How they stole the bomb from us - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

LaRondo · #1 12-12-2007, 04:36 AM

How They Stole The Bomb From Us
08/12/07

IT WAS like an atom bomb falling on Israel.

The earth shook. Our political and military leaders were all in shock. The headlines screamed with rage.

What happened?

A real catastrophe: the American intelligence community, comprising 16 different agencies, reached a unanimous verdict: already in 2003, the Iranians terminated their efforts to produce a nuclear bomb, and they have not resumed them since. Even if they change their mind in the future, they will need at least five years to achieve their aim.

SHOULDN'T WE be overjoyed? Shouldn't the masses in Israel be dancing in the streets, as they did on November 29, 1947, sixty years ago? After all, we have been saved!
Until this week, we have been regularly hearing that - any minute now - the Iranians will produce a bomb that threatens our very existence. Nothing less. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the new Hitler of the Middle East, who announces every second day that Israel must disappear from the map, was about to fulfill his own prophecy.
A small nuclear bomb, even a teeny-weeny one like the ones dropped on Japan, would be enough to wipe out the whole Zionist enterprise. If it fell on Tel-Aviv's Rabin Square, the economic, cultural and military center of Israel would be vaporized, together with hundreds of thousands of Jews. A second Holocaust.
And lo and behold - no bomb and no any-minute-now. The wicked Ahmadinejad can threaten us as much as he wants - he just has not got the means to harm us. Isn't that a reason for celebration?
So why does this feel like a national disaster?
A TWO-BIT psychologist (like me) might say: Jews have become used to anxiety. After hundreds of years of persecution, expulsions, inquisition, pogroms and then the Holocaust, we have little red warning lights in our heads, which come on at the slightest sign of danger. In such a situation, we feel at home. We know what to do.
But when the lights stay off and no danger appears on the horizon, we get the feeling that something suspicious is going on. Something is wrong. Perhaps the lights are out of order. Perhaps it's really a trap!
There is one little consolation in the new situation. While it seems as if the immediate danger of annihilation has disappeared, there is a feeling that we are alone, on our own again.
That is another sign of Jewish uniqueness: We are facing the entire world alone. As in the days of the Holocaust, all the Goyim have forsaken us. Face to face with the Iranian monster which threatens to devour us, we now stand here alone.
All our media are repeating this in unison, like an orchestra which does not need a conductor, because it knows the music by heart.
True, other peoples, too, can derive satisfaction from standing alone. Engraved in my memory is a British poster that was hanging on our walls in Palestine in the dark days after the fall of France to the Nazis, when Britain was left quite alone in the war. Under the grim face of Winston Churchill the slogan proudly proclaimed: "Alright then, Alone!"
But with us this has almost become a national ritual. As we used to sing in the good old days of Golda Meir: "The whole world is against us / That is an old melody / …And everybody who is against us / Let him go to hell…" At the time, one of the army entertainment teams even turned it into a folk dance.
In the last few years, a broad coalition against Iran has come into being. The Iranian bomb has become the heart of an international consensus, led by America, Queen of the World. With the consent of all its five permanent members, the UN Security Council has decreed sanctions against Tehran.

...to be continued

LaRondo · #2 12-12-2007, 04:37 AM

Now, before our very eyes, this coalition is crumbling. President Bush is stammering. Gone is the excuse for an American military attack on Iran, the dream of the Israeli government and the neocons. Gone is even the pretext for more stringent sanctions. God knows, perhaps even the existing feeble sanctions will be abolished tomorrow.
THE FIRST reaction of the Israeli leadership was vigorous and determined: total denial.
The American report is simply wrong, all the media proclaimed. It is based on false information. Our own intelligence community is in possession of much better data, which prove that the bomb is well on its way.
Really? All the intelligence in the hands of the Mossad is automatically transferred to the CIA. It is part of the mass of data on which the American report is based. It must be remembered that the published part of the report constitutes only 3% of the complete document.
So the American intelligence agencies must be deliberately lying. There is no escaping the conclusion that murky political motives must lie behind their unequivocal findings. Perhaps they want to make up for the false reports which President Bush employed to justify his invasion of Iraq. Then they overestimated, now they underestimate. Perhaps they want to take revenge on Bush and believe that the time is ripe, since he has become a lame duck. Or they are adapting themselves to American public opinion, which cannot stomach another war. And, besides, their chiefs are, of course, all anti-Semites.
Even if the American intelligence operatives innocently believe that Iran has stopped work on the Bomb, it just shows how naive they are. They cannot imagine that the Iranians are fooling them. Who knows better than us how easy it is to hide an atomic bomb and deceive the whole world? After all, we have been at it for years.
But all this does not change the fact: this report pushes American policy in a new direction and changes the entire international constellation.
The war on Iran, which was to be the defining event of 2008, has turned for the time being into a non-event.
WHAT ARE the results, as far as Israel is concerned? Why have our leaders been in a state of shock since the publication of the report?
The possibility of an independent Israeli military strike against Iran has vanished. Israel cannot wage war without the unreserved backing of the US. We tried once - the Sinai War of 1956 - and then President Dwight D. Eisenhower kicked our ass. Since then we have taken great care to obtain the blessing of the US before every war.
For the military and intelligence services, the report is an unmitigated disaster for another reason too. The Iranian bomb plays an indispensable part in the army's annual fight for its massive chunk of the budget cake.
For right-wing demagogues, the effect is even more disheartening. Binyamin Netanyahu has built his whole strategy on the Iranian scare, hoping to ride the Bomb right into the Prime Minister's office.
Furthermore, when the Iranian issue cools down, the Palestinian issue warms up. That is especially true in Washington DC. President Bush is in trouble, his fiascos in Afghanistan and Iraq are still dragging on. Any American effort to install a stable government in Iraq, with its Shiite majority, depends on the backing of Shiite Iran. Bush's dream of delivering a lightning stroke against Iran and thus leaving his imprint on history is going up in smoke.
What can he do in order to leave any positive legacy at all? The default alternative is Israeli-Palestinian peace. Perhaps he will now give stronger backing to poor Condoleezza. Perhaps he himself will get more involved. Fact: he is soon going to visit Israel for the first since entering the White House.
True, this effort has not much chance of success, but people in Jerusalem are worried nonetheless. That's just what we need - Bush acting like that anti-Semite, Jimmy Carter, who twisted Begin's arm and forced him to make peace with Egypt!
So what to do? One can instruct Israeli diplomats abroad to redouble their efforts to convince the governments that the situation has not changed, that one must fight against the Iranian bomb, whether it exists or not. But tell that to the Russians and the Chinese! The world's governments are happy to see the end of Bush's pressure - all except that happy couple, Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel, the new White House poodles now Tony Blair has gone.
THE NEW situation poses a thorny dilemma for Ehud Olmert.
On the way back from Annapolis, he uttered some amazing statements. If the "two states solution collapses," he declared, "the State of Israel is finished". Nobody in the peace camp has yet dared to go as far as that.
Does he believe what he says, or is it just a new spin? That is the question that is now dominating the discourse in Israel. In other words: is he just trying to win time, or is he really going to work for a peace settlement?
All indications suggest that he is in no position to take any step whatsoever. If he tries to carry out the first phase of the Road Map and dismantle some settlement outposts, he will face not only the determined opposition of the settlers and their supporters, and the silent (but highly effective) opposition of the military, but also obstruction by his government colleagues. Before the first outpost is dismantled, his coalition will break apart.
Olmert has no other coalition handy. Ehud Barak has been trying again and again to outflank him on the right and cannot be relied upon in a crisis. The Labor Party is a chaotic, spineless and unprincipled body. The shrunken Meretz party has a faction of only five Knesset members, four of whom are competing with each other for the party leadership. The ten members of the Arab factions (that's what they are generally called, even though one Hadash Knesset member is a Jew) are outcasts, and no "Zionist" government could be seen to rely openly on their support. And in Olmert's own faction there are several extreme-right members who would obstruct any peace effort.
In such a situation, the natural tendency of a real politician like Olmert is to do nothing, to issue pronouncement left and right (in both senses) and try to gain time.
This week, the government announced plans to build 300 new homes in the odious Har Homa settlement, near Jerusalem. For someone like me, who has spent many days and nights demonstrating against the building of this particular settlement, that is bitter news indeed. It certainly does not indicate a turn for the better.
On the other hand, I have heard an interesting thesis from one of Olmert's inner circle. According to this, knowing that he is going to lose power, Olmert may tell himself: if I must fall, why not enter history as somebody who has sacrificed himself on the altar of a lofty principle, instead of just vanishing as a good-for-nothing political hack?
If he has no other way out, he might choose this solution - particularly as his immediate family is pushing him in this direction.
I would evaluate this possibility as "unlikely" - but stranger things have happened.
In any case, perhaps the peace forces should overcome their understandable reservations and try to influence public opinion in a way that would help Olmert turn in this direction.
EITHER WAY, one thing is certain: that son of a *****, Ahmadinejad, has screwed us again.
He has stolen our most precious possession: the Iranian Atomic Threat.

BENZ-LGB · #3 12-12-2007, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaRondo

A TWO-BIT psychologist (like me) might say: Jews have become used to anxiety. After hundreds of years of persecution, expulsions, inquisition, pogroms and then the Holocaust, we have little red warning lights in our heads, which come on at the slightest sign of danger. In such a situation, we feel at home. We know what to do.
But when the lights stay off and no danger appears on the horizon, we get the feeling that something suspicious is going on. Something is wrong. Perhaps the lights are out of order. Perhaps it's really a trap!
There is one little consolation in the new situation. While it seems as if the immediate danger of annihilation has disappeared, there is a feeling that we are alone, on our own again.
That is another sign of Jewish uniqueness: We are facing the entire world alone. As in the days of the Holocaust, all the Goyim have forsaken us. Face to face with the Iranian monster which threatens to devour us, we now stand here alone.
All our media are repeating this in unison, like an orchestra which does not need a conductor, because it knows the music by heart.

Just when I think that there is some hope for you, you go back and do it again by quoting extensively and without attribution from a hate piece.

You get all bent out of shape when I call your people murderous, savage Huns with faded dreams of racial superiority.

Yet you have no problem quoting from someone who lumps all Jews into one group and who writes about Jews being an insecure people, always looking for a boogey man to bolster their "agenda."

That is the height of hypocrisy and it takes you right back to what I've been writing about you.

Now your options are clear.

You either disavow the article's characterization of Jews (assuming these are not your own words) and prove that you and your people are not all the things that I have accused you of being.

Or, you refuse to disavow the author's hatred-filled anti-Jew diatribe and thus prove me correct in what I've written about you.

The choice is yours.

I am hoping that you prove me wrong.

Jim B. · #4 12-12-2007, 09:04 AM

Wow!!!

connerm · #5 12-12-2007, 09:08 AM

Well said Benz-LGB. Lots of cut-and-paste pundits on this forum.

LaRondo · #6 12-12-2007, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BENZ-LGB

Just when I think that there is some hope for you, you go back and do it again by quoting extensively and without attribution from a hate piece

Quote:

Originally Posted by BENZ-LGB

You get all bent out of shape when I call your people murderous, savage Huns with faded dreams of racial superiority.

Yet you have no problem quoting from someone who lumps all Jews into one group and who writes about Jews being an insecure people, always looking for a boogey man to bolster their "agenda."

That is the height of hypocrisy and it takes you right back to what I've been writing about you.

Now your options are clear.

You either disavow the article's characterization of Jews (assuming these are not your own words) and prove that you and your people are not all the things that I have accused you of being.

Or, you refuse to disavow the author's hatred-filled anti-Jew diatribe and thus prove me correct in what I've written about you.

The choice is yours.

I am hoping that you prove me wrong.

I don't recall asking you for even an ounce of hope.

Yes, the piece is provocative, but in no way does it lump sum any one in the way you do with the "your people quote".

You talk about dogmas of racial superiority, while being a staunch supporter of it.
Only difference, you walk on the other side of the street.

It’s a sign of how insensitive people in the country have grown, if you see what level of provocation it takes to get your people’s attention.

You are not the one who sets my options, Ernesto. Be sure about that.

Let me tell you one of my latest acknowledgements:

“No nation in world’s modern history has managed with mastery the accomplishment of “making illusion appear like perfect reality” as America did.

It’s called the “World of Make-Believe”.

You are a perfect product of this accomplishment.

Now, why don’t you drive along in your ‘Sam Spade’ and be happy as you are supposed to be.

You will never dig my position, not in generations to come, you’re wasting your time trying …

LaRondo · #7 12-12-2007, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BENZ-LGB

...opening a thread and then clsoing it in order to get the last word in.

Reminds me of terrorists who hit and run; instead of staying and fighting like real men.

Cobardes todos!

I've been adviced that this is not a "forum of personal attacks".

Since you failed to address the article and preferred to pull the same old ... you know what, on me, I felt persuaded to react as I did.

Before I prove your delibaration on attacking me over the article, maybe you can pronounce "clsoing" for me and besides answer my question "Are you suggesting I am a coward, a terrorist or even both?"

So, if you can stick to the subject without driving slant insults toward me ... we could get administrative approval on this thread.

BENZ-LGB · #8 12-13-2007, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaRondo

"Are you suggesting I am a coward, a terrorist or even both?"

So says you.

Your words speak louder than anything I can ever write.

By your words and deeds you have proven that everything that I've written about you...and more...is true.

It is the height of cowardice, as well as being intellectually dishonest, to quote at length from a source without attribution.

By doing so, without comment, you have then attributed as yours the haterd-filled words of the author.

To re-state my point, which you asppear to either not understand or ignore, here it goes again (maybe I will get someone to translate it for me into German, so you can understand it better):

You do not like me lumping all German people into the same murderous, vaingloried, Semite-hating, Gypsy-killer, homosexual-burners, savage Huns who inflicted so much pain in the world during the last world war.

I can see how you would not like to be tossed into that group.

You do not even like it when I accuse the Germans who lived in Germany in the years leading up, and incuding, WWII, of complicity in the cirmes perpertrated by Herr Fuhrer in the name of Aryan-superiority and ethnic leansing.

Fine, I can also understand why you do not like to hear those accusations.

So I've restrained in doing so.

Now, you quote at length and without attribution, an article that accuses all Jewish people of being insucure, looking for a boogey man to justify their actions.

So tell me, why is it OK for you to spread such crap unchallnged and then turn around and whine and ***** and moan whenever I mention things which are fully supported by the historical record.

If that is not hypocrisy then I do not know what it is.

I even gave you an out. I asked you whether those were your opinions or were you merely quoting from a source and not incorporating the author's comments aobut Jews as your own.

Instead of taking the opportunity to come clean on this issue, you instead chose to personally attack me. And then, like any coward would do who cannot support his views, you closed the thread.

And now you are blaming the moderators.

Isn't that cowardice upon cowardice?

So what is it?

Do you accept the author's views of Jews (as expressed on his article)?

Or do you disavow them and call them for what they are: another attempt to marginilize a people who have already suffered enough through history.

The ball is in your court.

Just remember this, if you think that you can lump all Jews (or any other people) into a single, like-minded group, then don't *****, moan and whine if I lump all Germans, past and present into the same group as the Aryan bastards who tried to conquer the world.

BENZ-LGB · #9 12-13-2007, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaRondo

...without driving slant insults toward me ... we could get administrative approval on this thread...

Slant insults? What the "f" is a "slant" insult?

If I am going to insult you, thus risking the wrath of the administrators and a possible ban, I will do it directly, openly and explicitly so you get the full flavor of my meaning.

People can accuse me of many things, not being direct is not one of them, however.

Subtlety, or "slantiness" (whatever that may be), is wasted on the obtuse.

LaRondo · #10 12-13-2007, 02:36 PM

Why is it all about me?

I defended myself as a response to your attack. You still seem not to understand sensitivities of others. You are all together so prejudice and judgmental toward Germans there is simply no platform of a possible communication.
You will always funnel it down to the Third Reich period, in order to justify your own desire for superiority.

I don’t blame Mods, why would I ? Mods do what Mods do …

You excerpt one paragraph of the article and ignore the rest.

I’m not obligated to adhere to your limited choice of options, but I am happy to introduce you to the author of it.

Now let’s see if you call him the same as you call me.

I say, prove him wrong!
__________________
zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery

Gurkha · #11 12-13-2007, 09:28 AM

http://www.msnbc.com/news/wld/graphics/strategic_israel_dw.htm

http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/israel.htm

Larry Delor · #12 12-13-2007, 03:28 PM

Reading this, beats watching some of the presidential debates as of late.