It’s asking for the U.S. to keep a large swath of the mideastern world in a a sort of permanent state of stunted development. And one doubts the average American wants to sign on to such an open-ended, endless project.”

      Indeed. When Obama talks about a nuclear free ME, he means a nucelear free Arab region. In fact, the US has been pressuing the arab states not to discuss Israel in the upcomming talks about a nuclear free ME.

      How Orwellian is that?

      Also, Israel has been lobbying the US against denying Jordan the right to enrich uranium, and they can;t use teh excuse that Jordan has threatened to wipe Isreal off the map.

      What Israel wants is both miliatrya and technological hegemony.

      • When Obama speaks of a nuclear free region, he is speaking of Israel as well, as he’s clarified.

        But, he KNOWS that that can only happen when there is a confident peace between Israel and the Arab world, when Israel is accepted as Israel.

        • Chaos4700 says:

          When has Obama declared that Israel must surrender its nuclear arms capacity? Links, please. When has he even discussed Israel’s nuclear capacity at all for that matter?

        • Antidote says:

          That’s my understanding, too, that Obama’s nuclear free ME includes Israel.

          The question, though, is whether a nuclear free ME provides fewer or more opportunities for military conflict.

          I’m no military expert, but: the Iron Dome missile shield project, for which Obama secured additional funds from Congress, appears to once again secure Israel’s exceptional position: Israel can attack with impunity without having to fear a counter-attack. It’s even better given the fact that the fallout from nuclear weapons, used in the immediate neighborhood, would also harm Israel. Not a particularly effective deterrent (or only in connection with the ‘mad dog’-image Israel has cultivated)

        • MRW says:

          I agree with Chaos4700: links, please.

        • Shingo says:

          “When Obama speaks of a nuclear free region, he is speaking of Israel as well, as he’s clarified.”

          When has Obama declared that Israel even has nukes? I recall he said that Israel has the right to have them.

          In fact, Obama is pressuring the arab states not to even mention Israeli nukes at the upcomming nuclear summit.

        • Shingo says:

          “But, he KNOWS that that can only happen when there is a confident peace between Israel and the Arab world, when Israel is accepted as Israel.”

          It has been accepted and Israel reject the offer.

          22 arab states have signed the offer already.

  21. GalenSword says:

    The effort of Daniel Pipes and other racist Jewish Zionists to demonize Muslims and to normalize Islamophobia goes back to the 1980s.

    link to eaazi.blogspot.com

  22. Edward Q says:

    Big Brother will get mad at you if you keep committing these thoughtcrimes and salvaging trash from the memory hole. Remember, we are at war now with Eastasia, not Oceana.

    Don’t be lured by the reality-base community.

  23. tommy says:

    Israeli politicians always lie. Everything they say is intended to elicit hostility towards their victims so they can commit crimes and escape condemnation.