Trending Topics:

Netanyahu goes after Obama: ‘Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel’

News
on 94 Comments

Haaretz reports:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday launched an unprecedented verbal attack on the U.S. government over its stance on the Iranian nuclear program.

“The world tells Israel ‘wait, there’s still time’. And I say, ‘Wait for what? Wait until when?’ Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel,” Netanyahu told reporters on Tuesday.

“Now if Iran knows that there is no red line. If Iran knows that there is no deadline, what will it do? Exactly what it’s doing. It’s continuing, without any interference, towards obtaining nuclear weapons capability and from there, nuclear bombs,” he said. . .

On Monday, speaking to reporters in Washington, State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said, “It is not useful to be … setting deadlines one way or another” or to outline “red lines” for how far the U.S. can allow Iran’s nuclear program to advance.

She repeated that President Barack Obama has stated unequivocally that the United States will not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, and that U.S. support for Israel’s security is unwavering.

But she said she would not speak about ongoing discussions between the U.S. and Israel, calling such talk “not helpful for the diplomacy.”

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also said the administration is not prepared to make such a public commitment.

“We’re not setting deadlines,” Clinton said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio.

This comes weeks after an “explosive confrontation” between Netanyahu and US Ambassador Dan Shapiro on the administration’s Iran policy. Jeffrey Goldberg recounts an interview Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) gave about the argument. Rogers is the chair the House Intelligence Committee and witnessed the exchange:

Rogers told a Michigan radio interviewer earlier this week that he had not previously witnessed such a high-level confrontation, and he described Israeli leaders as being at “wits’ end” over what they see as President Obama’s unwillingness to provide them with his “red lines” in the effort to stop Iran’s nuclear program. He also said that neither the Israelis nor the Iranians believe that Obama would use force to stop the nuclear program. (UPDATE: Rogers said as well he believes the Israelis will “probably” bomb Iran if they don’t get clearer red lines from the U.S.)

Rogers description of the meeting directly contradicts repeated Administration assertions that there is “no daylight” on the Iran issue with the Israeli government. Shortly after the meeting took place, Israeli press reports appeared suggesting that Netanyahu and Shapiro had engaged in an argument, but Shapiro soon dismissed those reports, calling them “silly” and saying, “The published account of that meeting did not reflect what actually occurred in the meeting. The conversations were entirely friendly and professional.”

Rogers, speaking to WJR radio host Frank Beckmann, painted a very different picture. He said the meeting, originally scheduled to be a discussion of intelligence and technical issues between himself and the prime minister, spun out of control when Netanyahu began lambasting Shapiro over the Administration’s Iran policy. When Beckmann asked Rogers to describe the tenor of the meeting, he said: “Very tense. Some very sharp… exchanges and it was very, very clear the Israelis had lost their patience with the (Obama) Administration.” He went on, “There was no doubt. You could not walk out of that meeting and think that they had not lost their patience with this Administration.”

Rogers said Israeli frustration grows from what they see — and he sees — as a refusal by the Obama Administration to outline an endgame: “(I)t was very clear the overarching policy has been frustrating mainly because I think it’s not very clear. What we walked out of that meeting knowing is that the Administration was trying to defend itself.” By the end, he said, there was a “sharp exchange between the Administration’s representative there, our ambassador there, and Mr. Netanyahu, which was unusual to say the least, but I thought at the end of the day maybe productive.”

Beckmann then asked: “Is it inaccurate to say it was a shouting match?” Rogers answered: “I can say that there were elevated concerns on behalf of the Israelis.” When asked if he had “ever seen that sort of thing before,” Rogers answered: “No not that directly. We’ve had sharp exchanges with other heads of state and in intelligence services and other things, but nothing at that level that I’ve seen in all my time where people were clearly that agitated, clearly that worked up about a particular issue where there was a very sharp exchange.”

Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Executive Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

94 Responses

  1. seanmcbride on September 11, 2012, 10:43 am

    Benjamin Netanyahu’s claim to historical fame will be that he wrecked Israel’s relations with just about everyone, including its most important patron.

    • Krauss on September 11, 2012, 1:40 pm

      Bibi is a clown. Everyone is laughing at him.

      Israel can’t do anything on it’s own. That much we know. If it could, it’d done so long, long ago.

      Israel’s record on these issues is clear: to the maximum extent possible, do it on your own, without any warning.

      That was the case in Syria and in Iraq. Israel can’t do it now. So he’s stuck with Obama and Obama knows that. Bibi has tried to install Adelson’s puppet but now that plan seems to go to hell.

      The real scandal is how a significant part of the American political establishment is working for another nation against America’s national interest. That is the definition of treason. But they are willing to buy 90 % of Congress to make sure that treason is glorified.

      But even bribery has it’s limits. Bibi can put like the petulant little child he is.
      In the end without Obama’s green light he’s creamed – and he knows it.

      The only thing I wish now is for the left to begin rooting out the Likudniks from their own ranks, and pressure spineless tools like David Remnick who is prostituting himself for AIPAC’s minions and giving them space to run their propaganda campaigns.

      Without AIPAC and it’s media tools like Remnick, Bibi would be completely insignificant.
      And even now they are more and more forced to use brutal power.

      • Krauss on September 11, 2012, 3:03 pm

        Oh, now even this:

        White House Says No to Bibi Meeting

        he White House declined Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s request on Tuesday to meet U.S. President Barack Obama during a UN conference in New York at the end of the month.

        An official in Jerusalem said that the prime minister’s office sent the White House a message stating that although Netanyahu will spend only two and a half days on U.S. soil, he is interested in meeting Obama and is willing to travel to the U.S. capital specifically for that purpose. The official added that the White House rejected the request and said that at this time Obama’s schedule does not allow for a meeting.

        Source: http://forward.com/articles/162641/white-house-says-no-to-bibi-meeting/

        And what will Bibi do now? Rant some more in front of the media.

        The clown is irate and nobody is taking him seriously.
        Put up or shut up, Bibi.

      • BillM on September 11, 2012, 4:47 pm

        I don’t think you’re looking at this story quite right. Some point:

        1) The story was leaked out of Jerusalem (almost certainly Bibi’s office), not Washington).
        2) It was obviously timed for 9/11.
        3) It was guaranteed to outrage and agitate the right, as indeed it is doing (read some of their twitters or blogs).
        4) Thus, it was timed to damage Obama by increasing right-wing enthusiasm.
        5) Obviously, it damages Bibi as well politically at home, and no PM wants to ANNOUNCE the fact that he can’t get a meeting.
        6) Conclusion: Bibi is willing to accept political damage if he can damage Obama in doing so. His goal is to harm Obama even at political cost to himself.

        Sadly, Obama will almost certainly fold and end up meeting with Netanyahu, but in the meantime it shows yet again that Bibi’s central goal is to unseat Obama.

      • Carllarc on September 11, 2012, 4:55 pm

        Indeed, it would so seem that Netanyahu has shot himself in the face to spite his foot in his mouth.

        In the entire set of morons in the world, Netanyahu certainly would rank as the most moronic — unfortunately, this particular moron is in a position to do great harm. Maybe if the world is lucky nothing will happen because everyone is too busy laughing at Bibi.

      • annie on September 11, 2012, 5:13 pm

        The White House declined Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s request on Tuesday to meet U.S. President Barack Obama during a UN conference in New York at the end of the month.

        sweeet, just as i predicted earlier today.

      • ToivoS on September 11, 2012, 5:13 pm

        Krauss this story that Obama will not meet with Bibi is interesting. When a country announces that they would like to meet with a foreign leader publicly like that they normally have worked out in advance through their diplomats that the other side is willing to meet. Obviously, Bibi did not do this. By announcing without a prior understanding he forces Obama to either agree or to publicly diss Bibi. Bless Obama’s heart, he chose the latter.

        Another example of Netanyahu’s in incredible arrogance, and stupid arrogance in this case. I think Avnery is on to something when he says that Netanyahu’s stupidity is very dangerous for all concerned.

      • lysias on September 11, 2012, 5:22 pm

        Why should Obama meet with Bibi? The polls indicate Obama will win whatever Bibi does or does not do.

      • annie on September 11, 2012, 5:39 pm

        here’s more

        21.05 (16.05) This Netanyahu stuff looks set to blow up in the White House’s face. Tommy Vietor, the spokesman for the National Security Council, has put out this statement trying to dismiss the Haaretz report.

        Quote The President arrives in New York for the UN on Monday, September 24th and departs on Tuesday, September 25th. The Prime Minister doesn’t arrive in New York until later in the week. They’re simply not in the city at the same time. But the President and PM are in frequent contact and the PM will meet with other senior officials, including Secretary Clinton, during his visit.

        But the statement does not address the claim that Netanyahu offered to come to Washington to meet at the White House. I called the National Security Council but they’re refusing to go beyond that statement.

        I spoke to a Romney aide earlier who said they would not be addressing the issue out of respect for the 9/11 anniversary but expect them to hit Obama hard first thing tomorrow morning.

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9502431/US-election-2012-September-11-live.html

        my guess is obama will remain unruffled. he doesn’t have to be there for netanyahu’s beck and call. let’s not beat around the bush, netanyahu is campaigning for romney. get real.

      • Ellen on September 11, 2012, 5:49 pm

        Bill, unfortunately you have it absolutely right.

      • Woody Tanaka on September 11, 2012, 6:02 pm

        If Obama were smart, he would simply say that if ‘yahoo wanted to come out to, say, Akron Ohio, he could meet him for 10 minutes on the bus for a grip-and-grin with reporters, but then propose meeting in mid-November.

      • seanmcbride on September 11, 2012, 7:09 pm

        “This Netanyahu stuff looks set to blow up in the White House’s face.”

        Since most Americans are much more preoccupied with American than Israeli issues, all of these attacks on Obama by Romney over Israel are likely to blow up in Romney’s (and Netanyahu’s, and Israel’s) face — Romney gives the impression that he is not focused on the American interest and is on the payroll of Las Vegas Israel Firster Sheldon Adelson.

        Most Americans are also opposed to an Iran War, which both Netanyahu and Romney are eager to plunge into. This issue and policy position are not a selling point for Romney — the ruination of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars are too fresh in the minds of Americans.

      • bindup on September 11, 2012, 7:11 pm

        Netanyahu’s playing a weak hand, and playing it badly. Call me naive (and you won’t be the first), but seems to me that he’s vastly overestimated his ability to influence US politics, at this juncture and on this issue. No American President can be seen as being dictated to by a foreign leader in matters of war & peace, especially in the wake of Iraq and Afghanistan. So I think the issue will blow up in Romney face if he appears to sanction his old friend’s behavior. As far as Israel using nukes in Iran, I can’t help but believe that Israel’s security elite knows such a strike would be the ultimate “delegitimizer” of the Jewish state, with no “victory”, ie no increased security, to show for it.

      • ToivoS on September 11, 2012, 7:41 pm

        Also from Annie’s link to the Telegraph:

        underscored by the fact that this is the first time Netanyahu will visit the U.S. as prime minister without meeting the president.
        If true, the turned-down meeting will join the long list of perceived snubs by Obama towards the Israeli premiere and leave him vulnerable to the Republican attack that he is “throwing Israel under the bus”.

        Absolutely amazing. Obama has met with Netanyahu more times than with any other world leader. Israel, has a Jewish population (the only part of Israel that counts as a world power) about the same as 13th ranked Missouri. How often has Obama hosted the Governor of that any other state.

        I do hope Romney makes this a big political issue tomorrow morning with Obama simply dismissing it — I do think Romney might see a big drop, yet again, in the polls.

      • ahhiyawa on September 11, 2012, 9:24 pm

        No, your not getting it right. Obama’s flim-flaming Bibi and is why he showboated in front of Roger’s, who by the way was probably not “astonished” at all and a full partner in this ‘stooge hall show,’ just so he could come home and complain how bad and nasty Obama is to Israel.

        The vermin can’t move Obama and are now reduced to unstatesman like outbursts that actually hurts them more than it does Obama. And as for right wing enthusiasm, its going to take more than a wuss like Netanyahu to help out in that department. Its likely also a gambit for more money from high rolling Jewish donors, since what they have spent and got on hand isn’t enough.

      • Abierno on September 11, 2012, 10:41 pm

        Let Mitt hit Obama hard on behalf of Netanyahu – the anniversary of 9/11 is just the opportunity to remind patriots in this country that Netanyahu’s first comments were to indicate ‘ This is good for Israel!”

      • American on September 11, 2012, 11:38 pm

        “Sadly, Obama will almost certainly fold and end up meeting with Netanyahu, …”BillM

        Maybe not…..there isn’t really any political upside for Obama in meeting with Netanyahu.
        A ‘photo opt’ for Jewish voters… vr. ….Netanyahu misrepsenting anything said in that meeting to bash Obama.
        Nope, better to stay clear of Netanyahu.

      • Taxi on September 12, 2012, 3:20 am

        You hit the bullseye, bindup.

    • Citizen on September 14, 2012, 7:17 am

      @ seanmcbride
      Oh, I don’t know–Truman got over his extreme irritation with the big macher Zionist rabbi who pounded on Truman’s desk with his hammy fist in the Oval Office, trying to persuade (threaten) Truman to sign the letter recognizing Israel. Truman was so agitated he burned a big pile of Zionist-gathered letters without even opening them and scribbled in his diary his disappointment in how the Jews were like everybody, just another miserable case of the unterhund becoming the uberhund. Truman told his old Jewish business buddy he’d never see the Zionists again, but that buddy alone got Truman to capitulate and open his door to the Zionists, and the rest, as they say, is history–to be repeated no doubt in front of our eyes pretty soon.

  2. Dan Crowther on September 11, 2012, 10:48 am

    Whatever else is true about Bibi and Friends, they know their way around the propaganda dissemination table. Get a Right winger to talk to the press about his and the israeli’s being at their wits end with “this” administration and so on? Good move. Give a presser in English about the “red lines” and the “red lights”? Even better.

    I’m still not sure if Bibi isn’t playing the necessary asshole for the administration or not, but all the talk about nothing going down for at least another year is probably just wishful thinking. They can’t climb down from this branch.

    • Ellen on September 11, 2012, 6:18 pm

      Bibi is a foreign PM Visiting the US and intentionally creating a disturbance around himself in the hopes to influence the direction of the Presidential campaign.

      It is transparent, ugly and could backfire.

      Winds are changing and then coastal media and political vacuumes do not see it yet.

    • ahhiyawa on September 11, 2012, 9:27 pm

      They can’t climb down? Oh yeah they will. That’s why they are making fools out of themselves with these silly demonstrations. The only people they’re fooling is themselves.

  3. eGuard on September 11, 2012, 11:09 am

    Could it be this: Netanyahu sees Obama is on reelection course without attacking Iran or even promising to attack. Expect more outbursts. I hope Obama has said: “If you attack, you’re on your own”.

    • MRW on September 11, 2012, 2:22 pm

      Dempsey told Netanyahu that, apparently.

      • lysias on September 11, 2012, 5:23 pm

        I wonder who was behind that attack on Dempsey while he was in Afghanistan.

      • Kathleen on September 12, 2012, 12:33 am

        Ouch

      • moonkoon on September 12, 2012, 7:06 am

        And I wonder who was behind that attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi which killed the US ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens (amongst others).

        The reason given for the attack, outrage over an amateur video, sounds to me like copybook hasbara.

    • ahhiyawa on September 11, 2012, 9:28 pm

      He probably already has, more pointedly than most people suspect.

  4. Patrick on September 11, 2012, 11:21 am

    Netanyahu is just trying to influence the US elections. With polls now showing Obama pulling ahead of Romney, he’s looking increasingly desperate.

    • Ellen on September 11, 2012, 5:54 pm

      In his desperation, he may continue to make a greater fool of himself, which will immensely hurt Israel, and their treasonous lackeys in the US Congress.

      Eric Cantor may even want to disassociate himself from Bibi and hope Virginians forget that he is Israel’s puppet in the US Senate.

      • lysias on September 12, 2012, 10:15 am

        Cantor is in the House, not the Senate. (Although, as majority leader in the House, he has a lot of power there.)

  5. tear-stained uzi on September 11, 2012, 11:47 am

    “Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel,” Netanyahu told reporters on Tuesday.

    Nobody does self-delegitimization better than Bibi. What a drama queen.

    • Sumud on September 11, 2012, 7:02 pm

      Iran remains in compliance with the NNPT, which has it’s red lines.
      Obama should demand Israel join the NNPT and declare its weapons capability – or face the same sanctions now applied to Iran.
      It’s phenomenal that a rogue nuclear state gets to whine continuously about a NNPT compliant state like Iran, and that mainstream media talking heads NEVER bring this up. Should be top of the agenda.

  6. Kathleen on September 11, 2012, 12:25 pm

    Flynt Leverett has a great one up over at Race for Iran about Netanyahu and Obama.
    Flynt “An important part of what Netanyahu is doing is in a sense trying to influence our politics our debate here in ways that will set up the U.S. whether under a re-elected President Obama or under a Romney administration is set up the U.S. um to undertake that mission. Basically to start a war with Iran if Iran will not stand down from enriching uranium. I think this is a very important part of what Netanyahu and Barak are doing right now” Great interview with Flynt over there at Race for Iran.

    Adam I think you would be interested in the show Diane Rehm did yesterday “Israeli perspectives on Iran” as if we hear anything else in our MSM. Great comments on the Rehm page and facebook. Diane allowed outrageous and unsubstantiated claims to be repeated by Iran with no challenges. Last Friday during the the Rehm international hour Diane allowed CNN’s Ms. Labott to say that Iran is working on weapons in a way that inferred nuclear weapons. Kittfield repeated the debunked “Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map” No challenges at all from Diane Rehm. Continues to help set the stage for an attack on Iran

  7. chinese box on September 11, 2012, 12:49 pm

    Bibi loves traffic light metaphors. Anyone remember the “green light to terror”?

    I think Bibi must have spent his college years in the US perfecting a bunch of dumbed down soundbite material that he thought would resonate with uninformed American voters.

  8. tear-stained uzi on September 11, 2012, 12:50 pm

    Bibi screeches about ‘red lines,’ hoping the world will forget the Green Line.

  9. eljay on September 11, 2012, 1:03 pm

    >> “Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel,” Netanyahu told reporters on Tuesday.

    So, according to Bibi, it is more important to halt Iran’s alleged illegal activities than it is to halt the nuclear-armed, oppressive, colonialist, expansionst and supremacist “Jewish State’s” very real 60+ years, ON-GOING and offensive (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder.

    Hateful and immoral Zio-supremacists have absolutely no shame. Maybe that’s what it takes to be a good aggressor-victim.

  10. seafoid on September 11, 2012, 1:05 pm

    I wonder how Nuland feels to be savaged by Bibi after all the head she has given Zionism over the years.

    • Kathleen on September 11, 2012, 4:23 pm

      good one

      • seafoid on September 12, 2012, 2:35 am

        Bibi is pushing too far this time.
        Nuland does everything for him and he turns around and slaps her

        http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2011/10/176434.htm

        Matt Lee: All right. So, this was not particularly a banner day for U.S. diplomacy. If you count the abstentions, you had — 159 countries did not vote the way you did. Only 13 did. That would seem to suggest that these countries don’t agree with you that this is such a big problem. Those countries included the French – France. They included numerous members of the Security Council. What happens to them now that you’re punishing UNESCO? What happens to these countries that voted to, in this regrettable way that is going to undermine the peace process?
        MS. NULAND: Well, those countries obviously made their own national decisions on this vote. We disagree with them. We made clear that we disagreed with them before the vote. We make clear that we disagree with them after the vote. We also make clear here today that we want to continue our relationship with UNESCO. But as we said before this vote, and as we have had to say today, legislative restrictions compel us to withhold our funding now. And that will have an impact on UNESCO.
        QUESTION: But going back to – you said in your opening you said that this was regrettable, premature, and undermines our shared goal. Who’s shared goal? Who shares this goal, other than the 13 other countries that voted with you, now?
        MS. NULAND: Countries all over the international system share the goal of a Palestinian state and secure borders —
        QUESTION: Why would the possibly do something – how could they possibly do something that you say is so horrible and detrimental to that process? How can they – how can you still count them – count on them as sharing this goal?
        MS. NULAND: You’ll have to speak to them about why they made the decision that they made. We considered that this was, as I said, regrettable, premature, and undermines the prospect of getting where we want to go. And that’s what we’re concerned about.

        8-10 tankers carrying 2 million barrels of oil per day leave Saudi via the straits of Hormuz to feed the American economy. If Israel goes to war against Iran the straits will be closed and the US economy will tank.

    • tear-stained uzi on September 11, 2012, 11:51 pm

      OK pal — thanks very much for the nightmare fuel :8^(]

      (Hey, wasn’t there a gay porno filmed in some ethnically cleansed Palestinian village called “Savaged by Bibi”?)

  11. seafoid on September 11, 2012, 1:15 pm

    Bibi’s comb-over is a joke. It’s as ludicrous as his rhetoric.

  12. MRW on September 11, 2012, 2:19 pm

    Jim Lobe reporting on a survey that was released at the Wilson Center for International Scholars Monday by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs (CCGA). “The survey results suggest that more aggressive and militaristic policies adopted by Republicans at their convention last month may be out of step with both independents and younger voters.”

    The survey, which was conducted in late May and early June, also found strong resistance by the public to becoming more deeply involved — especially militarily — in the Middle East, despite the perception by seven in 10 respondents that the region is more threatening to U.S. security than any other.

    For the first time since 9/11, majorities said they opposed the retention or establishment of long-term U.S. military bases in Iraq or Afghanistan.

    At the same time, 70 percent of respondents said they opposed a unilateral U.S. strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities; and almost as many (59 percent) said the U.S. should not ally itself militarily with Israel if the Jewish state attacks Iran.

    http://original.antiwar.com/lobe/2012/09/10/us-public-satisfied-with-less-militarized-global-role/

    Maybe they bothered to poll people in the middle of the country this time. The ennui with Israel is palpable, but the east coast media ain’t hearin’ it. (Check out how Fox has lost viewers lately.) You heard it at the Democratic Convention, however, with the Villaraigosa vote.

    • ritzl on September 11, 2012, 3:52 pm

      Wow. Those are pretty significant poll results, MRW. They spell “backfire” or maybe “BACKFIRE” on my decoder ring, as you and American and others have been saying for a while.

      Thanks.

    • American on September 11, 2012, 7:03 pm

      “Maybe they bothered to poll people in the middle of the country this time.”..MRW

      If they had it would probably have had even worse percentages for the war mongers.
      I am about as far East as you get in the US and in the South to boot, and those numbers seem to reflect the general opinions I hear in the community..and really it’s more a conservative area than not…but no one is up for more ME involvement for any reason …..and Israel is regarded as an irritant.

  13. justicewillprevail on September 11, 2012, 2:26 pm

    As Uri Avnery rightly said, the low level of intelligence that Yahoo and Barak display is a real concern for just about everyone:

    http://original.antiwar.com/avnery/2012/09/09/the-march-of-folly/

    Bibi’s arrogant and bullying nature has turned him and his benighted little country into an international pariah, a rogue state which is shunned by most, whatever diplomatic language they use in public. His assumption that he can force the US to sacrifice lives and trillions of dollars in pursuit of his madcap ideological fantasies is truly repellent. The more he rages and has tantrums the better for the US public to see what kind of mad demagogue they have been suckered by.

  14. Bumblebye on September 11, 2012, 2:27 pm

    Israel has ZERO ‘moral rights’, nor does Netanyahu, since they are an undeclared nuclear power, quite aside from all their breaches of international law!

  15. lareineblanche on September 11, 2012, 3:04 pm

    OK. Perhaps more stern measures are in order.
    Can someone over there just stuff a sock in this clown’s mouth? Maybe some ether to put him down and ship him off to the Negev or something?
    This is getting ridiculous. Dagan, Pardo, Gantz, Cohen whoever – you know what to do…

  16. radii on September 11, 2012, 3:15 pm

    Bibi’s ego knows no bounds – he just doesn’t get it that the U.S. has won this war of brinkmanship and he lost … he pushes even harder … and the U.S. just may have to encourage his topple from power and now that the U.S. has allowed information about his part in smuggling U.S. nuclear triggers out of America in the 80’s he is fair game for arrest by the CIA for espionage

  17. Kathleen on September 11, 2012, 4:26 pm

    It is interesting that Grant Smith, Professor Norman Finkelstein, Dr. Zbig, former President Jimmy Carter have all inferred that they think Netanyahu has threatened the use of nuclear weapons on Iran and this is the threat he is holding over Obama pushing him to use conventional weapons.

    • lysias on September 11, 2012, 6:36 pm

      Does the U.S. have no means to disable an Israeli nuclear attack on Iran? (I’m thinking of things like an electromagnetic pulse.)

    • Dan Crowther on September 11, 2012, 7:18 pm

      Ding Ding Ding! I have no credentials, but that’s exactly what I’ve long thought

    • American on September 11, 2012, 7:30 pm

      @ kathleen

      I read something about that..Halder or Walt?.. I forget who at the moment except it was a knowledgeable person.
      The gist was Israel has outright threatened twice before to use nukes and is all the time ‘insinuating’ desperation could drive them to use them….but everyone is so sick of the threat and the crying wolf that Obama and the military command have adopted the posture that they just going to call Israel’s bluff on this one.

  18. DICKERSON3870 on September 11, 2012, 5:07 pm

    RE: “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday launched an unprecedented verbal attack on the U.S. government over its stance on the Iranian nuclear program.” ~ Haaretz

    MY COMMENT: In other words, give us what we want or else! This is nothing short of an “extortion racket” like those most commonly associated with organized crime groups. – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion It is not insignificant that the head of Israel’s “extortion racket”, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will be coming to the US next month in an effort to give the Romney/Ryan campaign a boost! Netanyahu has announced that he will address to the United Nations General Assembly and “tell the nations of the world in a clear voice the truth about the terror regime of Iran which represents the greatest threat to world peace”.
    Am I being overly suspicious in suspecting that Netanyahu’s “speech” to the UN might be a collaborative effort between Netanyahu’s office and the Romney/Ryan campaign with plenty of nice, juicy soundbites suitable for attack ads to be funded by certain billionaire-funded 503(c)(3) “super PACs” and/or even more secretive 503(c)(4) “social welfare organizations”?
    Would the Repub-Likuds stoop that low?

    • annie on September 11, 2012, 5:29 pm

      no, you’re not being ‘just suspicious’ dickerson this is exactly what’s going on.

      • ColinWright on September 12, 2012, 1:15 am

        This might be one reason Obama is refusing to meet with Netanyahu.

        He doesn’t want to give Netanyahu grounds for claiming he said or didn’t say something — nor a chance to feed him loaded questions where Obama has a choice between (a) agreeing to sanction an Israeli attack on Iran, or (b) giving the Republicans a line for their next ad.

    • Ellen on September 11, 2012, 6:02 pm

      No, not at all. But that is a very big risk for the GOP to get behind a war monger who wants to send more Americans to their death for Israel and further plunder US resources to attack another nation out of paranoia.

      It could backfire big time.

      • Kathleen on September 12, 2012, 12:32 am

        I don’t really think that Romney is that insane..but his foreign policy team is

    • American on September 11, 2012, 7:13 pm

      bibi is going to tell the nations of the world at the UN?…lol…they will laugh their asses off at him.

      • ColinWright on September 12, 2012, 3:13 am

        Watch for walkouts. I wonder if Netanyahu can empty the hall?

    • eljay on September 11, 2012, 8:23 pm

      >> Netanyahu has announced that he will address to the United Nations General Assembly and “tell the nations of the world in a clear voice the truth about the terror regime of Iran which represents the greatest threat to world peace”.

      Funny how Iran – a non-nuclear power w/ no stated expansionist goals – is a greater threat to world peace than the nuclear-armed and overtly colonialist, expansionist and war-mongering “Jewish State” of Israel that keeps i) threatening offensive warfare and ii) trying to drag other nations into supporting or helping to execute its offensive plans.

    • DICKERSON3870 on September 12, 2012, 9:28 pm

      RE: “Am I being overly suspicious in suspecting that Netanyahu’s ‘speech’ to the UN might be a collaborative effort between Netanyahu’s office and the Romney/Ryan campaign with plenty of nice, juicy soundbites suitable for attack ads . . . Would the Repub-Likuds stoop that low? ” – me (above)

      FROM THE N.Y. TIMES, By DAVID E. SANGER and ISABEL KERSHNER, 9/11/12:

      [EXCERPT] . . . Mr. Romney had no immediate comment about Mr. Netanyahu’s challenge to Mr. Obama, and one of his informal advisers on the Middle East said, “It’s probably better at this point to let Netanyahu make the point because it’s more powerful that way.” The adviser said he was not authorized to speak on the record.
      But the Netanyahu comments play right to the Republican nominee’s critique of Mr. Obama. On “Meet the Press” on Sunday, Mr. Romney declared that the progress of Iran’s nuclear program was Mr. Obama’s “greatest failure” in foreign policy . . .

      SOURCE – http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/middleeast/united-states-and-israel-engage-in-public-spat-over-iran-policy.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

  19. DICKERSON3870 on September 11, 2012, 5:17 pm

    RE: “Netanyahu goes after Obama: ‘Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel’”

    MY COMMENT: Spoken like a real narcissist!

    SEE: “Is There a Way Beyond Israeli Madness?” [Will the Chosen People and the Exceptional People Go Down Together?] ~ by John Grant, Counterpunch, 8/31/12

    [EXCERPTS]

    “The patient, by the name of Israel, walks into the room and instantly bursts into a tirade of arguments conclusively proving his credentials, and says that he is better than everyone else.” ~ Ofer Grosbard, ‘Israel On The Couch: The Psychology of the Peace Process’

    Americans have an Israel problem. . .
    . . . The problem Americans have with Israel is that the region it exists in is in the midst of a major political sea change, while Israel is frozen in time and holding on to its militarist, right-wing policies of extending settlements in the West Bank. It’s a policy that harks back to the ideas of the British-trained militarist Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s Iron Wall, which is based on the idea a live-and-let-live policy between Jews and Arabs is impossible and, thus, Jews must militarily control and repress Palestinians [i.e. the mindset of the “pale” – J.L.D.] . . .

    . . . How does a people turn back a racially-oriented demonization program with roots that extend back many decades? How do you ratchet down a nation’s narcissism so people are able to simply see the other as a human being? . . .
    . . . On our part, Americans and the United States need to stop being a permissive yes-man and begin to show Israel some tough love. We need more US criticism of Israel. No doubt this approach will be received with gales of cynical laughter from hardliners . . . but so what?
    In my mind, the Israeli narcissistic and arrogant mindset would benefit from a little Buddhist detachment, more of the posture that sees the world not of separate individual selves and egos but of human beings as part of a larger flow of life. The Buddhists call the self-obsessed, separatist state-of-mind [i.e. the “pale” of Israel surrounded by Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s Iron Wall* – J.L.D.] that Israel thrives on and defends with weapons as “the illusory self.”
    “Once one identifies with a permanent self-concept, the pride and craving adhering to this become the pivot from which an egocentric world arises,” writes Gay Watson, a psychotherapist attuned to Buddhism.

    David Loy puts it this way: “To become completely groundless is also to become completely grounded, not in some particular, but in the whole network of interdependent relations that constitute the world.”
    I’m not suggesting Israel become a Buddhist nation. The point is for Israelis, and more important Americans, to figure a way out of the worsening condition of “us versus them” to avoid the need to obliterate them and set off a war that no one really wants. The point is to re-shape our minds to make “the other” less threatening to permit talking.
    I’m not holding my breath that Benjamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman are going to become peace activists. But I’m done as an American being a silent stooge [i.e. a habitual “enabler” ~ J.L.D.] while Israeli militarist madness fuels hatred and sets the stage for war.

    ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/31/is-there-a-way-beyond-israeli-madness/

    P.S. Personally, I believe Israel’s Likudniks consider (at least subconsciously) Iran’s nuclear program to be a potential breach in Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s Iron Wall.

    • DICKERSON3870 on September 11, 2012, 5:23 pm

      P.S. FROM WIKIPEDIA [Narcissism]:

      (excerpts) Narcissism is a term with a wide range of meanings, depending on whether it is used to describe a central concept of psychoanalytic theory, a mental illness, a social or cultural problem, or simply a personality trait. . .
      . . . Hotchkiss identified what she called the seven deadly sins of narcissism:[6]
      • Shamelessness: Shame is the feeling that lurks beneath all unhealthy narcissism, and the inability to process shame in healthy ways.
      • Magical thinking: Narcissists see themselves as perfect, using distortion and illusion known as magical thinking. They also use projection to dump shame onto others.
      • Arrogance: A narcissist who is feeling deflated may reinflate by diminishing, debasing, or degrading somebody else.
      • Envy: A narcissist may secure a sense of superiority in the face of another person’s ability by using contempt to minimize the other person.
      • Entitlement: Narcissists hold unreasonable expectations of particularly favorable treatment and automatic compliance because they consider themselves special. Failure to comply is considered an attack on their superiority, and the perpetrator is considered an “awkward” or “difficult” person [or perhaps an “anti-Semite” ~ J.L.D.]. Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can trigger narcissistic rage.
      • Exploitation: Can take many forms but always involves the exploitation of others without regard for their feelings or interests. Often the other is in a subservient position where resistance would be difficult or even impossible. Sometimes the subservience is not so much real as assumed.
      • Bad boundaries: Narcissists do not recognize that they have boundaries and that others are separate and are not extensions of themselves. Others either exist to meet their needs or may as well not exist at all. Those who provide narcissistic supply to the narcissist are treated as if they are part of the narcissist and are expected to live up to those expectations. In the mind of a narcissist there is no boundary between self and other. . .

      . . . Thomas suggests that narcissists typically display most, sometimes all, of the following traits:[5]
      • An obvious self-focus in interpersonal exchanges
      • Problems in sustaining satisfying relationships
      • A lack of psychological awareness (see insight in psychology and psychiatry, egosyntonic)
      • Difficulty with empathy
      • Problems distinguishing the self from others (see narcissism and boundaries)
      • Hypersensitivity to any insults or imagined insults (see criticism and narcissists, narcissistic rage and narcissistic injury)
      • Vulnerability to shame rather than guilt
      • Haughty body language
      • Flattery towards people who admire and affirm
      them (narcissistic supply)
      • Detesting those who do not admire them (narcissistic abuse)
      • Using other people without considering the cost of
      doing so
      • Pretending to be more important than they really are
      • Bragging (subtly but persistently) and exaggerating their achievements
      • Claiming to be an “expert” at many things
      • Inability to view the world from the perspective of
      other people
      • Denial of remorse and gratitude

      SOURCE – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism

    • DICKERSON3870 on September 11, 2012, 5:43 pm

      P.P.S. RE: “Defiance of their will is a narcissistic injury that can trigger narcissistic rage.” ~ from the above excerpted Wikipedia article on narcissism

      SEE: “PM tells US ‘time has run out’ on Iran diplomacy'” ~ By JPost.Com Staff, 08/31/2012
      Source tells ‘Yediot Aharonot’ that Netanyahu initiates shouting match with US Ambassador Shapiro on Obama’s Iran policy.

      [EXCERPT] Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu got into a diplomatic shouting match with US Ambassador Dan Shapiro over US President Barack Obama’s handling of Iran’s nuclear program, saying “time has run out” for diplomacy, Yediot Aharonot cited a source as saying on Friday.
      According to the report, which The Jerusalem Post could not independently verify, the showdown took place as Netanyahu met with Shapiro and Republican Congressman Mike Rogers, who visited Israel earlier in the week. . .
      . . . The American ambassador is said to have responded politely but firmly, telling Netanyahu that he was distorting Obama’s position. Obama promised not to allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, he explained, and left all options on the table, including military options.
      At that point, diplomatic sources told the paper, “sparks flew” in an escalating shouting match between Netanyahu and Shapiro as the stunned congressman watched. . .

      ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?ID=283353&R=R1

      P.P.P.S. Boy am I glad that Israel is practically on the other side of the globe from us. I certainly wouldn’t want to be in the Europeans’ shoes.
      Judging from the fierceness of Netanyahu’s narcissistic rage, we need to get that European missile defense system up and running ASAP to help protect Europe from Israel’s nukes!

      • DICKERSON3870 on September 11, 2012, 6:16 pm

        RE: “. . . The American ambassador [Shapiro] is said to have responded politely but firmly, telling Netanyahu that he was distorting Obama’s position. . . At that point, diplomatic sources told the paper, ‘sparks flew’ in an escalating shouting match . . .” ~ from the J. Post article excerpted above

        MY CONCERN: I wonder if Ambassador Shapiro is getting hazardous duty pay.
        Whatever the case, he had better be very, very careful in dealing with Netanyahu or I fear that he might end up like Folke Bernadotte! ! !

        • Folke Bernadotte – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folke_Bernadotte

    • DICKERSON3870 on September 11, 2012, 5:55 pm

      P.P.P.P.S. RE: “Judging from the fierceness of Netanyahu’s narcissistic rage, we need to get that European missile defense system up and running ASAP to help protect Europe from Israel’s nukes!” – me (above)

      ALSO SEE: “Bush Had Gog and Magog, Bibi Has Amalek”, by Richard Silverstein, Tikun Olam, 5/25/09

      [EXCERPTS]

      “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu considers the lifting of the Iranian nuclear threat his life’s mission. Before coming to power, he had mentioned that such an operation might cost thousands of lives, but the price was justified in view of the threat’s severity.” – Aluf Benn, Haaretz

      “My job is first and foremost to ensure the future of the state of Israel … the leadership’s job is to eliminate the danger. Who will eliminate it? It is us or no one.” – Bibi Netanyahu quoted in Haaretz

      Recently, Jacques Chirac confirmed that George Bush, in telephone calls leading up the Iraq war, attempted to persuade France to join the coalition of the willing by invoking the Biblical war of Gog and Magog. . .
      . . . The closest political leader to Bush on today’s political stage is Bibi Netanyahu, as the above Haaretz passages make clear. In addition, there are Bibi’s references to Iran being Amalek, implying Israel’s duty to smite the mullahs a terrible blow lest they first strike Israel in an nuclear attack. . .
      . . . Aluf Benn credits Bibi with firmly held beliefs as does Jeffrey Goldberg (not that Goldberg is my arbiter of truth by any
      means). So we must at least credit some conviction to Bibi. In doing so, we have to concede that the fervor with which he leads
      Israel to war against Iran is frightening in the extreme.
      We have the example of George Bush to guide us. He too believed he was on a mission from the Lord to tidy up the Middle East. . .

      ENTIRE COMMENTARY – http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2009/05/25/bush-had-gog-and-magog-bibi-has-amalek/

  20. matter on September 11, 2012, 5:21 pm

    Bibi is mad dog, armed with nuclear weapons. Until Israel joins the NPT, he’d be better served by keeping his mouth shut. If GW Bush had really wanted to eliminate a rogue nuclear weapons program in the Middle East, he should have invaded Israel. That might be the only solution: a total defeat like Nazi Germany, then a de-Zionisation program to root out the mad-dog fascists. Only then could there truly be democracy and equal rights, along with the end of the slave-state apartheid policies of the present.

  21. lysias on September 11, 2012, 5:25 pm

    Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel,

    What moral right do those who refuse to place a red light before Israel have to put red lines before Iran?

    • DICKERSON3870 on September 11, 2012, 6:31 pm

      “What moral right do those who refuse to place a red light before Israel have to put red lines before Iran?” ~ lysias

      MY REPLY: Narcissists do not need to have a “moral right” in order to do something. They are “special” and “entitled”, so the rules that apply to everyone else do not apply to them.
      SEE THE ABOVE EXCERPT FROM THE WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE ON NARCISSISM. – http://mondoweiss.net/2012/09/netanyahu-goes-after-obama-those-in-the-international-community-who-refuse-to-put-red-lines-before-iran-dont-have-a-moral-right-to-place-a-red-light-before-israel.html#comment-496752

    • ColinWright on September 12, 2012, 1:18 am

      Somebody should ask Netanyahu whether there are any circumstances in which others would be justified in placing a red light before Israel?

      Specifically, someone might ask him whether Eisenhower was justified in placing a red light before Israel in 1956? Whether Reagan was justified in doing it when he suspended loan guarantees?

      • DICKERSON3870 on September 14, 2012, 10:57 pm

        RE: “Whether Reagan was justified in doing it when he suspended loan guarantees?” ~ ColinWright

        MY REPLY: I believe you must be referring to the dust up* in the early 90’s when George H.W. Bush was president. Reagan did, however, suspend the sale of cluster bombs**
        to Israel in 1982 due to Israel’s having used them indiscriminately in Lebanon.

        * SEE: “Flashback: Bush Also Threatened To Withhold Loan Guarantees From Israel”, By Zaid Jilani, ThinkProgress.org, 1/11/10
        LINK – http://thinkprogress.org/security/2010/01/11/76731/mitchell-israel-loan-guarentee/

        ** ALSO SEE: How Many Violations of US Arms Laws are Too Many? ~ by Franklin Lamb, Counterpunch, 3/16/12

        [EXCERPTS] . . . Alarm centered on whether or not Israel had used U.S.-supplied antipersonnel cluster bombs against civilian targets during its carpet bombing West Beirut during the nearly three month siege.
        The House Foreign Affairs Committee held hearings on this issue in July and August 1982. On July 19, 1982, the Reagan Administration announced that it would prohibit new exports of cluster bombs to Israel. . .
        . . . During a late June 1982 meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Begin, Reagan was handed a note from George Shultz. Based on the information he had in hand, Reagan directly told Begin that the US had reliable information than Israel was using American weapons against civilians in Lebanon. At this point according to Reagan, Begin became very agitated. He lowered his glasses and while glaring at Reagan and shaking his index finger said, “Mr. President, Israel has never and would never use American weapons against civilians and to claim otherwise is a blood libel against every Jew, everywhere.” Following their meeting Reagan told Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger, as reported by Weinberger and by various biographers of Reagan that “I did not know what the term “blood libel” meant, but I know that the man looked me straight in the eyes and lied to me.”. . .

        ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/03/16/how-many-violations-of-us-arms-laws-are-too-m

  22. annie on September 11, 2012, 5:26 pm

    This comes weeks after an “explosive confrontation” between Netanyahu and US Ambassador Dan Shapiro on the administration’s Iran policy.

    it also comes a month after netanyahu and barak went on a scarefest, that fell flat and their ” demand by yom kipper” statement, so he’s right on schedule and will be milking this thing all month long before that date and nag about it the entire month afterward in the run up to the election.

    • ColinWright on September 11, 2012, 7:05 pm

      I think Obama has finally screwed up his courage and is going to blow Netanyahu off.

      …seen in this light, his move to put ‘Jerusalem is the capital of Israel’ back in the democratic platform be seen as a precaution. It makes it very hard to label to label him an ‘enemy of Israel.’

    • gingershot on September 11, 2012, 7:18 pm

      Bibi is meeting as solid wall of resistance in the last 1 1/2 weeks …

      Gen’l Dempsey: statement doesn’t want to be complicit (intimations of illegality) in an Israeli attack on Iran

      Admiral Shapiro: Telling Netanyahu off

      VP Biden: statement that Republican rival Mitt Romney (and by extension determined Israeli/Israeli Lobby strategic plans put forward by his Neocon FP team) is “ready to go to war in Syria and Iran” while HURTING the American middle class

      And now Hillary saying ‘No Red Lines’

      I love it – this is the only kind of language the Israelis will understand – not a inch of daylight between everybody telling Bibi ‘ NO’

      See, Obama? – it ain’t hard when you try.

    • ahhiyawa on September 11, 2012, 9:51 pm

      I’ll second that with a further caveat. They’re the ones scared half to death, because they know full well what’s coming their way if they fail in beating Obama 6 November next. Nonetheless, none of their desperate antics will work.

      The American people have steadily been moving from the center/right to the center/left, and the motivator in that development is owned solely and totally by the Republican party and its far right wusses. I warned my fellow Republicans and legislators that they have got 2010 all wrong, that they are riding our party hard to ruin and the dreaded “wilderness” of political irrelevance.

      I’m done trying to talk sense to fools.

  23. Shingo on September 11, 2012, 6:23 pm

    Bibi’s dilemma: Despite his threats of Israeli strikes on Iran, Tehran is taunting him. His Cabinet is divided. The Shas Party in his coalition opposes a war, as do respected retired generals, former Mossad leaders, and President Shimon Peres.

    Bibbi is appears to be havign a breakdown in public as Pat Buchanana put it this week. Even his cabinet is not taking him seriously. Not even they recognize his red line.

    I remember someone sayign he saw hmself as a Churchill, but in reality, he’s more of a Baghdad Bob.

    http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2012/09/10/has-obama-called-bibis-bluff/

  24. W.Jones on September 11, 2012, 6:55 pm

    ‘Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel’

    Sure. Let’s be fair and make sure I & I both sign the NPT, hold regular elections, and allow native populations to live in their home cities. While we’re at it, no more cruel and unusual punishments in either country’s prisons or having a State Religion. Also, we’ll fund both governments equally, etc etc.

  25. Ellen on September 11, 2012, 7:08 pm

    Interesting comments at the NYT on this, and seems most of the readership is disgusted by Netanyahu’s threats and demands and interfering in an election period.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/middleeast/united-states-and-israel-engage-in-public-spat-over-iran-policy.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

    • eGuard on September 12, 2012, 3:13 am

      Indeed. Over 900 comments now there, and all upper Reader Picks are dismissive: why this on 9/11, don’t mingle with our iternal politics, we should stop helping Israel, … Clear statements all over.

      The editorial NYT Picks had a problem, they could not find a single supporting voice. So they pointed out comments like: Romney is bibi’s friend, different feeling, I hope, …. Note that these are more the wishes and prayers, as opposed to Readers Picks’ statements.

      Now what does this mean. Did Netanyahu win any vote for Romney or his war? Or is he singlehandedly breaking up popular support for Israel in US? I’d say he is loosing it, but he is even more dangerous to start his war before election day.

      • ColinWright on September 12, 2012, 5:26 am

        eGuard says: “Indeed. Over 900 comments now there, and all upper Reader Picks are dismissive: why this on 9/11, don’t mingle with our iternal politics, we should stop helping Israel, … Clear statements all over.

        The editorial NYT Picks had a problem, they could not find a single supporting voice…”

        This is a definite shift I’ve noticed over the past few years. It didn’t use to be like this.

        Counting posts at the NYT is hardly scientific polling, but still…

  26. gingershot on September 11, 2012, 7:12 pm

    Netanyahu needs to be remembered in history as the ‘Man Who Tried to Hoax the US into a War Against Iran’

    This man needs to have an example made of him – one that Israel will never forget and never try again

  27. yourstruly on September 11, 2012, 7:23 pm

    someone like israel’s pm netanyahu who green lights the mass murder of palestinians and lebanese has no right (moral or otherwise) to tell president obama* to put red lights before iran.

    *even though obama too is a mass murderer

  28. American on September 11, 2012, 7:46 pm

    Maybe Obama is ‘gas lighting’ Bibi……as in the old movie.
    Heheheh…I could enjoy thinking Obama was driving Bibi crazy with the on again off again support……loudly swearing his support for Israel in public while telling Bibi in private if he jumps off the mantle he isn’t going to catch him.

  29. radkelt on September 11, 2012, 9:25 pm

    Kathleen, PM Golda Meir was reputed to have invoked the “samson option” to
    successfully compel US aid to Israel during the 73 war.

    It has also been furtively whispered in the dark alleys of conspirecyland that some
    evil force has placed one of those missing nuclear bombs in a US city, threatening
    to explode it should we (the USA) not comply with it’s demands.

  30. traintosiberia on September 11, 2012, 10:41 pm

    Yahoo is not doing anything that has not been already embraced as polciy by Israeli leaders and militray strategists throughtout its history. It is only getting louder, overt and arrogant. The spinelessness of the leaders,churches,media and to a large extent of the American citizen are inexplicable.The damages Israel have wrought on these bodies will become more visible in the years ahead. Now and then administrations try to put a stop or sidestep or make moves that is not consistent with their earlier rhetorics or with the usal subserviences to Yahoo/Barak demands.
    But sometime they even get scared and try to slow down but the beast that has tasted blood is not going to let any moment pass by without further pressure and war rhetorics. Aim is relentelss progression is to a war that will take the last resistance to Israeli dreams of Herzl ( 1904) ,Rabbi Fishmann ( 1947 ), Oded Yinon ( 1982 ) PNAC ( 1992,1996 ,2000) and post 2001 AEI,ECI,and the wet dreams of a few more newly minted and mutated organizations all tied to JINSA,AIPAC,and Likudniks/Shas/Kadami party of Israel , out of equation . Today’s Iran crisis can explain how Iraq happened. The Israeli machine and its neoocn counterpart did not bother or get hung up on who and when in ME gets attacked as long as the tanks started rolling and bombs started falling on the desert after 911. A Pearl harbor they wanted and it was showed up on thier plate .Looking back it seems they offered it to themselves by methodical and continous pressure and shaping of opinions in and out of the governemnt offices while forcing the adminsitartion to take the eyes off the Al Quida threat and forcing to think more in terms of hatred and alter threat from Saddam ( he was chosen for he was the bogeyman and conveneint distraction having earned that American perception from 1991 war. The 1991 war was never allowed to fade by the neocons-‘friendly media from American mind for same reason ). To them Al quida mattered only in terms of collusion with Saddam which was a flagrant lie and sand in the eyes to the CIA and to the intelligence agencies. But the intelligence bodies had no power compared to the neocons.The coup took place when 29 mebers of PNAC showed up on Bush Jr’s 2000 cabinet. The intelligence agencies were not allowed to do the job. Bush was kept in the dark. neocons knew where and how they were moving. They had “gentile” to make it look like a non -Israeli programme. Iran-crisis today is eerily recapturing those methods ,ploys and utter contempt for any moral or legal ramifications of the behaviors. The only changes seen are the shrill vocies of Yahoo and Barak in making similar demands that leaders from Ben Gurion to Sharon had extracted from US but they did it mostly quietly.

  31. Kathleen on September 11, 2012, 11:41 pm

    Thought I linked the Huff Po article up about Netanyahu and Obama. Important one. 1500 comments pending. Think that is the largest number of pending comments I have ever seen over there. 15,ooo have gotten through. Hope mine linking to Adam’s post about this and Flynt Leverett over at Race for Iran’s post about this dangerous dance between Netanyahu and the U.S.

  32. piotr on September 12, 2012, 12:02 am

    Interestingly, it was reported that Barak is jumping the ship of “attack Iran”.

    On related news, chipmunk on my back porch gave indications that it is loosing patience with me.

  33. Taxi on September 12, 2012, 12:48 am

    I dunno, every time I hear ‘red light’ I think of red light districts and prophylactics.

  34. Taxi on September 12, 2012, 3:11 am

    Israel’s public enemy number one is the Internet, number two is their big mouths, number three is right here: Taxi (lined up like the China Wall with a billion other truth and justice seekers).

    LOL! Netanyahu WOULD open his big mouth on 9/11 and the internet WOULD do the rest. Judging from the talkbacks on so many sites carrying this news item, sooooooo many Americans are just clearly FED UP TO THE EYEBALLS with warmongering israel.

    Even though it hasn’t registered with whoring congress yet, there is clearly a blinding SHAFT OF DAYLIGHT between the people of America and israel. I predict that by next election of 2016, an anti-zionist intifada in congress will be taking place.

    Thanks Bibi. So where do we send you the cheque for doing such a great job on our collective illumination/awakening? You’re gonna need it cuz you’re gonna go down in history as the coward who didn’t attack Iran and the bigmouth who pissed off the greater American people. A double-whammy disaster for zionism.

    Woohooooooo!!!!

    • ColinWright on September 12, 2012, 5:23 am

      taxi says: …Thanks Bibi. So where do we send you the cheque for doing such a great job on our collective illumination/awakening?”

      It’s not Israel’s enemies and critics that will kill her — it’s her friends and supporters.

  35. ColinWright on September 12, 2012, 3:40 am

    Curious, really.

    “Despite labeling Iran’s nuclear program as a “critical threat” to U.S. interests, a clear majority of Americans oppose a military strike against Tehran and support a policy of UN sanctions and diplomatic dialogue.

    The new annual poll published this week by the Chicago Council for Global Affairs on American attitudes towards foreign affairs – dubbed “Foreign Policy in the New Millennium” – found that 70% of Americans oppose a strike on Iran that is not authorized by the UN Security Council, and 51% are opposed even if the UN body does sanction the attack. In addition, 59% of Americans are opposed to US intervention on behalf of Israel in case of Iranian retaliation for a preemptive Israeli attack…”

    Read more: http://forward.com/articles/162681/americans-oppose-iran-attack-by—margin/#ixzz26ErdVvQ9

    Naturally, I’m glad…but isn’t it odd? One would think there was actually support for an attack on Iran, going by the rhetoric. ‘New sheriff in town,’ and all that.

    I think AIPAC and the Israel lobby have really overreached themselves here. If Netanyahu is still pushing this when he comes to New York, it could really be the end.

    Israel will become an election issue — and in a bad way. Obama will back off and leave Romney holding a baby that nobody wants any more. This could all play out very, very well.

    Well, I’m probably being optimistic. But still…

  36. justicewillprevail on September 12, 2012, 5:21 am

    What a dunce you are Bibi. The ‘red lines’ are of course not for Iran but for the US. Bibi and his gangsters have tried to push legislation in the US which would create these ‘red lines’, arbitrarily decreed by Israel, which would then force the US into war, once Israel has decided that Iran has crossed them, which of course it would quite swiftly. The object of these absurd red lines is to give Israel the whip hand, and to ensure that whatever Iran does or does not do, the famous red lines will be crossed, since they are drawn at the behest of Israel’s incessant propagandising and false ‘intelligence’. The whole thing is Kafka rewritten by Al Capone.

    As a further demonstration of his stupidity, Bibi starts ranting about ‘red lights’ for Israel. Of course the only country that possesses such a thing is the US. All he is doing is drawing attention to the fact that he needs the US to do his dirty work for him, and that he has to pay attention to what they allow Israel to get away with. So not one own goal, but two. All we can hope is that he spontaneously combusts with his own self-righteous outrage that the US isn’t doing what he has decreed.

Leave a Reply