Former U.S. ambassador Charles O. Cecil's letter to President Obama warns that a U.S. veto of Palestine's application for U.N. membership will physically endanger American civilians:
...if the United States vetoes the Palestinian request for statehood, we will damage our position in the Islamic world—not merely the Arab World—for untold years to come. We will become the object of retribution throughout the Muslim world, and will give new energy to the lagging efforts of al-Qaida to retaliate against us.
Considering that U.S. support for Israel's oppression of the Palestinian people was the #1 motivator for the September 11, 2001 attacks, shouldn't the possibility that a veto will motivate another such attack be part of the mainstream media discourse? This is why it's not, plus this too.
Although it may be unlikely, if a post-veto terror strike on the U.S. materializes, it's easy to predict that the mainstream media will again elide "oppression of Palestinians" from the analysis. We can look forward to another narcissistic and jingoistic bout of patriotism, revenge lust, and cheerleading for an unprovoked bombing/invasion of ________. (Fill in the blank with "despised Muslim country," Mad Libs style... Iran, in all likelihood.)
Remember when Bush administration officials lied and claimed they had no way of knowing that Al Qaeda could strike in such a way (when in fact, they'd received precisely such warnings)? If the Obama administration knowingly endangers American civilians by blocking the legitimate rights of the Palestinians to statehood and UN membership, they'll have no defense that they "weren't warned" that this decision could motivate a violent reaction.
I'm not arguing that the U.S. should bow to a terrorist threat. The Palestinians have a legitimate right to statehood regardless of such threats. But I do think the government and the media should be honest about what motivates these violent attacks, and they aren't.
History could be about to repeat itself. The veto may go down in the books as the worst U.S. diplomatic decision ever.
“Considering that U.S. support for Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people was the #1 motivator for the September 11, 2001 attacks, shouldn’t the possibility that a veto will motivate another such attack be part of the mainstream media discourse? This is why it’s not, plus this too.”
I have heard one expert (Richard Clarke, Ray McGovern, Micheal Scheuer, Ray McGovern, Scott Ritter, Bryzinski after the next as well as world leaders (King of Jordan etc) mix up these three issues in different orders for the hatred directed towards the US and attacks on the US and US interest.
1. US support for Israel no matter what they do
2. US support for dictators in that region
3. US military bases on Muslim lands
It really wasn’t the #1 motivator, but this is Mondoweiss, I’ll let it slide.
Tell us DBG, what has been in world wide biggest motivation to example suicide bombers ?
Former Counter terrorism Richard Clarke, Former National Security Advisor Bryzinski, Former Head of the CIA’s Bin Laden unit Micheal Scheuer, Former IAEA’ weapons inspector Scott Ritter, Former President Jimmy Carter, Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern, Kathleen and Bill Christison, General Jones, General Zinni etc have all placed the lopsided support for Israel no matter what they do in the top three reasons for the hatred towards the US and attacks on the US in those three top positions. And at times put the support for Israel no matter what they do in the number one position at times depending on who and where they are talking
I blame the terrorists, you act like if there wasn’t an Israel there would be no hatred towards America and everything would be peaceful. It is pretty naive. Sure they can claim Israel as their motivation, but it is just a scapegoat. Nothing unites them like their hatred of Jews and Israel.
Why not just attack Israel with hijacked planes from say Lebanon or Egypt (where some of the hijackers came from) if they hated Israel so bad?
Why not just attack Israel with hijacked planes from say Lebanon or Egypt (where some of the hijackers came from) if they hated Israel so bad?
Precisely. Why was Israel spared?
Because their hatred of Israel is just an excuse. They hate the West and its leader the US.
DBG, related but unrelated question for you. You seem to make no distinction between Jews and Israel, a position common among Zionists.
I am assuming you have been led to believe that Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people just as Italy is for Italians. Criticism of Italy is not criticism of Italians, so why is criticism of Israel criticism of Jews? You seem to think that the region hates Jews. If that is true, it wasn’t always the case. You can blame Zionism and modern Israel for it.
Jews may not have been equals in say the Ottoman empire, but this was true of all minorities. Going back to the Crusades, the Jews sided with the Muslims against the Christians. In antiquity the Jews migrated among Muslims across North Africa to the Iberian Peninsula before being expelled in the Spanish inquisition (same with the Muslims). In modern times, the indigenous Jews of Palestine sided with the other Arab Palestinians against the Zionist colonists… at least for a while.
Again, if they hate Jews it is because of Israel and Zionism and not a position they held before. The people holding up signs that say ‘kill the Jews’ in the Arab revolutions are suspicious considering it is spelled in English. Get what I mean? Arabs don’t consider Jews their mortal enemy. They hate Israel because Israel hasn’t exactly been the best neighbor.
I get what you are saying Charon. I make a huge distinction between Jews and Zionists.
With that being said though, why is there anti-Christian pogroms in Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistian etc. you explained their hatred towards Jews, by why against the Christian minority?
How do you explain the sectarian violence between Sunni and Shia?
“In modern times, the indigenous Jews of Palestine sided with the other Arab Palestinians against the Zionist colonists… at least for a while.”
I would be interested to read about this. Do you have any source or is this your invention?
Why does the Hamas charter refer to Jews being killed and not Israel?
Take a look at this:
link to memritv.org
There are plenty more with the same message. The fight is against the al-Yahud.
“Why does the Hamas charter refer to Jews being killed and not Israel?”
Why do Americans refer to the United Kingdom as “England”?
Why do
EnglishmenUKers refer to sons of Dixie as “Yanks”?“I would be interested to read about this. Do you have any source or is this your invention?”
++++ You dont know what happened in ME in early 1900′s eee ? I wonder why they have kept this as a secret in zionist circles ?
“Why does the Hamas charter refer to Jews being killed and not Israel?
Take a look at this:
link to memritv.org”
++++ Here is better one eee :
link to youtube.com
“There are plenty more with the same message.”
++++ When memri is in question, i have no doubt.
DBG :
Second time, Tell us DBG, what has been in world wide biggest motivation to example suicide bombers ?
Im gonna keep asking this until you answer. If you dont know, say so, its ok.
So Woody agrees Israel is the Jewish nation, that is a start. Sounds like Hamas does to w/ their charter. We are getting somewhere ppl!
Wow, impressive straw man you got there BDG! We were discussing what the #1 motivation was, not the ONLY motivation. If there is a #1 motive, then by definition, there will he a #2.
In other words, it must be the #1 motivation – seeing as nothing is a stronger uniting factor.
Thanks for proving the point you dolt.
So are you suggesting there have be no terrorist attacks against Israel?
Seriously DBG. Did you go out for a lobotomy on your lunch break?
Woody,
It is clear that Hamas is at war with the Jews, not Israel. They do not use the words as synonyms since they are quoting Koran verses and obviously Israel did not exist at that time, but the Jews did.
That’s because Zionists insist on referring to Israel as “the Jews”. You guys insist on Israel being recognized as a Jewish state, but statements like Ereqat uses the term to refer to Israelis, you Hasbarats jump on it as proof that
all Jews are being persecuted.
“So Woody agrees Israel is the Jewish nation, that is a start.”
Nope, hate to burst your hasbubble, but I do not agree. Israel is a state with a lot of Jews in it. Nothing more.
“It is clear that Hamas is at war with the Jews, not Israel.”
If that was the case, then it sure was dumb for the Israeli to have been so instrumental in its creation. Of course, if Hamas is really only opposed to Israel, it COULD have been smart for Israel to support it as a way of splitting its opposition in the Arafat/PLO days along secular/religious lines.
(Hmmm, maybe you’re right. Boy, those Israelis were just dumb. They TOTALLY got taken advantage of on that one. Suckers.)
Besides, if Hamas was at war with “the Jews” there are a lot of places other than Israel where they could fight this war and not have to worry. Do you realize how many soft Jewish targets there are in the US?
“They do not use the words as synonyms…”
My answer was only partly in jest, in light of the strong effort that Israelis and their supporters go to conflate “Israeli” with “Jew” and then some of these same people then complain when you use “Jew” instead of “Israeli.”
“…since they are quoting Koran verses and obviously Israel did not exist at that time, but the Jews did.”
Exactly. The real answer is that they are a religious group. Part of their religion recapitulates conflict with the Jews of the 8th Century and they’re drawing a parallel between that conflict and this to take succor from what they believe is their antecedent’s past triumphs. (Israelis do the same thing, of course, with the whole “promised land” nonsense, the crap about “Samaria and Judea” and the criminals going on about “Amalekites,” the people were who your ancestors supposedly genocided.)
Really? Have Palestinians murdered European Jews in Europe? You know, the way your country targeted first Palestinians, then Arabs generally in Operation Wrath of God?
It’s not Hamas that’s engaged in targeted genocidal intent, eee, it’s you. And your race hatred will be your downfall.
One reason might be the heightened state of airline security in the ME and the difficulty of placing 4 man Arabic suicide teams on planes. The number and size of planes, the fuel loads and the very lax security in the US likely also contributed to the decision. Another might be they felt the US was a far more important and dramatic target. There had also been a prior attempt at multiple plane hijackings which was discovered and stopped.
How do you know which was the #1 motivator? Was orbit the Qana massacre that inspired Bin Laden’s fatwa against the US?
Was it not the #1 motivation for KSM, and Atta?
sorry but I trust KSM and Atta about as much as I trust the commenters here on MW. You guys treat them like they are some valuable source of truth. Sorry I don’t trust ppl who were responsible for thousands of American’s deaths
You can be as sorry as you like, but the 911 Commission Report explicitly cited KSM’s primary grievance as being the IP issue.
Nor can you deny that Bin Laden issued his fatwa right after the Qana massacre (1996)
Not can you deny that Atta issued his last will and testament after the Qana massacre (1996).
Of course, I would be curious who you would regard as more credible about the true motives of KSM, Atta and Bin Laden than KSM, Atta and Bin Laden themselves.
They hate us for our freedoms right?
So do you guys when they say stuff that suits your agenda – like the Hamas Charter for example.
I love it how you hold us their declarations as though they were sacred when it suits you, but dismiss them as unlrealible when it doesn’t.
” Sorry I don’t trust ppl who were responsible for thousands of American’s deaths”
But u trust people who are responsible for thousands of innocent Palestinian deaths!
So according to eee and DGB terrorist hate Israel and Jews for no reason at all. Because they just loooove to hate. Kinda reminds me of good ol Bush Jr “they hate us because our freedom”. BHAHAHAHAHAHA!! I truly feel sorry for you guys. U have the impossible job of defending the “indefensible” (thank bibi for that wonderful word)
In former head of the CIA’s Bin Laden unit Micheal Scheuer’s latest piece over at his site he moves the I/P conflict into the number one spot of the anger and attacks. But in the past I have heard him put this issue in the number two spot of the anger and attacks. Again have heard experts more this issue around in the top three reasons for the built up hatred and for the reasons for the attacks
link to non-intervention.com
“Motivating enemies: Interventionists and the UN veto
By mike | Published: September 21, 2011
For most of a decade I have said in books, articles, interviews, and speeches that America’s war with the growing Islamist movement is motivated by the Islamists’ belief that U.S. foreign policy is an attack on their faith and brethren. Generally, this effort has been akin to yelling into a closet. The dominance of pro-Saudi and especially pro-Israel political influence and money in both political parties, the media, and the academy is just too strong to allow more than fleeting opportunities to tell Americans that they — and their soldier-children — are and will continue to be at war because of the impact in the Muslim world of the foreign policy of Washington and its NATO allies.
This week, however, all Americans have a chance to see for themselves how Washington‘s bipartisan, interventionist foreign policy provides our Islamist enemies with their main motivation and encourages young Muslim males to seek out membership in Islamist organizations fighting the United States and its allies. If the Palestinian Authority’s president, Mahmoud Abbas, goes ahead and asks the United Nations to recognize Palestine as an UN member state, and the Obama Administration then vetoes the chance of a positive response — as would any Republican administration — Americans will see clearly and unequivocally how a U.S. foreign policy decision motivates Islamists to war and provides them with their major source of unity and enduring cohesiveness. Actions cause reactions, and, in this case, the pro-Israel lobby will have a harder time than usual telling Americans that U.S. foreign policy does not promote war with Muslims. The Obama veto will surely kill Americans and promote domestic Islamist violence in the years ahead.”
Scheuer on Washington Journal
On Osama Bin Laden
link to c-spanvideo.org
link to c-spanvideo.org
Micheal Scheuer “Imperial Hubris”
link to c-span.org
Scott Ritter and Seymour Hersh address the issue in detail in this talk/debate. Worth watching the whole talk
link to video.google.com
In Bin Laden’s initial interviews given in the aftermath of 9/11, he denied being involved in the attacks. The following is taken from an 9/28/01 interview with him:
“I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the [U.S. Government] system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom. This system is totally in the control of the American Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is clear that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid down by them. So the punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the U.S. is not uttering a single word.”
I know it’s tough for people around here to begin to consider, but even the FBI is not convinced Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11 based on what little evidence was available. It was the MSM that was pushing the Bin Laden angle literally moments after the WTC fell. It was the MSM that played the Bin Laden videos of questionable origin, and he had radically different physical appearances. It was also the MSM that played the audio tapes as genuine when German audio experts (they know their audio in Germany) said it wasn’t him. The same MSM who censors and lies about I/P. It is not kooky to question the absence or any sort of proof of his death this year and all it does is add even more evidence.
The following link contains an extensive discussion of the various parts of the 9/11 Truth conspiracy theory.
link to debunking911.com
I dont know why we presume that “security” for american citizens is a goal of the government. Clearly it is not. Americans will continue to do what they are told. We wont ask any question other than “what rights can I give up?”
Another big time terrorist attack would be the death knell for any sort of democracy in America, something that would make many Americans very happy.
It’s a stretch, but I think the proof that our government is not interested in American citizen security is all in the name – “Homeland” Security.
Homeland is not a word that was ever used in reference to America, not from a government stand point. It was criticized then for sounding odd. Homeland in German is heimat where it has a different meaning that is lost in translation to English. Heimat is derived from the Hebrew word moledet where it has a similar meaning in modern Hebrew (moledet is translated to birthplace in English language bibles). So you could say in modern Hebrew is means ‘the chosen land’ but in classic Hebrew, which was the intent of the biblical text, it more likely means ‘chosen ones’ because it refers to birthgroup and not birthplace. Birthgroup as in family in the context of King David’s decedents.
Homeland Security could very well be Israel’s Security. Chertoff played a huge role in its formation and even led it for a few years. He also co-wrote the patriot act and is responsible for the x-ray machines that cause cluster tumors. Oh and his mother was a Mossad Sayanim. DHS is resembling Israel-style security more and more as time goes on.
“and will give new energy to the lagging efforts of al-Qaida to retaliate against us.”
So many benifited from 9/11 that I can’t help feeling that keeping the war on terror going is part of the strategy.
If trillions have been spent on homeland security, defense & war, then surely there are many be it local and state agencies, defense industry etc that don’t want that gravy train to end.
If 9/11 was a boon to Israel as it alligned ‘us’ more closely in seeing their enemies as their own, then surely they would welcome that outcome.
Maybe, encouraging blowback is part of the equation.
How else are you going to launch wars and open the spigots for billions upon billions of dollars of defense spending? How else are you going to ensure that the US doesnt make an exit from the ME?
“Remember when Bush administration officials lied and claimed they had no way of knowing that Al Qaeda could strike in such a way (when in fact, they’d received precisely such warnings)?”
The lie, I think was elsewhere. I am satisfied that the Saudi folks who flew those airplanes were working for (or believed they were working for) Al-Qa’ida. Sure. They were, in fact, Saudi terrorists. But who were they actually working for? No-one knows. But why suppose Al-Qa’ida just because the “soldiers” believed that? Didn’t Bin Laden deny it? They were set up. By whom? No-one knows. But the airplanes were not shot down or even directed to change course by the air force of the Great Oz. The buildings fell in a manner that made many engineers say they must have been brought down by pre-set demolition charges.
Bush et Cie. seem to have facilitated the destructiveness of the event to such an extent that it seems to many, and to me, that this was a USA job or Mossad job, something like that, something done by people able to organize a really big bang, such as 9/11 was. It was a show put on by the folks who wanted to start a perpetual war with Islam. Or so it appeared and still appears.
There is plenty of circumstantial evidence showing Zionist and Neocon fingerprints all over 9/11 including the investigations afterwards (a conflict of interest considering they consider Arabs their mortal enemies). The problem is it is circumstantial evidence and far from conclusive. When combined though it’s just too much to be coincidence. They knew something.
Larry Silverstein tried to set up a free trade zone in the Negev desert years ago. It didn’t work out because he was implicated in a lawsuit for heroin trafficking, the proceeds of which were used to buy/corrupt NYC police supposedly. Silverstein owned the controversial building 7 and leased the WTC complex just a few months prior to 9/11 along with Frank Lowy.
Frank Lowy emigrated to Palestine when he was young where he fought in the Zionist terrorist group Haganah. He’s also a super-rich Australian along the lines of Rupert Murdoch who he is friends with.
Silverstein is close friends with Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon (if you count Sharon as alive). He speaks to Netanyahu on the phone every Sunday. Both called him in the aftermath of 9/11. He is also friends with Barak who he offered a job to be his representative in Israel. Silverstein made out quite well from the insurance policy on the WTC. He usually ate in a restaurant at the top of one of the towers every single day. But not on 9/11. The man shows signs of psychopathy too just like all of his above mentioned buddies.
Basically, Silverstein has ties to Israel and their PMs, probably sold drugs to pay off police, probably knew about 9/11 which is why he bought and insured the complex and didn’t eat there that day, whose business partner is a known Israeli terrorist and friends with puppet master Murdoch. That sounds highly suspicious by itself
An important point in discussing these “three reasons” or motives for
AQ/OBL’s attacks against the US is that two of the three are largely derivative of the main reason, US military and diplomatic support for Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians since 1967. For example, AQ/OBL (now AAZ) are pissed at us because of our invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, but those events are both derivative of reason #1. i.e We attacked Afghanistan and later Iraq because of the 9/11 attack on us, which was then motivated primarily by our support for Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians. Our support for Arab dictators is likewise largely derivative of our support for Israel in that a major justification for that support (e.g. Egypt) was that it removed or greatly lessened a major threat to Israel. Virtually all our current military/intelligence interventions in the ME and greater Muslim world are directed at stopping further attacks by AQ/AAZ who originally attacked us because of our support of Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians.
So, reason #1, US continuing military and diplomatic support for Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians, is THE motivation for AQ/OBL’s attacks against the US, culminating in 9/11. The other two reasons, support for dictators and US bases, wouldn’t be there absent reason #1. Pre-1967, our relations with the Arab world were pretty good as we had maintained a largely neutral stance. Linkage is the key word. That linkage is why Obama started his presidency with the express purpose of solving IP, because the continuing IP conflict, and our connection to it, was doing great harm to US vital national security interests.
Unfortunately, that discussion is verboten in the US as General Patreaus and Admiral Mullen discovered a couple of years ago when they tried to raise it but received no support from the Obama administration and were essentially hung out to dry. The only “acceptable” reason that can be used in public is that “they attacked because of our freedoms” which is hogwash. What else is new.
ugggghhh another 9/11 truther thread.
Weird huh ? First time in history, when steel framed building has collapsed from fire. And that happened to 3 buildings in a single day. Either in states is building profession in poor level ( which i know it isnt, because my relative is architect in US ), or something strange happened.
“Either in states is building profession in poor level ( which i know it isnt, because my relative is architect in US ), or something strange happened.”
Well, yeah, something strange happened. Airliners filled with jet fuel flew into them. (Causing one to fall into the third.) “Strange.” is one way to describe that.
1. Most of the jet fuel from the second airplane was burned in the explosion
2. Nether of the towers fell into Bldg 7
Detailed analysis of WT7 theories:
link to debunking911.com
“1.Most of the jet fuel from the second airplane was burned in the explosion”
And in the process set fire to all of the flamable materials that was in that part of the building. (This was, of course, after the building was hit by an airliner. Again, “strange.”)
“2. Nether of the towers fell into Bldg 7″
Portions of the north tower (if memory serves) did.
Interesting bit on fire in the WTC here.
link to lookingglassnews.org
Bad fire. Long time. No collapse.
Following link shows fire was quite limited and not all that hot.
link to en.wikipedia.org
“Following link shows fire was quite limited and not all that hot.”
And did not follow a fricking airplane crashing into it.
Here is a link to a very thorough discussion of the 9/11 conspiracy theories which forms part of the basis for my not buying into the 9/11 Truth conspiracy theories:
link to debunking911.com
That particular page deals with the “first time in history when a steel framed building has collapsed from fire” issue. It gives some examples of steel buildings that have collapsed from fire.
The links on the left side of the opening page deal with other portions of the 9/11 Truth conspiracy theory.
I am not claiming this is definitive proof of my view, but just saying there is ample evidence on both sides of this controversy and the evidence on my side is pretty well represented in the link(s) provided.
Tell us how one vote one man means one world government DBG.
what on earth does that even mean Shingo? is that an illluminati reference? you’ve said this in the past, i didn’t get it the first time and i don’t get it know.
RE: “But I do think the government and the media should be honest about what motivates these violent attacks, and they aren’t.” ~ Matthew Taylor
SIGMUND FREUD SEZ (posthumously): If they were to be honest, it would trigger far too much emotional pain (cognitive dissonance) on the part of the “hoi polloi”. And that would be bad for both the mainstream media’s bottom line, and also for Obama’s reelection hopes.
Consequently, it’s better to use some tried and true ‘defense mechanisms’.
A FEW DEFENSE MECHANISMS:
• Displacement is the redirecting of thoughts feelings and impulses from an object that gives rise to anxiety to a safer, more acceptable one. Being angry at the boss and kicking the dog can be an example of displacement.
• Denial is the refusal to accept reality and to act as if a painful event, thought or feeling did not exist. It is considered one of the most primitive of the defense mechanisms because it is characteristic of very early childhood development.
• Repression is the blocking of unacceptable impulses from consciousness.
ALSO SEE: DEFENSE MECHANISMS & COGNITIVE DISSONANCE – link to mondoweiss.net
Charon, MIG, et al,
Your comments about who did 9/11 basically hijacked this vitally important thread and turned it into a 9/11 Truth debate. While I don’t begrudge you your right to see an Israeli or US Government conspiracy behind 9/11 (which I attempted to respond to at great length in a very long earlier thread) it is very damaging to our side of the overall IP debate to conflate the critical Linkage issue with the 9/11 Truth issue. In essence, conflating the two issues diminishes or eliminates the Linkage issue in favor of the 9/11 Truth debate.
Only one of the two theories can be true. Both theories are entitled to full debate, but that debate shouldn’t be inserted into a discussion of Linkage which is an issue that should be allowed to be debated in its own right, just as the 9/11 Truth issue should have the right to be debated on its own.
Probably the most important IP issue for the mainstream on both sides of IP is the Linkage issue: whether or not AQ/OBL attacked the US because of its support for Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians. It is an issue that scares the crap out of Israel and its US lobby supporters because it creates a real basis for US citizens to oppose US support for Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians. The lobby folks fight it tooth and nail. The Linkage issue needs to be talked about and screamed from the roof tops because it provides such a powerful basis for convincing US citizens to demand the US stop its insane policies that support Israeli oppression.
Tossing the 9/11 Truth debate into the middle of the Linkage issue debate plays into the hands of Israel and its lobby folks and allows them to walk away laughing, which diminishes both debates.
Our mutual attack on the IP issue should have two totally separate prongs: the Linkage prong and the 9/11 Truth prong (that the Israelis and/or the US Government conspired to do 9/11). Conflating the prongs in the same thread is devasting to both arguments cause they both can’t be right at the same time.
In my more paranoid moments I think that a tactic of the Hasbara folks is to insert the 9/11 Truth issue into a thread knowing it will quickly take the emphasis off the original thread topic which they viewed as threating to the Hasbara folks cause. Beware.
Let’s keep our two prongs of attack separate so they can’t divide and conquer us. Fighting among ourselves about which prong is the most valid hurts the overall cause both sides believe in and are dedicated to.
You know honestly? It no longer matters who dropped the World Trade Center really. If it was Osama bin Laden he got EXACTLY what he wanted — a United States that has been unmasked as a state that uses torture, employs hired killers and has absolutely no regard for the lives and rights of anyone Muslim, and that is uniting the Muslim world (whether they want to be or not) against a clear threat to Muslims worldwide.
And if it was someone else? They’ve clearly gotten away scot free.
They are probably working on the details as we write.
“Right, this time it’ll be Eye -Ray-nians. But still because they hate our freedoms.”
“Yeah, and can we make it something nookyoolar?”
“An actual bomb, or just some sort of dirty bomb.”
“Whatever. As long as I get in on the real-estate deal.”
Of course, the “Veto” will totally isolate us. It’s an act of war. Add the impending “Soviet economic moment” and you can kiss your past goodbye. We are being lead down the primrose path. The only consolation will be the revenge that’s taken in the confusion. Nothing to talk about, act. At least it will be interesting for a change.
Hej!
P.S. You remember how fast the last “Superpower” unraveled? Weeks, a blink of an eye!
I wouldn’t call it an act of war, but it is definitely an act of overt hostility toward the Palestinians — it makes the United States, unequivocally, an enemy to Palestine. And it certainly will isolate us from the rest of the world. Including Europe, who I’m fairly confident isn’t willing to join us in a neo-Crusade against the Muslim world. I think even the UK will abandon us if Israel drags us into war with Iran.
a vote at the UN is an act of war, that is a new one.
I’d rather hear your analysis on how, when an Arab country runs a blockade of one oceangoing passage, that’s an act of war, but when a Jewish country runs a blockade of an ENTIRE ocean access for a seiged population, that’s not an act of war and suddenly the act of war becomes challenging the blockade.
When you can answer that (without spitting venom or lying outright) then you earn the right to criticize someone else for making up an act of war that isn’t.
Chaos, Turkey is blockading Syria right now, you know that right?
So is Gaza occupied or not? you guys change your arguments to fit whatever situation you want. Also was Egypt shipping thousands of tons of goods into Israel following their closure of the strait?
As for the straits of Tiran, that wasn’t the only reason for the 6 day war, I think Israel was more concerned with the 100k troops and 2000 armored vehicles massed at their border. Or maybe it was Egypt’s expulsion of the UNEF force from the Gaza and the Sinai.
Nasser’s own words were probably the catalyst though:
We shall not enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand. We shall enter it with its soil saturated in blood.
A few months later, Nasser expressed the Arabs’ goal to be:
- the full restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people. In other words, we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel.
- The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel.
“So is Gaza occupied or not? you guys change your arguments to fit whatever situation you want.”
Nonsense. You’re just in love with a dumb argument.
“Also was Egypt shipping thousands of tons of goods into Israel following their closure of the strait?”
No need. The Israelis had other ports. No one was stopping them from using those ports.
“As for the straits of Tiran, that wasn’t the only reason for the 6 day war, I think Israel was more concerned with the 100k troops and 2000 armored vehicles massed at their border.”
Stationed there due to the threat posed by the Israeli, especially considering that the Israeli blood-lust was whetted but not slaked, by 1956, and the fact that the Egyptians acutely remembered that diabolical Israeli sneak attack.
No that was BS too. As Miko Peled explained, his father puched for the attack on Nasser not becasue he was going to attack, but becasue they knew Nasser would need a year to prepare for a war even if he wanted to attack.
As Rabin said:
“I do not believe that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions which he sent into Sinai on 14 May would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it.”
As Begin said:
“In June 1967 we had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches did not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us, We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.”
So clearly that wasn’t a reason.
No, it wasn’t that either. Israel could easily have invited the UN forces to it’s side of the border.
Nope wasn’t that either.
As General Peled said:
“The thesis according to which the danger of genocide hung over us in June 1967, and according to which Israel was fighting for her very physical survival, was nothing but a bluff which was born and bred after the war.”
And
“Israel was never in real danger and there was no evidence that Egypt had any intention of attacking Israel.” He added, “Israeli intelligence knew that Egypt was not prepared for war.”
So? Turkey is blockading Syria and Syria is attacking civilians just like Israel is. Sounds like Edrogan is being remarkably consistent, actually, and it’s rather refreshing for a head of state. Not you know that it matters because Turkey is TURKISH, not Arab. (They all look the same to you, hmm?) Has Turkey been staging air strikes on Syria the way Israel bombs Gaza on a weekly basis?
Here’s an interesting take on the UN vote, from John V. Whitbeck, at thepalestinechronicle:
“An American veto would be neither a big deal nor a bad thing. It would unequivocally confirm the sad and humiliating reality, now almost universally recognized, that the United States of America is enslaved to Israel, paying tribute and taking orders. By doing so, an American veto would definitively disqualify the United States from playing any significant role in any genuine Middle East “peace process” which would replace the fraudulent one which the United States has been controlling and manipulating on Israel’s behalf for the past 20 years and, thereby, would finally give peace a chance.
Indeed, since state observer status would confer on the State of Palestine virtually all the same benefits as member state status (most importantly, right of access to the International Criminal Court, where it could sue Israelis for war crimes, including settlement building, and crimes against humanity), an American veto in the Security Council followed by an upgrade to state observer status by the General Assembly might actually be the most constructive possible result for Palestine — even better than full UN membership with American acquiescence but with the United States maintaining its monopoly stranglehold on any “peace process”.
It appears that the current American strategy to defeat the State of Palestine’s UN membership application is to try to deprive Palestine of the required nine affirmative votes in the Security Council by convincing all five European members (including Bosnia & Herzegovina, which has recognized the State of Palestine) and Colombia (the only South American state which has not recognized the State of Palestine) to abstain, leaving only eight affirmative votes and thus making America’s lone negative vote not technically a “veto”.
America’s unanimous European abstention strategy, if successful, would have catastrophic consequences. While the Arab and Muslim worlds have learned to expect the worst from the United States, they have, at least until now, maintained some hope that Europe is not their enemy. If Palestine’s membership application were to be defeated by a united Western front, the world would be confronted by a fundamental clash of the “West against the Rest”, resurrecting memories of the most arrogant and contemptuous periods of Western imperialism and colonialism and confirming the belief, already widespread in the Arab and Muslim worlds, that the Judeo-Christian world is at war with the Muslim world.”