War is coming, it's about OIL and GAS


by Q

From Senate Hearings with Army Secretary and Army Chief of Staff. Thursday Nov. 15, 2007. Broadcast on CSPAN2.



Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV): General Casey, in your comments before the National Press Club in August and in your prepared testimony today, you suggest that increase in competition for oil resources, particularly with a growing demand in China and India, will be a source of international conflict in coming decade. You appear to be suggesting that a primary justification for developing an expanded military is to secure adequate oil supplies for the US. If so, is that not an unrealistic objective and would it not be prudent to accelerate investment in infrastructure and alternative energy and to ensure that market mechanisms operate smoothly?

Gen. George Casey:
That was not what I was trying to suggest senator. I was just trying to point out the fact... that for example in India, the middle class population of India is burgeoning. It already exceeds the population of the United States. And the estimates that I have read about oil research and infrastructure improvements say that it’s not going to bridge the gap, we’re not going to have the oil resources that we need. As people try to shift to cleaner fuels, like natural gas… 60% of the world’s natural gas resources are in Russia, Iran and Qatar. We’re going to be drawn more to the Middle East rather than less. China, also has a burgeoning middle class. I believe the competition, not just oil but for water and other resources is going to generate global competition. Now whether it turns to conflict, it remains to be seen.

Sen. Robert Byrd: the International Energy Agency forecasts, contrary I believe to your estimate forecasts that OPEC will have little spare capacity left by 2012 and predict supply increases by other producers will start flagging as early as 2009. If this estimate is accurate, the competition that you suggest is already upon us. Specifically, what role do you see the military taking in this global struggle for energy resources?

Casey: I don’t see the military playing a direct role in it, Senator. What I highlighted those trends of which this is one, as trends that could exacerbate what is already likely to be a period of protracted competition. But I do not see the military as having a direct role in it.

You do not!
Iran currently has a stable government and economy. As the second largest oil reserves globally with approximately 10% of the world’s oil. While the US does not directly import oil from Iran. The economies of Europe and Japan are dependent on Iranian oil production and export. Is a military conflict in Iran, a practical approach to addressing our differences in Iranian government? Is it a practical approach?

Casey: Sen. This is a policy question that I wouldn’t want to comment on.

Byrd: It sounds like a practical approach to oblivion, a military conflict in Iran. Gen. Casey, does the United States have the military depth to conduct combat operations in Iran. And could we be certain that a US strike would destroy all the Iranian nuclear facilities?

Casey: Sen. You’re asking hypothetical situations, that would have to have a lot of conditions before I could even give you a remote answer to that. I’d prefer not to address it.

Well, hypothetical? I’m asking a question. I don’t think we are talking about a hypothetical situation. Does the United States have the military depth to conduct combat operations in Iran and could we be certain that a US strike would destroy all Iranian nuclear facilities.

The US military has the depth to conduct combat operations anywhere in the world. And on the second question, the track record for destroying targets entirely by air is not a 100%. So I would expect that any type of attack would not be a 100% successful. Again, this is a hypothetical situation.


If you listen carefully, a few things become clear. US rulers, both republican and democrat understand and fully accept that US will be in the Middle East for long term and that this presence is to secure oil and gas resources. They may have different ideas of tactics, but they all understand this is the game they must play.


And secondly on Iran, people like Byrd who are so old and established tha they have nothing to lose are not afraid of pushing the envelope on Bush Iran war plans. Of course, the Bush appointed General is not going to raise red flags before the war "product" is ready for public consumption. But Byrd did get him to admit that an aerial strike is useless to stop nuclear development.


But than again, the whole point, conceded by all sides, is that this is about OIL and GAS not NUKES.


This this is going down, on schedule.


more from Q

To: Problem with Arezu

by Arezu (not verified) on

Dear to Problem with Arezu:

You have chosen a very appropriate name for yourself, because I am getting tiered of repeating that "I have a problem".

It seems that you and I are the only two having a conversation on this article and have taken it in a totally different dimension.

You raise additional questions, many which are quite valid however an adequate response would require that we both write a book; and even then we would then have to write a second book to rebuttle each other's comments on the first. Though I find it intellectually dynamic and challenging exercise, I wonder if either one of us has the time?

And poor "Q" is probably saying you guys took over my entire article and switched it to your own topic -Wasn't really fair of us to sabotage his/her article. If we had the guts we should have written our own piece as opposed to using "Q"'s platform!

Though it has been a very enjoyable and intellectual discourse, and more amazing very "CIVILIZED". Good start.


The Problem with Arezu

by The Problem with Arezu (not verified) on

Dear Arezu,
Thank you for your response. You are an excellent writer regardless of our differing views. As to Iranians being open to religions I think that you are generally right to a certain degree- there is still a very deep tension with Sunni Islam . I was talking specifically about the IRI. They IRI is not open to other religions. Look how they are treating the Sufi Muslims. I don't have to mention how they treat the Bahais and anyone else who disagrees with their view of shiite Islam.
As to calling you hypocritical, I understand that your were responding to the Goldman character. Notwithstanding the reason for your response, and assuming that this Goldman character did not write what he did, don't you think the crimes committed by Muslims against Muslims this century are far more severe than what the Israelis have done to the Palestinians? I am not trying to justify (or be an apologist) for what the Israelis have done. I am asking you to take a global view of the situation.
Additionally, it is not only the Americans/neocons/Israelis that are after the IRI's atomic ambitions. Its also the French, The Brits, the Germans (really the entire EU). Its also the entire Arab world that is not comfortable with the idea- And I will explain why below.
Yes. Israel has nukes and America is the strongest nation in the world. No matter what you say, no matter what the IRI says and no matter what the IAEA says (which is not that favorable for Iran at all), the world wants guarantees that Iran will not get its hands on nukes. Sure, I agree that Iran as a sovereign nation has the right to nuclear power. However, I don't like the idea of the IRI having nukes (regardless of the hypocrisy of the US & Israel). I do not trust the Mullahs having nuclear weapons. I fear that they will use it to dictate and influence the region in a manner that will lead to more Iranian (and human) deaths in the long run. The record so far is clear. IRI has supported the most extreme elements in the region with arms and money. Just imagine a little suitcase nuclear bomb given to the Hizbollah as a gift. Just imagine a dirty bomb. What do you think the Israelis would do ? Just Imagine Saddam with nukes. He would lead Iraqis into hell as he attempted to control the regions oil production by invading Kuwait (yeh I know the American got it wrong in Iraq but after 9/11 no one in America likes to take the risk-Democrats or Republicans). Whether you like it or not, oil is the water of the worlds economy and Americans (and other world economic powers) will try to insure uninterrupted supplies for itself and its allies. If Japan gets hurt because of an oil shortage because of the IRI, it will effect the US (its a global economy). Its about balance of power. If we had a true stable and rational regime in Tehran, no one would care how many nukes Iran has. This is not the case now. IRI for 30 years has been trying to spread its revolution across the region. Just Imagine them with nukes. You are risking way more casualties. Just one additional fact for you- It was the Americans, under the Shah, who supported Iran's nuclear ambitions in the 60's & 70's. However, no one likes the mullahs. No one. Not the Arabs (except for the Syrians who will sell themselves to the highest bidder), not the Europeans and not the Iranian people living in Iran. Your pride as an Iranian has blinded you (and many others) to the ramifications of a nuclear Iran.
As to the Russians, they just want IRI money. They will get as much as they can. They are pissed off that the US sells weapons to anyone and at the same time the US tries to dictate to them how to conduct business in the region. They will also sell off Iran for the right price. The Russians did the same to the Iraqis.
Are you telling me that as an Iranian you will be proud with Khamenei having nukes under his belt? Are you telling me that Khamenei & Ahmadinejad are rational?
Again, no one said that Iran could not have nuclear power. Its nuclear weapons. The enrichment process they are going after has dual use. They don't need this dual use enrichment technology to achive their energy needs.
Your pride as an Iranian and your hate of American power in the world has blinded you (and many others) to the ramifications of a nuclear Iran.


To: The Problem with Arezu

by Arezu (not verified) on

Dear Problem with Arezu:

Well, I am happy to be speaking to an Iranian compatriot. Regardless of our different views, I always hope that as Iranians we are taking into consideration the welfare, sovereign rights of Iran and our people.

Your points are well taken, “the problem with Iranians and Middle Easterners is that they do not know how to handle political power and how to transfer (in peaceful means).”

However, with respect to Iran I have always believed that we Iranians are far more open to other religions, and ethnic group. Although the majority of the Iranian population is Muslim, we have lived among people from different religions and ethnic backgrounds throughout our history, and never believed that one’s religion identifies ones national identity.

I also agree with you that we have done poorly in our economic development. Unfortunately, the combination of rampant corruption and the sanctions has allowed much waste with our oil wealth.

In response to your comment – Let me clarify it for you, I am definitely not hypocritical.

Why do you think I am blaming everything on the Zionist/Israelis (let’s make it clear, I am not blaming it on Jews who are not Zionists). I am against any kind of radical and fundamentalist view! If you believe that my comments were directed very much to the Israel-Zionist and neocon cabal, I believe I explained it to you. My comments were directed to Shalom Goldman’s comment.

However, I staunchly believe that the Gov. of Israel, the Israeli Lobby, the neocons, and the hawkish Bush Administration are strong advocates of a military strike and regime change in Iran. They are pushing for it. There is no doubt that there are many problems within Iran internally, but this does not give any foreign country the right to push for resolutions which advocate sanctions on Iran, or a military strike, and force a country to give up its sovereign rights to appease any other country. .

I am going to state it again, Iran has a right to civilian nuclear power, and to date the IAEA has found absolutely no evidence of a nuclear weapons program. Iran’s dossier was illegally taken to the UNSC... For the United States, and the Zionist neocons including John Bolton to state that whatever the IAEA says is irrelevant to us, there is no option but a military attack just demonstrates what I am stating. They have no respect for international organizations unless they are advocating the U.S. stance on issues...

For Israel to feel that it has the right to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities because it aims to remain the only nuclear armed country in the Middle East is just too hypocritical. For Israel to feel that Iran is a threat to the security and peace of the world, including the United States, Israel and Europe is idiotic. Israel has one of the most sophisticated military in the world and this does not include the 200 to 400 nuclear war heads.

For the greatest military power in the world, the U.S.A. to feel threatened by Iran is simply foolish and any individual with a bit of brain can figure this out. Even the Russia President, Putin laughed at the excuse that the U.S. provided for installing its missile defense system in the ex-Soviet states – they are being installed to protect Europe from an attack by Iran! I guess they believe everyone is an idiot!

Why do you blame Iran for what will happen to it in the next few months? Are you basically saying that Iran should forego its rights under the NPT and stop enrichment to appease the U.S. and depend on other countries for its fuel? Why are you not blaming the U.S. who has used similar excuses to invade Iraq for regime change, and the WMDs were simply an excuse. Why are you not blaming the U.S. for not going forward with the Baker/Hamilton report of engaging in direct diplomatic negotiations with no preconditions with Iran?

I am confused as to what exactly are you blaming Iran for having committed that it deserves these illegal sanctions and threats to its national security?


First to Jamshid

by Arezu (not verified) on

There is absolutely no disagreement with your remark that Iranian people’s welfare comes first and foremost to that of any other people or nation.

First I will apologize for this elongated response to your comprehensive comment. Maybe this is the only way I belive I can respond adequately to your questions.

1. Iran just as the U.S. or in fact other countries must first clean its own house and provide for social and economic benefits for its own population before spending a significant amount of Iranian capital on other disfranchised nations.

2. However, much to our dismay the world of politics does not work in such a clean cut manner. As you know throughout history countries (especially U.S., Europeans including Russia) have implemented an interventionist foreign policy in order to create their spheres of influence that benefits the interest of their own agenda, even if at times it has had a significant backlash. Point in mind is the U.S. and U.K. foreign policy in the Middle East which has given rise to extremism in the Muslim countries and hatred toward the U.S. and U.K..

With the ending of the Cold War which lead to the U.S. becoming the sole super power and change in the balance of power; countries, including Russia, Iran, China and others have attempted to combat the status of the U.S./NATO by finding their own spheres of influence.

So, Iran's position is not unique – the U.S., U.K. and Russia have always played an interventionist role in Iran, specifically due to both Iran’s geopolitical position, and its rich natural resources. Democratic governments have been toppled to supplant a dictatorial regime. Saddam was instigated and aided by the U.S., Europeans as well as the Persian Gulf States to wage a brutal, bloody war against Iran. The U.S. double standard with respect to Israel has created much animosity within the Middle East nations and the Muslim world.

The U.S. has set a separate and distinct standards for Israel while other countries like Iran are forced to meet a totally different bench mark. This type of double standards and hypocrisy has created mush resentment against Israel not only by Iran but other countries as well. Furthermore, let’s not forget Israel has been calling for the invasion of Iran as early as 2002.

3. Iran’s attempts to forge relationship with the U.S. in 2003 and discuss all matters including its nuclear issue, its relationship with Israel, Hezbollah, etc... was all rejected by the U.S. Demonstrating that it has no interest in establishing a relationship with Iran but rather would like to do unto Iran as it has to Iraq. Furthermore, in return for the assistance that Iran provided to the U.S. in toppling of the Taliban’s, President Bush coined his famous term on Iran as member of the “Axis of Evil”.

4. What is the current status of Iran – (a) Iran is surrounded by nuclear armed states, including Israel which is pushing for a military attack and regime change; (b) the U.S. armed forces are surrounding Iran to its west, east, north and in the Persian Gulf States; (c) U.S. warships with nuclear warheads are stationed in the Persian Gulf; (e) the U.S. has imposed sanctions on Iran for over 29 years and is further forcing other countries to strangle Iran’s economy; (d) in contravention of international law and the UN Charter the U.S. has illegally taken Iran’s nuclear case to the UNSC while the U.S. itself is the greatest violator of the NPT and is aiding non-NPT nuclear states in developing their nuclear facilities; (f) U.S. is supporting terrorist organization (i.e. MEK, PJAK, Jundallah, and others) to create dissent within Iran in order to push for regime change; (h) It has provided funding to Iranian dissident groups to bring about regime change; (i) the U.S. is fabricating and decimating false propaganda and forged documents against Iran to ensure that the world will acknowledge that Iran is truly the “Axis of Evil” that the U.S. has painted it to be; and (i) the list goes on and on against Iran.

5. What has Iran done to protect itself against a military attack and forced regime change? Iran has formed its own spheres of influence which include: (a) Palestinians, (b) Hezbollah, (c) both the Sunni’s and Shiites in Iraq, (d) the masses in the Arab/Muslim worlds who are against the bullyism of the super power and are against their own puppet regimes, (d) the Caucasus States, (e) Russia, (f) China,; (g) Syria and others.

Iran knows that it cannot combat the military might of neither the U.S. nor Israel; however it can cause significant damage and problems in the region. Any country and regime will naturally do anything in its power to protect itself.


The only solution that the U.S. has provided to Iran is to forego its rights as a sovereign state and succumb to the dictates of the U.S. and become a puppet regime like the some of the other governments in the region. The U.S. wants access to Iran’s oil, resources and a foothold in Iranian territory; and Israel wants to be a benefactor and share in the U.S. hegemony in the region and the riches that it will garner.

Iran is determined to maintain its sovereign rights and not have a servant/master relationship with the U.S... In return the U.S. is pushing the squeeze on Iran initially with sanctions and threats of a military attack and regime change. The U.S. is continuously threatening Iran day in day out with military strikes, a threat to a country's survival against all international norms.

In order to protect itself, Iran has forged its own alliances with Palestinians, Hezbollah, Syria Iraqis, Russia, China and others. As such, the way it has won their support has been to provide funding (much which is for infrastructure rebuilding) and given Russia and China multi-billion dollar contracts. This is no different as to how the U.S. has implemented its strategy – aid to Israel in the billions, oil contracts to the Europeans and other avenues of arm twisting!!

Unfortunately, the U.S. has implemented a misguided foreign policy and is forcing nations to protect themselves from the super-power. Iran therefore believes that it needs the support of other countries and people. This is why it has not maintained a neutral stance with respect to the Palestinians.

I blame this on the Bush Administration for not taking the advice of Baker/Hamilton and entering into direct dialogue with Iran with no preconditions. Under such a circumstance, the concept of a "grand bargain" would work, and Iran would not fear threatened for its survival nor a need to provide funding that it desparately needs for its own people.

I in fact am a strong advocate that Iran should have a good relationships with all countries, including Israel. They can be great partners in many area

Finally, I don't believe you and I are different on our assessment of how in a more cordial political atmosphere Iran should be playing its cards. However, sadly the Middle East is in a constant state of turmoil.


The Problem with Arezu

by The Problem with Arezu (not verified) on

Dear Arezu,

First I am Iranian. My favorite food is Koreshteh bademjoon (I don't like ghormeh sabzi as much- never did). Bavar kon, Irooni hastam.

You are totally wrong when you say that Israelis or Jews get along and are united. Jews and Israeli are very disunited when it comes to the questions such as judaism, palestinians, zionisim, peace with arabs......They are united when some suicide bomber blow himself up in the name of Islam. They are also united when some crazy Iranian ahmagh calls for their distruction. Which is why the majority of jews (you can call them zionists) would support bombing Iran.

Its OK to have different points of view. Its healthy. Its healthy in Iranian.com as well that you and I have different points of view. Its a markeplace of free ideas. The problem with Iranians & middle easterners in general is that they (we) have not figured out how to handle political power, how to transfer (in peaceful means) political power and we do not respect freedom of religion. We may say that we do, but we don't.

Look at America, no body gives a dam what god you pray to or how you pray. In Iran(and the middle east) the god you pray to and how you worship god is still an issue.

Additionally, oil has been the biggest Curse. Why? not because we are selling it to cheap. Even if it was $200 or $300 a barrel, we would still screw it up . Its like the poor person who wins lotto and in a matter of a few years is still poor again. The majority of lotto winners end up poor or miserable. There have been studies on this. We do not know how to manage the resources and the great majority of it is wasted.

Arezu, you are still dogging the question I asked you. I don't care if you answer or not. You will not answer because it will be an admission that your arguments are hypocritical. I apologize for my tone but it is the only way I can express why you and many far lefties blame everything on zionists/neocons/jews..... Its absolute garbage (ashghal)/ It does not help the Iranian cause either. Innocent Iranians may die because of the IRI's policies. You are waisting your breath by blaiming jews/zionist. this is classical far left dietribe (prevalent in many colleges and universities these days).

We have no one to blame but Iranians for what will happen in the next few months. Lets take responsibility and stop blaming others.


Re: Arezu

by jamshid on

Iran has three choices for its foreign policy in regards to the Israel/plastine issue.


1. Take the side of the palastinians and fight for their cause. It is certain that this will result in confrontation with the US which is the super power of this world. This in turn will result to more problems for Iran and its people, as any confrontation with a stronger power will cause problems.


2. Take the side of Israel. This will result in confrontation with Arab and other moslem countries, which will also result to some problems for Iran.


3. Take a neutral side, i.e. let this issue be a problem between Israel, Arabs and the US and anyone else who may want to jump in. Let them solve their problems and keep Iran out of their troubles. This is the most benefial to Iran and its people as it does not cause confrontation with foreign countries. Iran can then focus its limited resources on its own demostic issues and the betterment of Iranian's lives.


I won't choose #1. Because Iranians are morally obligated first and formost to the betterment of their own people. Iran and its people are FIRST when it comes to Iran's enconomical and political decision making. Israel, Palastine and any other country should be a distant second.


Those Iranians who feel they are morally obligated to help the palestinian cause AT THE COST OF JEOPARDIZING AND DETREMENTING THE IRANIAN PEOPLE'S LIVES AND WELL BEING have no rights to drag every other Iranian into their risky business. They have no rights to lavishly spend Iran's limited resources on Palastine or any other country while Iranians themselve are living in poor conditions.


Another point is that these palestinians, JUST LIKE THE ISRAELIS, don't give a damn about Iran and Iranians. The Palastinians would definitely hurt us and even kill us, if doing so will benefit their cause. They are not in love with Iranians. They are not Afghans or Tajiks either who at least speak farsi.


I personally think #3, being neutral, is best for Iran.



To: the person called Problem with Arezu

by Arezu (not verified) on

First the general definition of Zionist has nothing to do with Judaism. Just like you have Christian Zionists etc... More importantly not all Jews consider themselves Zionists. Furthermore, as I indicated to you, I said I do not agree with any nation which equates itself as belonging to one faith. This is why I personally do not believe that Israel should be a State only for Jews. However, this is not a decision for me to make, but the Israelis. The same way that Israelis cannot make a decision for the Iranian people. Finally, I am definitely not a Zionist on any account.

On the Second question you have raised, I am not dodging your questions about Muslims.

If you look at my initial comment and how this entire conversation with respect to Israel came about, it was in direct response to Shalom Goldman's comment.
"By Shalom Goldman (not verified) on Fri Nov 16, 2007 04:54 PM PST TITLED: FOR ITS SURVIVAL ISRAEL HAS A RIGHT TO PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE AGAINST IRAN!!"

So the issue was Israel, and the fact that Iran should be taken out so that the rest of the "organs" should live in peace and security.

If you follow my comments you shall see the logic of my remarks and the reasons for the discussion that you seem to believe I am obsessed with. When a Zionist calls for the destruction of my country and the Iranian people, you bet I am going to respond. However, rather than throwing mud at him and designing false fabricated lies as he or she did, I provided a factual discussion PERTAINING TO THE SUBJECT MATTER.

The gentleman or woman should have known that such a remark would have its come back as I am sure if I was on an Israeli web-site and made a similar remark, without a doubt I would have been bombarded with all sorts of harsh rhetoric. However, nothing I have said is a lie or a fabrication or an imaginary creation of my mental state. The neocon-Zionists/Israel have taken the entire world hostage with respect to their view of the world. In this country the neocon-Zionist/Israel influence has no equivalent match!!

Discussion with respect to Muslims was not the point of the discussion. I kept to the subject matter!

Hopefully, this completes the question and answer session.

One final point before closure; it is interesting that when one goes on an Israeli web-site, YNET, Jerusalem Post and others you see the unity of the Israelis with respect to their country. However, on an Iranian-web site we don't see the same. In fact, for several hours now I have been asked to explain my reasons for the factual remarks I have made which is widely recognized by scholars, intellectuals, the world of academia as well as political circles.

Just for my understanding are you an Iranian or not? I would expect it if an Israeli asks me such questions, but I am curious as to why Iranians are so concerned about Israel and are over heated about the use of the word Zionists. After all if you go on an Israeli web-site you will see how they have no problem advocating a military strike, or as they call it "nuking" Iran. They futher trash Iranians as if we are ants that can be crushed. Do Iranians have no self-respect and no dignity? Don't get me wrong I am not directing this remark to you. I would very much like to know what is going on in the brains of some of these Iranians who are such staunch supporters of Israel against the welfare of their own mother land?


The Problem with Arezu

by The Problem with Arezu (not verified) on


I did not make any false statements. The academic world
is very free when it comes to criticizing Israel. You are trying to paint a picture that simply does not exist. There are two sides to every story. Your obsession with "zionist" clouds your thinking (i believe). Thank you for answering my questions. It seems that you are a zionist as well since you believe in Israel's right to exist. As far as I know and understand, most jews' Zionistness is very simple- i.e. Israel has the right to exist- this makes 95% of the jews in the world zionist- think about it.

However, my critique of your positions, which you are still dodging, is the Islamic worlds crimes against muslims. Don't you think your arguments would make more sense and have more validity if your tone was at least the same when it comes to crimes committed by Muslims around the world. Don't you think they are much more severe than what the
zionist are doing or have done (I am talking number of inocent people killed)? go look at the numbers. go compare them. You have dogged this issue and its the main flaw in all you extreme lefties who enjoy life in America but hate it so much. You would not last a minute in the middle east with your point of views (except in the zionist state).


To: the person who calls him/herself Problem with Arezu

by Arezu (not verified) on

First I was not attempting to impress you or anyone else with my knowledge. Since you made a false statement, I accurately provided you with the examples.

Suffice it to say here are the responses to your questions:

1) Do you believe in the right of Israel to exist as a jewish democracy? First I am against a country belonging to one religious faith. This is where the problem comes with the current status of Israel as a state for the Jews. I believe that Israel has a right to exist with equal treatment for all of its people regardless of their ethnic or religious background. However, this is currently not the case with Israel.

2) Do you believe in a two state solution? Yes, I do.

3) Do you believe in the concept of Velyateh Faqih? No I don't.

4) Do you think the the IRI is a democracy? No. However, in my belief it is also not a tyrannical theorcracy. The Iranian political system is extremely complex and not black and white. Furthermore, the U.S. which calls itself the greatest democratic nation on earth is also no longer a democracy.


The Problem with Arezu

by The Proble with Arezu (not verified) on


I am very aware of the current facts. And I will admit that everything you wrote in your last reply is accurate. What I will not agree to is your interperretation of these actions. If you think that you have impressed me by all the examples you listed below, you are wrong. You fail to mention all the anti Israeli bias in the Universities and academia that goes on on a daily basis. You are not fooling anyone by listing all these great examples below. There are plenty of great examples that can be listed by the anti zionist side. That is why you see the relentless response from zionist groups. You make it seem like its a one way game here. Its not. Both sides are at eachothers throats. The jewish community is more organized and with more money and of course there is a lot of Hassody as I see it.

The reason why you are labeled as an antisemite is because of the way you (and people of your type) amplify the Israeli/palestinian/zionist/jewish issue . You are still dodging the question. You are such an expert on the "zionists". If the so called "crimes" of the "zionists" bother you so much, then you should be screaming hell by the crimes of the IRI, Iraqis vs. Iraqis, Taliban against Afganis, Turks v Kurds, Iran v Kurds, Iran v Iraq, Darfur, the Russians in Chechneya, the Slavs/serbs/muslims in Yougouslavia....... that is why you are a hypocrite Arezu. You fail to scream as loudly except when it comes to the zionists.

Let me ask you a few questions:

1) Do you believe in the right of Israel to exist as a jewish democracy?

2) Do you believe in a two state solution?

3) Do you believe in the concept of Velyateh Faqih?

4) Do you think the the IRI is a democracy?


To:Problem with Arezu- you are so far behind in current affairs

by Arezu (not verified) on

You obviously are either attempting to ensure that the readers not learn what has been going on or you are too far behind in current events.
Unfortunately, there is much facts to support these claims - and very easy for anyone to determine if they are true. I have no need to fabricate the truth, the truth is too ugly and in a democratic society as we like to believe that this country is we would never expect that such discrimination would take place.

Grassroots Zionist-led authoritarianism, practicing coercion, repression and financial blackmail in defense of Israel and the ZPC is occurring in every region of the country, in every sphere of social, cultural and academic life at an accelerating pace. Below are cited a small sample of cases which have gotten national and even international attention and which illustrate a far more extensive pattern.


In informal interviews, writers and journalists have reported ‘visits’ by local Jewish ‘notables’ and members of the Jewish Community Councils to local newspaper editors to demand the firing of columnists who dared to criticize, for example, Israel’s horrific invasion of Lebanon. After one such ‘visit’ and ‘talk’, a local columnist never ventured to criticize or even write about the Middle East. This is not a matter confined to the United States.

In 2004, after James Petras wrote an article for the Mexico City daily, La Jornada, critical of Israel’s savage repression of Palestinians in Jena and the US Zionist apology for mass killings, the Israeli Ambassador in Mexico visited the editors to demand they discontinue publishing his articles. The editor refused to accede at that time, but immediately afterwards they published several vicious personal attacks by their regular columnists (one a Troskyist, and the other a Jewish dentist) labeling Petras’ critiques as ‘Nazi’ propaganda , in line with the ‘Protocols of Zion’. This was in a reputed independent progressive daily newspaper.

‘Private visits’, abusive phone calls by Zionist zealots, including death threats are not uncommon practices among ‘respectable’ Zion-fascists. One incident involved a local doctor who received a ‘visit’ to her office by a fanatical Zionist ‘colleague’ complaining of her letter to the local newspaper criticizing the role of the Zionists in financing the electoral defeat of Georgia Congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney because of her criticism of Israeli policy. She was ‘warned’ that it was anti-Semitic to criticize the activities of organized Jewry in destroying politicians, especially black politicians, for their support of Palestinian civil rights. African Americans, she was told, were increasingly ungrateful to American Jews, who had lead and financed the civil rights struggle, and therefore had to be taught a history lesson. A local ‘group’ of notables had chosen her Harvard-educated Zionist colleague to deliver this message. When he declared himself ‘a Jew and a Zionist’, she countered that she was ‘an anti-fascist and an anti-Zionist’ and pointed to the door but not before asking him how an educated man of high professional standing could stomach such a degrading task of trying to censor a colleague. These types of ‘visits’ from ‘respectable’ Zionists intimidate others with less standing and intestinal fortitude.

When presented with the manuscript of James Petras’ book, The Power of Israel in the United States, many of his previous editors informed him that it would make a great book…but…they didn’t want to face the backlash, threats and vituperation that they expected from the ZPC, Jewish academics, writers on contract and publishers. Even the publisher and editor who finally agreed to publish his MS expressed real fear of Zionist hostility – and eventually a dozen or so Jewish academics cancelled book orders for their classes.

A sample of the most publicized cases of Zionist efforts to silence and purge American society of critics of Israel and the Zionist Power Configuration includes the case of over one thousand Zionist alumni of Barnard College campaigning to deny tenure to Professor Nadia Abu el-Haj for publishing Facts on the Ground , her ground-breaking critique on Israeli archeologists efforts to erase centuries of continued Palestinian presence in the Holy Lands (Chronicle of Higher Education, August 5, 2007).

Banning the successful British play, ‘My Name is Rachel Corrie’ based on the writings of the murdered American activist from scheduled performances in New York, Miami and Toronto caused consternation among theater goers and actors on both sides of the Atlantic. The Israeli soldier who murdered the young woman was exonerated in Israel while Rachel’s words were banned from the cultural capital of her own country.

Even more recently, the Chicago Council of Global Affairs bowed to pressure from the Zionist lobby and cancelled a lecture by the respected professors of political science, John Mearsheimer and Stephan Walt because of their critical study The Israel Lobby.

The list goes on to include the cancellation of a concert by Marcel Khalife in San Diego, California and the cancellation of an invitation to Nobel Peace Prize winner, South African Bishop Desmond Tutu because of his criticism of Israeli apartheid policies in the occupied territories.

There was a successful campaign to prevent author Susan Abulhawa from presenting her gripping novel, The Scar of David, at a Barnes and Noble Bookstore in Bayside, New York. This was followed by a cyberspace attack on the author to undermine a scheduled speaking tour. This pro-Israel attack was led by 14 rabbis and the President of the Queens Jewish Community Council.

The University of Michigan Press was pressured to withdraw distribution of Joel Kovel’s Overcoming Zionism, violating a contract with his publisher, Pluto Press. The University Press then threatened to stop distribution of all books published by Pluto Press.

The recent Congressional Hearings of a blue ribbon committee, which finally got around to investigating the Israeli military attack on the USS Liberty (after 40 years of successfully preventing an official investigation through the pressure of the Israel lobby) found Israel guilty of the deliberate killing and maiming of over 100 US service personnel. Its explosive findings, published in the Congressional Record, never appeared in the print and broadcast media.
In violation of United Nations resolutions, Israel’s military aggression against Lebanon, Syria and Palestine, were rewarded by the US Congress with an additional $30 billion dollars in military aid over the next 10 years, making the US annual ‘tribute to Israel’ in excess of $6 Billion dollars a year (NY Times, August 16, 2007). At a time of record US deficits and cuts in domestic health programs for poor children and educational services, the vote to give Israel an additional $30 billion dollars passed with virtually no opposition or even discussion.

Australian journalist and documentary maker, John Pilger produced a searing critique of Israel entitled “Palestine is Still the Issue” which has been viewed all over the world. Its scheduled showing on the public educational channel in San Francisco was blocked by a campaign led by the Jewish Community Relations Council.

The bilingual Arabic-English public middle school in New York City named after the Lebanese Christian poet, Kahil Gibran, was attacked by the ZPC (NY Times August 11, 2007) leading to the firing of its Arab American Principal. Her ‘crime’ was accurately translating the Arabic word ‘intifada’ into ‘shaking off’ instead of ranting against the Palestinian rights movement in the Occupied Territories. The Zionist-controlled United Federation of Teachers actively backed the blatant purge of one of its own members for her thought crimes.

At San Francisco State College there was a campaign led by the executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of San Francisco to ban a mural depicting a famous Palestinian cartoon character, a little boy defiant before Israeli occupiers. The subject in question was a child holding a key in his hand, which, according to the local Jewish leadership represented a ‘veiled reference to Palestinian right of return to Israel’ (Jewish Forum, August 10, 2007).

One of the most bitter and successful Zionist Purge campaigns was to deny tenure to highly respected scholar, Professor Norman Finkelstein of De Paul University in Chicago. The purge, led by Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, was a direct response to Finkelstein’s numerous scholarly studies critical of Israel and the exploitation of the Holocaust to further the aims of the Zionist Power Configuration.

Despite the recommendations of three academic committees at Yale University, Zionist millionaire philanthropists were able to block the appointment of renowned Middle East specialist, Professor Juan Cole. The millionaires threatened to withdraw contributions and several Zionist professors prepared a scurrilous attack on Professor Cole (June 1, 2006).

A campaign was mounted to pressure several state pension funds to divest funds from any company doing business with Iran and pushing the funds to invest in Israel bonds. This has so far succeeded in Texas, Florida, New York, and New Jersey. Several state governors were ‘persuaded’ while on Zionist-paid junkets to Israel (see Houston Chronicle, July 18, 2007). During one of these junkets, the now disgraced New Jersey Governor McGreevy met an Israeli operative with whom he formed a homosexual relation and later had him installed as ‘Homeland Security’ Chief for the State of New Jersey, until the FBI intervened. McGreevy resigned from office after denouncing the Israeli, Golan Cipal, for blackmail.

The Anti-Defamation League, pro-Israel transmission belt, forced the only Muslim Congressman, Keith Ellison, to recant and humiliate himself for daring to compare the tactics of the Bush Administration to the Nazis (Jewish Telegraph Agency, July 20, 2007). As in the case of Congresswoman McKinney, Zionist ‘punishment’ against African-American politicians is particularly vehement.

The major Zionist organizations led by the American Jewish Committee successfully mobilized the major US trade union bureaucrats to denounce the United Kingdom’s militant trade union’s boycotts of Israel (Jerusalem Post, July 22, 2007). The AFL-CIO unions are under the thumb of the ZPC and have purchased over $5 billion dollars of their members pension funds in Israel bonds which consistently under-perform market indexes, thus costing their 12 million members hundreds of millions of investment returns each year.

The dean of religion Barry Levin, a pro-Israel activist at McGill University recently fired Professor Norman Cornelt after 15 years of teaching for his support of Palestinian human rights (Montreal Gazette, June 2, 2007).

Every major newspaper published editorials and scurrilous book reviews attacking former US President Jimmy Carter’s critical study, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid. This was part of a high-priority propaganda campaign coordinated by major Zionist organizations and prominently included Professor Alan Dershowitz (Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 2007).

The prominent Jewish writer, Professor Tony Judt of New York University was dis-invited from a scheduled talk at the Polish Consulate because of Zionist opposition to his criticism of Israeli policy.

B’nai Brith of Vancouver, Canada attacked a Canadian web site called Peace, Earth and Justice forcing the removal of 18 articles critical of Israel.

In early 2007 the ZPC intervened in the US Civil Rights Commission and introduced a section equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism and slandered dozens of academic Middle Eastern studies programs as centers of campus ‘anti-Semitism’. The Middle East Studies Association of North America, the major academic group, wrote a reasoned refutation on June 11, 2007.

Plans to construct a mosque for the Muslim community in Roxbury, Massachusetts were attacked in a campaign by the ‘David Project’, a Zionist front group affiliated with the Jewish Community Council of Greater Boston.
On the basis of secret testimony by Israeli intelligence agents and backed by the ZPC ‘terrorism’ charges were made against 16 members of a US Islamic charity. A Texas court convicted them of ‘crimes’ against Israel, even though many of the accused were US citizens and had no access to challenge their hooded accusers, Israeli secret agents operating in the US. The lead defendant, Dr. Rafil Dhofer received a sentence of 22 years for an ‘Israeli’ crime – although he was never convicted of any crime committed in the US. The defendants and their attorneys were never allowed to question the secret foreign ‘witnesses’.

Campus Zion-fascist organizations run by David Horowitz, routinely bait blacks, Latinos and Arab Americans by praising the ‘benefits’ of the African slave trade and defend the use of torture and assassination by Israelis and their US counterparts in Iraq and Guantanamo. In addition, they smear professors not sufficiently favorable to Zionism, spy on instructors, disrupt classes, bring lawsuits for ‘anti-Zionist’ bias against teachers, other students and college administrators throughout the US.


The Problem with Arezu

by The Proble with Arezu (not verified) on


You are full of it. Some of the biggest and loudest critics of Israel and Israel's policies are Jews and academics. Academia is full of Anti Israeli professors and Academia. What the Hell are you talking about? Absolute nonsense. Yeh, Edward Saiid was denied a tenior. You are taking one example, (an asshole Jewish professor who denied the numbers in Holocust and was denied tenior because of his stupied analysis) and making it sound like there is a concpiracy against anyone who does not support Israel. That is pure garbage. Its like the IRI inviting the Neturei Karta (Ardent Jewish Anti zionist) and saying - oh you see, we invite Jews, we are not anti semites.

You are dodging the issue Arezue. You are a Hypocrite. You magnify the Israeli issue 1000 times bigget than it is and make it an excuse. Look at the Muslim world and its crimes against muslims. Were is your outrage at muslims committing crimes?


To: The Problem with Arezu

by Arezu (not verified) on

Hypocrisy, I think not!! You just don't like the truth that's all. The Zionists are not just against the IRI, as I said again, if you have read my comments and if you have understood what is going on in the world today; anyone who says anything against Israel is considered anti-Semitic. Anyone who exposes the crimes of the State of Israel is considered anti-Semitic. I guess you have no clue about how many professors have been denied tenure in U.S. academic institutions (i.e. some are even Jewish), how many scholars and intellectuals (many who are Jewish) have had their writings banned because they dared expose the crimes committed by Israel; the media will not publish any article that discusses the crimes of Israel!! U.S. presidential candidates will not be elected into office if they don't support Israel and the Israeli Lobby!! If you are not aware of this - then go and do your own research.

The usual propaganda is that anyone who says anything about Israel is called an anti-Semite.

What Iran has said in rhetoric, Israel has committed in action!! This has been going on since 1948!!

In response to Fred, I am absolutely not against Iran and Israel building the bridges of friendship and dialogue. As I am not against Iran building a relationship with any country and in fact that is why I am pro dialogue and discussions as opposed to beating the war drums. However, relationships have to be based on mutual respect and recognition of the sovereign rights of one another.

Furthermore, unlike the Bush Administration's hypocrisy of using the terminology of "democracy and human rights" only to fool the masses in order to expand its hegemonic power in the Middle East. I believe in true democracy and human rights for all people. This democracy and freedom will have to be achieved by internal home grown transformation towards this ultimate aim and not by force - the American way. And again the U.S. has no interest in promoting democracy that is why it is supporting and aiding all the dictators in the region!

Only reason it hates the IRI is that it has not succumbed to being its puppet. Now go ahead and call me an IRI agent for the statement that I just made!! What else is new!


To: Anonymous½ Is this all you you could get from my comments

by Arezu (not verified) on

It is obvious that the intellectual discourse was too advanced for you to comprehend. All you got out of it is "Are you Palestinian". Go read my comments one more time, in fact don't bother, you don't understand what I am speaking about, it is way over your head.

As the great Iranian Poet Sa'adi (c. 1210-1290) said:

"All human beings are limbs of each other having been created from one essence. When time afflicts a limb with pain the other limbs cannot at rest remain. If thou feel not for others' misery a human being is no name for thee."

This is the land and culture that I come from. I have been blessed to have learned the meaning of what it means to be a human being not in name but in its true and profound meaning.

And finally: "unto you your religion and unto me my religion." This is another verse which is obviously too deep for you to understand.


The Problem with Arezu

by The Proble with Arezu (not verified) on

Arezu is still in a dream land dreaming. She has mentioned the word "zionist" about 100 times in this blog. The IRI blames everything on Zionists and Arezu blames everything on Zionists. Arezu, if you look at the record, it was the IRI who started asking for Israel's destruction back in 1979. Marg Bar Israel came to symbolize the revolution way before the "zionist" had their agenda against the Mullahs in America. Also, these same Mullah's that preached "Marg bar Israel", the same ones
who are so anti "zionist", purchased weapons from the Zionists against Saddam in the 1980's.

Arezu, it looks like you are more of a hypocrite lefty than an Islamist. Regardless, your level of rethoric and hypocrisy against zionists is the functional equivalent of being anti semetic.

The fact is that the Arabs have played their cards wrong since 1948 and the IRI has made the situation worse by supporting the most extremist elements in the Arab world (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah). That is why AIPAC is after the IRI. AIPAC has every right to be after the Mullahs if the IRI has the right to support these extremists and have anti jewish slogans such as "marg bar israil" for the past 30 years.

Also, the fact is that Muslims have killed Muslims , and committed crimes against each other, 1000 times
more severely than how the Israeli's (Jews) have treated the Muslims. But you will spend all your useless energy on "zionists". Yeh, Ahamadinejad is not anti Jewish, he is anti Zionist.


Israel, Iran and the anti-Semites

by Fred (not verified) on

First and foremost you should calm down. Second, no one including you is “fighting” in defense or against any country. It is all exchanges of points of views from the safety and comfort afforded us by Democracy. I strongly suggest you should not attempt to do this in the Islamist Republic or any other Islamic country for they are genetically averse to any ideas except their own and look and act unkindly toward transgressors. As for you not being an anti-Semite, congrats, you might want to inform your keyboard for it is typing stuff contrary to your self proclaimed beliefs. Lastly I see Iranian national interest; strategically, economically and geopolitically aligned with Israel. Now if you need to hyperventilate remember that you said you are not an anti-Semite, take a deep breath before correcting your independent minded keyboard’s response.


Arezu: Are you palestinian?

by Anonymous½ (not verified) on

Arezu: Are you palestinian? what's in the interest of iran will never be what is in the interest of Islam unless you're a jihadist. Don't call yourself an Iranian if you define yourself by your religion if islam. As a moslem, you belong to the *ummah* and that doesnot include any nationality. Leave Iran to real Iranians.


To: Fred stop preaching this concept of anti Semitic

by Arezu (not verified) on

I agree with Kamangir and others who say no war no destruction of Iran, this is not the solution for Iran, the U.S. Israel and the world. Simple!!

Sorry, for those who don't want to hear this topic again, but I have to respond to Fred.

Fred the world is getting tiered of being labeled anti-Semitic every time they raise any issue with respect to Israel and the Zionist machine and lobbyists.

We can call the U.S. Imperialists and murderers, having committed crimes against humanity. People can slander the Christian faith, they can slander Islam, and they can use the most racist bigoted hateful comments about any country except one country, Israel who is exempted. What gives Israel this supremacist exemption?

It is this slavish obedience to the official Israeli policy that marks out the Zionist Power Configuration as something much more than just another lobby as its ‘left’ apologists and even Walt and Mearsheimer claim. The ZPC is much more sinister both as a transmission belt for the policies and interests of a colonial power hell-bent on domination in the Middle East and as the most serious authoritarian threat to our democratic freedoms: no single individual who dares criticize can escape the long hand of the pro-Israel authoritarians. Book sellers are picketed, editors are intimidated, university presses and distributors are threatened, university presidents are blackmailed, local and national candidates are browbeaten and smeared, meetings are cancelled and venues are pressured, faculty are fired or denied promotion, corporations are blacklisted, union pension funds are raided, theater performances and concerts are cancelled. And the list of repressive actions taken by these authoritarian Zionist organizations at the national and local levels runs on, arousing fear among some, anger among many more and a slowly burning resentment and growing awareness among the silent majority.

You Fred are doing to same. No one is anti-Semitic; no one is against Jews, and Judaism. Why are you preaching the same propaganda that the Zionists are raising towards anyone who dares utter the word - ISRAEL!!

I wish you would fight for your country and the Iranian people the same way you are fighting for Israel!



by American Dream (not verified) on

You people are out of touch with reality.
With over 1000 000 Iraqi children murdered for OIL,
USA is the most hated government in in the ME and the world.

Do you think they will dare WAR with IRAN ?
If US cold it would have by now.

over 1000,000 dreams and hope has been extinguished for OIL.

over 1000,000 people with names have been killed by USA and continue to ie in Iraq....

USA the killer of Iraqi Children .



NO and NO!

by Kamangir on

I used to be a very pro-war individual. My frustration along with deep deslike of the arabo-fascist mafia in Iran, led me to believe for many yeras that only the US military brute force could knock the mafia out. However, I've come to realize that that is not the solution at all. It won't free our people from their nasty jailers, it will worsen their situation with even less possibilities of internal regime change.

Besides, such an attack on Iran will have a very devastating effect around the world, it will have too many nasty side-effects. I'm aware that some of the most heavy weight US military generals and leaders have so far done whatever they can to stop the neocon plans of starting the war. There's a very deep divide in the pentagon regarding Iran. That only confirms one thing, that the situation is very sensitive and volatile. Weaponery, air strikes and war is not the solution to the problem of Iran.



by Faribors Maleknasri M. D. (not verified) on

war should be coming? To IRI? sorry but I dont see it? Please just acknowledge the following:

'Stop beating drums of war on Iran'
Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:19:49
US lawmakers urge vigilance against Bush's Iran policy.
Democrats in the US Congress have vowed to use constitutional powers to thwart any plot by George W. Bush to launch an attack on Iran.

The remarks, in a Capitol Hill press conference, came after Bush reiterated his warning earlier Friday that Iran would face 'stronger international pressure' if it stuck to its uranium enrichment activities.

"It's an open secret that Dick Cheney is agitating for a preemptive attack on Iran," said Democratic Congressman Peter DeFazio. "It [any military action against Iran] would be disastrous to the United States, disastrous to the region, disastrous for our armed forces in Iraq. "

Democratic Representative Jim McDermott said that under the Constitution, Congress lawmakers 'have the right to declare war, to send troops into battle, not the president.'

The House of Representatives and the Senate are taking up 12 bills designed to foil any decision by the Bush administration to take military action against Iran, including ones that demand the president to seek Congress authorization before waging another war.

The Congress Democrats argue that the resolutions permitting the use of force against Iraq in 2002 cannot be used to justify any action against Tehran.

Now? Does any body stil see a War coming? from where? Greeting


Oil it is...........and the innocent people

by Faribors Maleknasri M. D. (not verified) on

It is most unlikly that the barking dogs and grunting sdwines would ever attack IRI. But if they do the GIs will be the innocent ones who would die. But their Gouvernment does not care about that if there would be a tiny chance for winning the war. the chance is but lesser than Zero. Please acknoledge the following:
Ex-French PM: Iran war 'catastrophe'
Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:41:33
Former France Prime Minister Michel Rocard
Former French premier says any attack by the US against Iran will be just as illegal as and even more catastrophic than the Iraq war.

Michel Rocard described the war in Iraq as an environmental and health catastrophe, feeding the hatred, fanaticism and terrorism that it was supposed to combat.

"An attack against Iran, no matter what its targets, its methodology and initial magnitude would aggravate the situation leading to similar results, not to mention its effects on the global economy," Rocard said in an open letter published in the French daily Liberation.

Military action against Iran would be illegal under international law, he said, citing Article 2 of the UN Charter, which bans the use of force.

Rocard, a French premier from 1988 to 1991, termed diplomacy as the best way to reach a comprehensive solution for the standoff over Iran's nuclear program.

"Diplomatic solutions would help ensure peace and security for all states and all people of the Middle East," he urged.

One could say at least ONE person who has not forgett how much his- and of course also hermajesty did for France. The food for the festivities 2500 years Iranian emperror came fresh from maxim. the trees - at least 100.000 piece - were bought in Paris. And the pigs drunk alkohol publicly and the real VIPs from West ignored the festivities.



by Faribors Maleknasri M. D. (not verified) on

Bush saber rattling against Iran
Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:04:35
US President George W. Bush
US President George W. Bush is once again saber rattling against Iran declaring that Washington will exert more pressure on Tehran.

In a meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, Bush said pressure on Iran "must, and will grow" if Tehran refuses to suspend its nuclear enrichment program.

Bush's remarks came following the release of the IAEA report, which acknowledges the peaceful nature of Tehran's nuclear activities.

President Bush said he and Fukuda agreed that Iran must not become a nuclear-armed nation-an objective that the Islamic Republic categorically denies, saying that it is against its Islamic beliefs.
Of course the great satan sees himself not obliged to have a reason to make his bestialic attack against any country but in Case of IRI he does have one not to act bestialic as its nature afforts and that is: The TARSS AS KUNESH you know.Greeting


Closet anti-Semites

by Fred (not verified) on

What these Palestine obsessed, closet anti-Semites don’t get is that the Palestine centric policies of Islamist Republic have backfired on them. An enduring slogan during any demonstration in Iran just before being put down by regime’s Islamist goons is:” let go of Palestine…..” An emancipated Democratic Iran can do a lot more for Palestinians by working alongside the fellow democracy Israel. The least Iran would be able to do is that Hamas would not be bankrolled by Iran to continue butchering their Palestinian brethrens.


War should be coming? Why HE does not see it?

by Faribors Maleknasri M. D. (not verified) on

US 'in no position to attack Iran'
Sat, 17 Nov 2007 08:16:54
Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said that the United States is in no position to launch an attack on the Islamic Republic of Iran.

"Keeping in mind many reasons, including the lack of necessary economic, political and military prerequisites, the US is incapable of launching an attack on Iran," Ahmadinejad told the Arab-language TV channel al-Arabiya on Friday.

He added that any aggression would trigger a crushing response by the Iranian nation.

The Iranian President referred to the ties between Iran and Saudi Arabia, saying that the two countries have common views and cooperation among regional countries is the best way to prevent outside pressures on Middle East states.

He called for strengthening friendly ties in the region, terming it as one of Iran's main policies.

Well the Answer is easy to find: He knows that he can allways escape away......to America? Its is most obvious that he would rather die on the front. fact is: The option are all on the table AND: they will remain there till reappearance of Mahdi(s). Greeting



by Faribors Maleknasri M. D. (not verified) on

war should be coming? To IRI? sorry but I dont see it? Please just acknowledge the following:

'Stop beating drums of war on Iran'
Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:19:49
US lawmakers urge vigilance against Bush's Iran policy.
Democrats in the US Congress have vowed to use constitutional powers to thwart any plot by George W. Bush to launch an attack on Iran.

The remarks, in a Capitol Hill press conference, came after Bush reiterated his warning earlier Friday that Iran would face 'stronger international pressure' if it stuck to its uranium enrichment activities.

"It's an open secret that Dick Cheney is agitating for a preemptive attack on Iran," said Democratic Congressman Peter DeFazio. "It [any military action against Iran] would be disastrous to the United States, disastrous to the region, disastrous for our armed forces in Iraq. "

Democratic Representative Jim McDermott said that under the Constitution, Congress lawmakers 'have the right to declare war, to send troops into battle, not the president.'

The House of Representatives and the Senate are taking up 12 bills designed to foil any decision by the Bush administration to take military action against Iran, including ones that demand the president to seek Congress authorization before waging another war.

The Congress Democrats argue that the resolutions permitting the use of force against Iraq in 2002 cannot be used to justify any action against Tehran.

Now? Does any body stil see a War coming? from where? Sure if "it" would come, it would be because Oil and Gas. anyway: I do not see it coming. What do? Greeting


To: Jamshid

by Arezu (not verified) on

I was not intending to give you or anyone else a sermon, I was attempting to discuss the disinformation passed by Shalom Goldman to readers. This is quite critical, in light of the fact that he is advocating a pre-emptive strike on Iran so that we can have peace and security. When one wants to rebuttle an argument one provides factual comments. Exactly what I did. Simple!

Too bad this bothered you about Palestine. But one can't hide the truth. It is about time for people to know who is doing what to whom in the region. Isreal is no victim!!


To:S.Goldman (a) IRI cannot be trusted; Part II

by Arezu (not verified) on

It is not Iran which is the menace but Israel!! If Bush is so keen on a Middle East intervention and on removal of WMD, his troops should land in Israel, on the shores of ar-Rafah and forcibly remove all the weapons of mass destruction.

That's where the real threat to the peace and security of the region rest.

Israel, consistent with its policies since the late 1980’s, encouraged the Bush Administration toward an invasion and occupation of Iraq in all of its top level meetings with Rumsfelt, Powell, Rice and Bush. The Israeli media, with rare exceptions, demonized Saddam, played up his ‘threat’ to the Middle East and Israel’s security, conflated Palestinian suicide bombings with Iraqi support for the Palestinian people’s national aspirations, and energized their fundamentalist Christian allies in the US to follow suit in calling for an invasion of Iraq.

An analysis of the relationship between the Israeli state and highly placed Zionist officials in the Bush Administration reveals first and foremost that Tel Aviv laid out the strategic policies of eliminating Middle East regimes opposed to its ethnic cleansing of the occupied territories and unlimited expansion of colonial settlements in Occupied Palestine and the consolidation of Israeli hegemony in the Middle East. The Zionist elite in the Bush regime invented the pretext and the propaganda for war and most important, successfully designed and operationalized the US invasion of Iraq. This ‘division of labor’ included the Zion-Cons in the executive branch, backed by the Presidents of the Major Jewish American Organizations (including AIPAC), the regional, state and local Jewish federations through their influence over Congress.

Testimony by former Pentagon analyst, retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski confirms that throughout the period leading to the Iraq war, Israeli military officials, intelligence officers and other high ranking functionaries had daily access with top Zionist Pentagon officials like Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. Frequent consultation, intelligence coordination and joint planning between top Zion-Cons in the Pentagon and top Israeli military operatives in the US indicates that there was close agreement in directing the US to invade Iraq. There was Zion-Con/Israeli agreement, confirmed in the immediate aftermath of the initial ‘successful’ occupation, that Iraq was the first of a series of invasions in the Middle East, to be followed by attacks against Iran and Syria. The Israeli joke current at the time was: ‘Anyone can take Baghdad, real men go for Tehran.’ In November 2002, Ariel Sharon, in an interview with the Times of London, called for the bombing of Iran ‘the day after the US invades Iraq’.

The Zion-Con/Israeli blueprint for sequential wars was explicitly stated in the policy paper “Project for a New American Century’, a kind of American-Israeli Mein Kampf of US world domination in which Israel would be a co-benefactor of American military might and treasure. Most of the Zion-Con designers and executers of US war policy in the Middle East were listed as authors or sponsors of the ‘New American Project’.

Now with Iraq in disarray, war with Iran is the Highest Priority for the Zionist Power Configuration (and Israel)

Rather than seeing Israel as giving us a double dose of an incurable colonial disease, exoneration allows Israel and its agents to follow the same Iraq invasion pattern of manipulation and duplicity in leading us to war with Iran. The White House and Democratic Congress, echoing Israel, are using inflated threats of nuclear attack, demonizing Iran’s leaders, financing low intensity warfare through the training and funding of violent Iranian exile-based clients, economic sanctions and ‘failed’ diplomatic maneuvers …to lead up to a new war. Taking advantage of their liberal (Zion-lib)-led exoneration for their role in the invasion of Iraq, the Zionist Power Configuration, through such loyal mouthpieces as Senator Joseph Lieberman, blame the Iranians for the deaths of US soldiers in Iraq. It is not the Zionist pro-war officials in and out of the government who sent young American soldiers to die in Iraq at the behest of the Israeli state to whom the US public should direct its anger, but rather the Iranians who are accused of arming and training Iraqi resistance fighters. Leaving Israel out and bringing Iran into the debacle in Iraq serves the Israeli purpose of covering their backsides while inciting Americans into a new military adventure against the much larger and better-armed Iranians.

The centerpiece of activity for all the major national, state and local pro-Israeli Jewish organizations is to isolate and destroy Iran, by economic sanctions and a massive military attack by the US. There is absolutely no consideration of the millions of Iranians who would be killed, injured or made homeless by a US or Israeli effort to ‘wipe Iran off the map.’


Re: Arezu

by jamshid on

Thanks for your very long sermon on Israel and Palastine. My sermon will be shorter, in fact just a couple of sentences:


The palastinians don't give a damn about Iran or Iranians, in fact they'll even hurt us if they find it necessary. So why are you tearing yourself apart for them? If you love them so much, go become a palastine citizen and leave Iran and Iranians alone.


To:S.Goldman (a) IRI cannot be trusted; (b) it must be taken out

by Arezu (not verified) on

Before I even comment on your outrageous and blatant lies about Iran I must say you have come to the wrong web-site to deliver your message. How dare you come on an Iranian web-site amongst Iranians and promote the destruction of our mother land and our people. You have totally miscalculated who we are.

Have you not learned your history. You are speaking to a people who come from the same country, whose leader allowed the Jews the right of return to Israel, and rebuilt your dilapidated temples.

Now in reverse order; you want to speak about peace and security:
(b) What do you think that your beloved country has done to the Palestinians for over 60 years? Let me summarize it as you seem to believe we are ignorant fools:

You have occupied their territory, kicked them out of their homeland, dehumanized the Palestinians and used your lethal weapons of mass destructions to ensure ethnic cleansing of an entire people, and have wiped Palestine off the map. You call Israel a peaceful nation !!! Contrary to Israel, Iran has not invaded any country for over 250 years nor has it wiped any country or people off the map.

From its birth, Israel has waged a brutal campaign driving hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes and lands. Subsequently, the Zion-Cons fully and un-questioningly endorsed the killing and jailing of thousands of Palestinian civilians protesting the Israeli military occupation and conversion of the occupied West Bank and Gaza into ‘open air’ concentration camps, with over 500 military outposts and roads blocks. More recently the entire leadership of the major Jewish organizations, comprising both Zion-Cons and Zion-Libs, defended Israel’s building of a massive 30 meter wall, effectively corralling the entire Palestinian population in ghettos resembling the walls constructed around the huge Jewish population in Warsaw by the Nazis. The wall and the military outposts strangle trade, movement of food and people from the occupied territories to markets, schools and hospitals and prevent farmers from even tilling their lands.
On Octobert 10, 2007 the Jerusalem Post quoted Aron Soffer, head of research and lecturer at the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) National Defense College. The 71-year old father of 4 and grandfather of 8 had said on May 21, 2004: “When 2.5 million people live in a closed off Gaza, its going to be a human catastrophe. The pressure at the border will be awful. Its going to be a terrible war. So if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day…every day.”

This is the literal message of murder taught to Israeli officers at their most advanced military school by eminent Zion-Fascist lecturers. This helps us understand the naked brutality and homicidal behavior of Israeli soldiers in the occupied territories.

A recent Israeli study by two prominent psychologists illustrates the deep strain of sadism and racism inculcated by Israel’s military academies and backed by Israel’s top politicians, including the Prime Minister’s Office. According to Haaretz on September 21, 2007, two Israeli psychologists interviewed 21 Israeli soldiers, who expressed “their innermost emotions about the horrendous crimes, in which they took part: murder, breaking the bones of Palestinian children, acts of humiliation, destruction of property, robbery and theft.” One of the Israeli psychologists was “shocked to find that the soldiers enjoyed the ‘intoxication of power’ and had pleasure from using violence.” She said, “Most of my interviewees enjoyed their own instigated violence during the occupation.” (Haaretz September 21, 2007) Absolute colonial domination brings out the psychopathic tendencies in an occupation army. Soldier C testified, “If I didn’t enter Rafah (Palestinian City in Gaza) to put down some rebellion – at least once a week I’d go beserk.” Like previous colonial occupiers, the Israeli soldiers adopt a totalitarian ‘super-race complex’. Soldier D testified, “What is great is that you don’t follow any law or rule. You feel that YOU ARE THE LAW. Once you go into the Occupied Territory YOU ARE GOD!.” The soldiers’ internalization of the powerful Zion-fascist ideology provides a self-justification in the eyes of the interviewees for castrating a man, bashing in the face of a woman protester, shooting an innocuous pedestrian, breaking the arm of a 4-year old child and other ‘gratuitous’ acts of random violence.
The Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations never ever mention, let along criticize, the daily psychopathic behavior of the IDF.
Every issue of the Daily Alert parrots the Israeli line, even when it involves supporting the brutal cutting of electricity, gas and drinking water to over a million trapped civilians in Gaza – a war crime under international law. In the words of the Daily Alert, Israeli murders of unarmed teenage Palestinian boys and girls who are labeled ‘militants’ or ‘gunmen’. And the Daily Alert describes Israeli ‘peace negotiations’ as being carried out in ‘good faith’ – despite continued land grabs and assassinations of scores of Palestinians, including young kids. “In the time between George W. Bush, US President announcing the (Annapolis) peace meeting on July 16, 2007 and October 15, 2007, the Israeli military had killed 104 Palestinians including 12 children.” Financial Times (October 18, 2007 p.4)

The Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations never ever mention, let along criticize, the daily psychopathic behavior of the IDF. Major Jewish billionaire philanthropists contribute hundreds of millions in support of the IDF’s violent occupation and repression of Palestinian civilians, described with cruel pleasure by the soldier-subjects of the Israeli study. In fact, the biggest Zionist contributor to the Democratic Party, Haim Saban ($12.3 million dollars in 2002), has a ‘soft spot for Israeli combat soldiers.’ According to Haaretz (September 12, 2006), Saban declared, “I can’t handle combat soldiers, whenever I have any interaction with them…I cry.” There is a powerful emotional bond that links Israeli Zion-fascism to its US counterparts. Saban arrogantly points to the primacy of his loyalty to Israel, “I strut around like a peacock in America and say I am an Israeli-American. What you hear…an Israeli-American.” (Haaretz October 14, 2007). The formerly respectable Brooking’s Institute now houses the ‘Saban Center’, financed by Haim Saban, turning Brookings into just another of a dozen propaganda mills churning out apologetics for the totalitarian practices of the IDF – their leading research directors and their Prime Minister. The deadly ‘sentimentality’ of the Israeli-American billionaires toward the psychopaths in the IDF does not extend to the young Americans serving Israel’s interests as US soldiers in Iraq and who are suffering the burdens of a war to extend Israel’s regional power. Saban, like the great majority of the top leaders of the most influential Zionist organization are pushing for another war – this time with Iran. According to Saban, “I would try other things first, but if they don’t work, then attack…In Iran you go in and wipe out their infrastructure completely. Plunge them into darkness. Cut off their water.” (Haaretz October 14, 2007). These are not the homicidal ranting of a fanatical Jewish settler beating a pre-adolescent Palestinian shepherd. Saban is a major leader in AIPAC, family friend and political broker of the Clintons and the entire current Israeli leadership. His $2.8 billion dollars buys the fawning attention of all major US presidential “candidates courting Jewish support” (MSNBC, October 14, 2007).