252 comments posted · 1 followers · following 0

7 years ago @ Information Clearing H... -     How... · 0 replies · +9 points

You are the propagandist and had you done your due diligent research you would have found that indeed Margolis is a respected journalist + he is personally wealthy so he can afford to speak his mind without fear of being fired, something that most journalists either refuse to do or are instructed not to do: Israel is like a hot potato that burns those who don't handle it the way Zionists want them to. The list of burnt politicians, journalists and activists is long. Your talking point indicate that you are a hasbara troll. Talking about moral standards, Bibi and Sarah have proven to be king and queen of sleeze, over and over again.

7 years ago @ Jewish Daily Forward - Hillary Clinton Set fo... · 0 replies · +2 points

This is an election for a US president who should theorically put US interests first. That's the POTUS mandate.
If you want to put Israel's interests ahead of US', then go and vote in Israel.

7 years ago @ Jewish Daily Forward - Readers Write: Bibi, B... · 0 replies · +9 points

... and the neocons who promised peace on earth but are trying hard to send us the Armageddon way.

7 years ago @ Jewish Daily Forward - Readers Write: Bibi, B... · 0 replies · +9 points

Security Council Resolution 1441 was not a pass for war. Saddam, MI6 and the CIA knew that there were no WMDs in Iraq. The fact is that Iraq was becoming less compliant and therefore Saddam had to go and the WMDs were the best pretext they found, along side fabricated intelligence and dubious connections to al Qaeda - all proved false.
As to Butler:
"Iraq’s stated position is that it has no weapons of mass destruction (WMD). As recently as last week, two senior Iraqi officials – the Deputy Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister – reiterated this claim." (Statement at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee by Ambassador Richard Butler, Former Executive Chairman of UNSCOM, Diplomat in Residence, Council on Foreign Relations - July 31, 2002)
That's how Richard Butler started his presentation on Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction. He went on: "It is essential to recognize that the claim made by Saddam’s representatives, that Iraq has no WMD, is false. Everyone concerned, from Iraq’s neighbors to the UN Security Council and the Secretary-General of the UN, with whom Iraq is currently negotiating on the issue, is being lied to." History has proved Saddam right and Butler wrong.
By the way, when he made his presentation, Butler was Diplomat in Residence at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). While the CFR is a respected institution, the presence of neo-cons on its roaster, the close contact, and cross-pollination of ideas with the powers-that-be has translated into a hawkish stand during the run-up to the Iraq war, as some members have now on Iran.

7 years ago @ Jewish Daily Forward - Readers Write: Bibi, B... · 0 replies · +7 points

These are not just "articles". They represent the opinion of two former Israeli prime ministers and therefore carry weight that an ordinary op-ed would not. "like Goebels". Really? Nothing better to contribute to the discussion than a cravenly ad Hominem attack?

7 years ago @ Jewish Daily Forward - Readers Write: Bibi, B... · 0 replies · +10 points

First, you keep referring to Security Council Resolution 1441 as a pass for ar. It was not. According to Patrick McLain, 1441 "stops short of explicitly authorizing force, yet the United States maintained that such explicit authorization was unnecessary."
The resolution places the burden of proof on Iraq to affirmatively demonstrate that it does not possess WMD or related materi-als, and provides that “false statements or omissions in the declara-tions submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach.” (SETTLING THE SCORE WITH SADDAM: RESOLUTION 1441 AND PARALLEL JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE USE OF FORCE AGAINST IRAQ, Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law)
Moreover, while Saddam repeated that Iraq had no WMD, "[T]he potential justifications for unilateral intervention in Iraq are inconsistent with existing international law. That is not to say definitively that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq does not or will not present a credible threat to the United States or the international community, just that it does not currently present a threat that is recognized by international law as giving rise to unilateral armed intervention." (Settling the Score)
And just in case there was any doubt about the Administration's intent, Colin Powell made sure to tell AIPAC the following: "And let there be no doubt about the outcome. We will drive Saddam and his regime from power. We will liberate Iraq. We will remove the shadow of Saddam’s terrible weapons from Israel and the Middle East, and we will keep them from the hands of terrorists who would threaten the entire civilized world." (Colin Powell’s speech to AIPAC, 31 March 2003)

7 years ago @ Jewish Daily Forward - Readers Write: Bibi, B... · 3 replies · +11 points

Goldberg missed the fact that both former Prime Minister Ehud Barak (Taking Apart Iraq's Nuclear Threat, NYTimes, Sept. 4, 2002) and his predecessor Netanyahu (The Case for Toppling Saddam, Wall Street Journal, Sept. 20, 2002) wrote op-eds in major US papers justifying/pushing for war and regime change in Iraq.
One reason may be oil. Netanyahu, then Finance Minister, said he expects an oil pipeline from Iraq to Israel to be reopened in the near future after being closed when Israel became a state in 1948. "It won't be long when you will see Iraqi oil flowing to Haifa," the port city in Northern Israel, Netanyahu told a group of British investors, declining to give a timetable. It is just a matter of time until the pipleline is reconstituted and Iraqi oil will flow to the Mediterranean." ( Haaretz, June 20, 2003)
The war didn't turn up the way the neocon 'Clean Break' report, Bibi and friends foresaw it. Still no pipeline open to this day and no strong state to challenge Iranian hegemony, except Saudi Arabia, the new Israeli friend in the region.

7 years ago @ Jewish Daily Forward - CIA Chief Denounces Ir... · 0 replies · +3 points

Your anger is misdirected. Do you have credible sources other than Bibi/ AIPAC talking points to justify your rant?

7 years ago @ Jewish Daily Forward - On Iran, Four Question... · 2 replies · +4 points

Yes, they did and do. But the Palestinians are under Israeli occupation, and therefore Israel has responsibilities towards them according to The Geneva Conventions. There is no legitimate reason for Israel to treat members of an off-shoot of al-Qaeda that is attacking Yarmouk, Syria alongside ISIL terrorists, other than shortsighted belief that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Way back, Hamas was helped along the way by Israel to undermine the secular PLO. Blowback big time. Al-Nusra seems to be another blowback in waiting.

7 years ago @ Jewish Daily Forward - Israel Details Objecti... · 0 replies · +2 points

Don't you love the chutzpah?
"Given Iran’s track record of concealing illicit nuclear activities, why can’t inspectors conduct inspections anywhere, anytime?"
How about Israel covert operations, illicit nuclear activities and refusal to sign the NPT?
Bibi, join the legit side, then you can criticize.