|
|
|---|
|
American Politics Journal Atrios Barry Crimmins Betty Bowers Buzzflash Consortium News Daily Howler Daily Kos Democatic Underground Disinfotainment Today Evil GOP Bastards Faux News Channel Greg Palast The Hollywood Liberal Internet Weekly Jesus General Joe Conason Josh Marshall Liberal Oasis Make Them Accountable Mark Morford Mike Malloy Political Humor - About.com Political Wire Randi Rhodes Rude Pundit Smirking Chimp Take Back the Media Whitehouse.org More Links |
Subject: Your argument is weak tea
Bart, first you say, how could anyone know what Ahmedinejad (sp?) really said
unless they spoke Farsi?
Weak tea, bro....!
It's called 'translators.' It's how we tell what anyone said, when they spoke in
a foreign language.
If you don't have a live person who is a translator, there are various
translation functions in Google, Babblefish (sp?), whatever.
My point was translators often have their own agenda.
When Obama talks to Medvedev, he doesn't want to hear from a Russian what was
said.
He wants his hand-picked guy that he trusts completely.
Personally, I have an ex-wife who is Iranian, and yes, having lived there until
about high school leaving right around
the time of the revolution in '79 or so, she speaks and understands Farsi. (She
looks like the princess in the animated movie 'Alladin.')
Then you actually wrote something to the effect of, how do we know he NEVER said
it?
BUZZ!!! Oh, I'm sorry, but thanks for playing.
I AGREE, it's probably
impossible to prove he hasn't said something to this effect. That is not the
point.
Some people (not you) say "It's OK for Iran to get nukes because
Ahmahandjob never said that."
We should never decide to engage in an act of WAR (such as a naval/air power
blockade of oil exporting boats) on the basis
that maybe someone once said something, and nobody can prove otherwise. If you
advise an act of WAR, there should be
SLIGHTLY better evidence than the lack of a proof that nobody can possibly
provide. Unless you're going with the
Cheney 1% doctrine. I sincerely hope and trust that is not the case.
Over the weekend, CIA boss Panetta says Iran has enough nuclear material NOW
to make two bombs.
You seem to be saying we're acting too hastily but we may have come to this
party very late.
It is ISRAEL which has made a
veiled threat that not only do they have the capability of delivering
nuclear missiles to every
capital city in Europe, they will do so under the so-called 'Samson
Option.' (Look up that term-- it's a quasi-official plan that
if ever Israel is obliterated somehow, they intend to take everyone with them.
The Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Sy Hersch,
himself a Jew, discovered this in his reporting, and wrote of it in his book of
the same name.)
That is, you don't have to wait for an Islamic state to get the primitive
beginnings of a nuclear capability, which would involve
getting a couple of nukes and some limited missile capacity, for the threat of a
nuclear holocaust. You
have it right now,
from Israel, with their 200 to 400 nuclear devices and robust missile
capabilities, courtesy of the French and the US,
and ballistic nuclear submarines,
courtesy of Germany.
Israel cannot abide any strong nation that opposes their territorial expansion
program, which is (and talking about insane!)
to take physical possession of most of the land on the eastern Mediterranean
Sea, from the Nile in Egypt to the Tigris/Euphrates in Iraq.
They think God gave them a promise that their land would extend that much, and
they are working a program to accomplish it, one country at a time.
Iran hasn't attacked ANYBODY in, oh..., at least 500 years. Israel has made any
number of pretexts to attack several of their neighbors,
and in the case of Lebanon, to attack it at least twice, and occupy the southern
section for about 20 years until Hizbollah resistance forced
them out because of the cost. Iran funds Hizbollah, and Israel doesn't like it,
understandably. But Hizbollah ONLY attacks Israel when
they're IN LEBANON. And it's a key provision of international law that any
country is justified to attack another country's military that
is occupying it, which is what Hizbollah did.
Bernays
Bottom line, I don't trust Ahmahandjob - I think he's crazy and crazy plus nukes
scares me.