Posted by Tina
“If Iran’s rulers were working to destroy your countries, perhaps you’d be somewhat less enthusiastic about the deal. If Iran’s terror proxies were firing thousands of rockets at your cities, perhaps you’d be more measured in your praise. And yet the response from every one of you here, utter silence. Deafening silence.”
Hat tip: Cortney O’Brien, TownHall
Bibi has more leadership in his little fingernail than can be found in the entire white house.
Has no one here ever heard the story of “The Boy Who Cried Wolf?”
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU’S LONG HISTORY OF CRYING WOLF ABOUT IRAN’S NUCLEAR WEAPONS
Murtaza Hussain
Mar. 2 2015, 8:40 a.m.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to address the U.S. Congress tomorrow about the perils of striking a nuclear deal with Iran. Netanyahu, not generally known for his measured rhetoric, has been vociferous in his public statements about the dangers of such compromise, warning that it will allow Iran to “rush to the bomb” and that it amounts to giving the country “a license” to develop nuclear weapons.
It is worth remembering, however, that Netanyahu has said much of this before. Almost two decades ago, in 1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind,” adding that, “the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close.”
Almost 20 years later that deadline has apparently still not passed, but Netanyahu is still making dire predictions about an imminent Iranian nuclear weapon. Four years before that Congressional speech, in 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”
In his 1995 book, “Fighting Terrorism,” Netanyahu once again asserted that Iran would have a nuclear weapon in “three to five years,” apparently forgetting about the expiration of his old deadline.
For a considerable time thereafter, Netanyahu switched his focus to hyping the purported nuclear threat posed by another country, Iraq, about which he claimed there was “no question” that it was “advancing towards to the development of nuclear weapons.” Testifying again in front of Congress in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”
Needless to say, these claims turned out to be disastrously false. Despite this, Netanyahu, apparently unchastened by the havoc his previous false charges helped create, immediately went back to ringing the alarm bells about Iran.
A 2009 U.S. State Department diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks described then-prime ministerial candidate Netanyahu informing a visiting Congressional delegation that Iran was “probably one or two years away” from developing weapons capability. Another cable later the same year showed Netanyahu, now back in office as prime minister, telling a separate delegation of American politicians in Jerusalem that “Iran has the capability now to make one bomb,” adding that alternatively, “they could wait and make several bombs in a year or two.”
In statements around this time made to journalists, Netanyahu continued to raise alarm about this supposedly imminent, apocalyptic threat. As he told The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg in a 2010 interview, “You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs,” adding, “that’s what is happening in Iran.”
In 2012 Netanyahu said in closed talks reported by Israeli media that Iran is just “a few months away” from attaining nuclear capabilities. Later that same year, he gave a widely-mocked address at the United Nations in which he alleged that Iran would have the ability to construct a weapon within roughly one year, while using a printout of a cartoon bomb to illustrate his point.
Despite this heady rhetoric, Netanyahu’s estimates of an imminent Iranian nuclear bomb have consistently been at odds with analyses made by his own intelligence agency. In 2011, departing Mossad intelligence chief Meir Dagan said in his final intelligence summary that, contrary to Netanyahu’s repeated statements at the time, an Iranian nuclear weapon is in fact not imminent, and that any military action against the country could end up spurring the development of such a weapon.
Just last week, leaked intelligence cables reported by Al Jazeera revealed that at roughly the same time in 2012 that Netanyahu was brandishing his cartoon bomb and telling the United Nations that Iran was close to obtaining a nuclear weapon, Israeli intelligence had actually determined the country was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.”
The conclusion from this history is inescapable. Over the course of more than 20 years, Benjamin Netanyahu has made false claims about nuclear weapons programs in both Iran and Iraq, inventing imaginary timelines for their development, and making public statements that contradicted the analysis of his own intelligence advisers.
Despite this, he continues to be treated by lawmakers and media figures as a credible voice on this issue.
When Netanyahu gives his address to Congress, he can likely be counted on to say much the same thing he’s been saying for the past two decades about an impending Iranian nuclear threat, and credulous pundits and politicians can be counted on to believe him.
https://theintercept.com/2015/03/02/brief-history-netanyahu-crying-wolf-iranian-nuclear-bomb/
Why should we believe Netanyahu’s predictions now? How many times does the same man get to be wrong about the same thing and still be taken seriously when he makes the same exact prediction again?
The better question is why should we believe Iran over Israel? Which one is more at risk from a nuclear attack and which one is more likely to commit a nuclear attack?
Which one has been our ally and supports democracy and human rights?
Are Iran’s Ayatollahs trust worthy, peaceful guys or have they lied, supported terrorism, threatened the US and caused the deaths of many American soldiers in Iraq?
Do you really believe everything Al Jazeera tells you?
If you answer truthfully and correctly, you’ll see where we should be focusing our criticism, and it sure isn’t on Netanyahu.
Jack: “The better question is why should we believe Iran over Israel?”
Who said anything about believing Iran?
Anyway, you’re not responding to what I wrote at all. The fact is Netanyahu has been warning that Iran is an imminent threat for decades. He has never been correct. He has set timetables based on nothing, in direct contradiction to his intelligence agencies.
I’m not saying Iran isn’t a threat. That would be insane. But that doesn’t mean the threat can’t be exaggerated.
“Which one is more at risk from a nuclear attack and which one is more likely to commit a nuclear attack?”
Sorry to be flip, but…which one actually has nuclear weapons?
“Which one has been our ally and supports democracy and human rights?”
Israel is definitely superior in that respect, without question; but again, that’s irrelevant to my point.
“Are Iran’s Ayatollahs trust worthy, peaceful guys or have they lied, supported terrorism, threatened the US and caused the deaths of many American soldiers in Iraq?”
The latter, of course. Also irrelevant.
“Do you really believe everything Al Jazeera tells you?”
I don’t read or watch Al Jazeera with any regularity.
“If you answer truthfully and correctly, you’ll see where we should be focusing our criticism, and it sure isn’t on Netanyahu.”
OK. Next time you criticize Obama, I’ll tell you the same thing, and you can tell me whether or not that’s a valid counter- argument to your critiques.
“Sorry to be flip, but…which one actually has nuclear weapons?”
Gee, on what can we base a decision about the character and intentions of these two nations?
Hmmmmm…first to answer your question:
The nation that’s been under attack for decades by terrorists sponsored by Iran and has refrained from using it’s nuclear nuclear weapons.
The nation that has negotiated in good faith only to see the other side go back on the terms. According to this site, 10 times.
The nation that wants to live in peace beside it’s neighbors but is denied the chance because of the real intentions of Iran, to wipe Israel off the map and murder all Jews.
The nation that includes peoples of every religion and race.
The nation that stands on the side of civility and freedom and shows great restraint and humanitarianism in defense of itself.
On the “flip” side:
Number one sponsor of terrorism:
Can you honestly say you think Iran would show the same level of restraint that Israel has after acquiring nuclear weapons capability?
There is absolutely nothing to support that case.
In a discussion about who the bad guys are you choose the nation that is the number one supporter of terrorism around the world and is responsible for heinous attacks in nations all around the world. You choose a nation that has proven to have little regard for humanity, even it’s own people, and is committed to Muslim religious rule in the world.
All I can do is shake my head in incredulity.
Jack you ask all the right questions.
The article Chris posted is written by a man who has been published in the NYT and Salon. It should come as no surprise that he would speak out against Netanyahu with such contempt.
Intelligence isn’t a business of absolute certainty, any fool should know that. And Israel hasn’t been collecting intelligence on Iran for decades just because it’s fun. Iran is the worlds number one sponsor of terrorism. See also here.
John Bolten – Jerusalem Post:
Iran Intelligence
Algemeiner.com:
The Iranian Ayatollah has been called “a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” proving that nursery rhyme rhetoric cuts both ways.
While our State Department was making a “deal” with Iran, and Kerry was yapping his irresponsible and inept gums about how the weak and stupid leaders of America would not allow Iran to get a nuke the Ayatollah was busy tweeting:
Chris can you tell the difference between warning of an imminent problem and pointing out a strong future possibility?
In the 1996 paragraph Netanyahu is quoted: “If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind,”
“If Iran were allowed to acquire” “IF!” His statement was accurate.
Today we might wonder at his foresight.
Iran has been sponsoring terror acts targeting Israel, since at least 1989.
Peace agreements have been attempted but Iran has not ended their “death to Israel” position any more than the Palestinians have.
Iran has been building centrifuges (some secretly). The administration just made it possible for Iran to basically do whatever it wants with billions at his disposal.
Netanyahu isn’t living in a fantasy, thank God, and doesn’t depend on theory.
You, unfortunately are either blind or out of your mind.
Tina: “Chris can you tell the difference between warning of an imminent problem and pointing out a strong future possibility?”
Yes, I can. Netanyahu clearly cannot. See above, re: the many, many times Netanyahu has falsely claimed that Iran’s nuclear capabilities pose an imminent threat over the past twenty years.
But no one will address that.
Chris you have no proof that anything in your article is more than opinion.
Netanyahu has had facts over those twenty years that caused him, and others, to have concerns that Iran was developing nuclear capability and have speculated given the information at hand about how soon it might be.
Iran has been under sanctions. Iran has worked in secret. Iran has more centrifuges than are needed for peaceful use of nuclear capability. Iran just “suddenly discovered” a big pocket of uranium, according to Reuters.
Now thanks to Obama and Kerry, Iran will have the means and the money to realize their dreams and make those deadly rockets fly whenever they want.
But Netanyahu, as a responsible Israeli leader is a liar and a dolt to be concerned and to voice that concern, according to you.
Imminent: 1. likely to occur at any moment; impending:
2. projecting or leaning forward; overhanging.
Iran has, does, and will continue to be an imminent threat to Israel. “Overhanging” is an apt descriptor for the threat against Israel has had over it’s head for more than twenty years. Israel has lived under threat of annihilation, either peace meal or all at once, since the Jews came home to Israel.
Have you no sense of what that’s like?
Tina, I have absolute proof that Netanyahu claimed Iran would have nuclear weapons by 1995, 1998, 2011, and 2012. That is not “opinion;” it is a fact he made each of these claims. You can easily find the same proof yourself with a quick Google search.
Regardless of what evidence he had that led him to believe this–evidence which, in at least one case, was contradicted by his own intelligence agency–I hope we can both agree that all of the aforementioned predictions were incorrect.
That makes him, at the very least, an unreliable judge of predicting Iran’s future nuclear capabilities.
Do you see how that conclusion logically follows from the evidence?
I do not know what it is like to live in Israel. I do know that plenty of Israelis disagree with Netanyahu and feel that his responses to the threats of Iran and others in the Middle East have been disproportionate and counter-productive.
You seem to tend toward exaggerating threats and favoring hawkish policies that are meant to stamp them out but actually make them worse, e.g., the Iraq War, which destabilized the region and attracted terrorists to the country like bears to honey. As the foremost expert on the Venona papers pointed out, McCarthyism made fighting the Communist threat more difficult. Netanyahu’s policies and rhetoric are representative of the same problem. Fear–even legitimate fear–can make people crazy. Don’t give in to it.
Absolutely. We should be so fortunate.
I take it that THE ENGLISH MAJOR does not much care for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose country is under constant threat from its Muslim neighbors. Evidently Democrats and the left have joined in the hatred of Jews. Not surprising.
This left wing Democrat Nazi propagandist does not impress me. Mock all you like. You, sir, are completely insane. A lunatic. Iran and Iraq constantly issue threats against Israel. Muslims wish to destroy it. Is your head buried in the sand? Chris condemns Israel? Do you ever pay any attention to what is going on in the world or do you just parrot left wing propaganda like a mindless fool.
Yeah, I know, Post Scripts loves this evil, nonsensical person and hates me. So don’t post it.
I didn’t say anything to condemn Jews or Israel, but you know that already.
“Yeah, I know, Post Scripts loves this evil, nonsensical person and hates me.”
You actually believe the blog runners here have shown “hatred” towards you? You’re nuts. You’ve got a persecution complex the size of Miami. Get over yourself.
And, of course, you addressed nothing in my actual comment. Typical.
So, what explanation do you have for attacking Netanyahu with this bigoted left wing Nazi propaganda tripe? None. Of course.
Pie,
My specific critiques of Netanyahu were so clear even a semi-illiterate lunatic like yourself could understand them. Either engage with them, or don’t; but asking stupid questions makes you look, well, rather stupid. Calling me a “Nazi” for daring to criticize the leader of the Jewish state for his proven record of exaggerating the Iranian threat over a period of more than twenty years is convincing to no one with half a brain.
Yeah, I know, Post Scripts…hates me.
Care to explain? I feel like I’ve missed something important and would like a chance to clarify.
I can explain: you’ve enabled Pie’s horrendous and abusive behavior for so long that he’s forgotten what acceptable behavior looks like, so when he feels even mild criticism from you and Jack (like the frequent civility warning, which have ALWAYS resulted from this one poster), he perceives it as a hateful attack on his entire person. This is a mark of someone with massive insecurities; he must be praised at all times, and anyone who disagrees with him on any issue is not just wrong, but an evil Nazi who wants Jews destroyed, Negroes to burn, and Boy Scouts to be molested.
That’s the kind of logic you’ve encouraged when you’ve said that Pie is simply offering a “mirror.”
“How can Israel make peace with a partner who refuses to even sit at the negotiating table? I remain committed to a vision of peace of two states for two peoples in which a demilitarized Palestinian state recognizes the Jewish state.”
Benjamin Netanyahu
Up yours. Chris. Why are you promoting the destruction of Israel? Are you a fool or a tool?
Pie: “Up yours. Chris. Why are you promoting the destruction of Israel?”
You’re a goddamn liar, but what else is new? You claimed that I supported pedophilia because I supported the Boy Scouts lifting their ban on gay scout leaders, and now you’re claiming that any criticism of Netanyahu is “promoting the destruction of Israel.” Apparently the message Jack posted about spreading libel here was lost on you. Here’s the short version: don’t.
Chris is the boy who calls wolf.
From the Lunatic Chris : The conclusion from this history is inescapable. Over the course of more than 20 years, Benjamin Netanyahu has made false claims about nuclear weapons programs in both Iran and Iraq, inventing imaginary timelines for their development, and making public statements that contradicted the analysis of his own intelligence advisers.
That is a goddamn lie.
Prove what part of it was false. You were just given several examples of Netanyahu giving timetables for Iranian’s nuclear development, as well as for actual attacks, that never happened. Exactly which of the Netanyahu quotes are you claiming he never actually said? Be specific.
I know you find it nearly impossible to argue specific points, which is why you rely solely on insults, but do try and behave like an adult for once. Man up and present evidence for your claims. You are not so special that you deserve to have your every claim believed simply because you make it. Make an actual argument. Man up.
Right on the mark. It is a lie.
What’s worse is it’s a lie not understood by Chris who actually believes he gets how intelligence works.
But then, in my experience, Chris only cares about things he can be use to nail someone…he doesn’t seem to care about realities that people must live with or the difficult decisions that leaders like Netanyahu must make with best estimates. The world of intelligence is not black and white…Chris can’t imagine being a leader in such a world.
What part of the quoted portion is a lie, Tina? Be specific.
I mean, I’m legitimately confused:
“The conclusion from this history is inescapable. Over the course of more than 20 years, Benjamin Netanyahu has made false claims about nuclear weapons programs in both Iran and Iraq”
This can’t be the lie; you know Iran didn’t have nuclear capability by any of the years Netanyahu claimed it would have nuclear capability. That makes his claims that Iran would have nuclear capability by those years false, as in the opposite of true. Correct?
You also know his statements about Iraq’s nuclear capabilities were false.
“inventing imaginary timelines for their development,”
See above. Is it the word “inventing” you’re objecting to? I can see why that might seem like a harsh word, but in at least one case his timetable was contradicted by Israeli intelligence, so where did he get it from if he didn’t invent it?
“and making public statements that contradicted the analysis of his own intelligence advisers.”
Again, documented fact. Easily provable with ten seconds of Google.
So what is the lie in the portion Pie quoted?
Or are you just calling it a lie because you don’t like what it says about someone you like?
I think it is safe to say that Chris aligns with the destruction of Israel.
Hey Chris, ever read this? SFB! Do I need to link to a hundred or a thousand such announcements? Get a damn clue. I should make a formal argument when you make none except to quote some idiot in the news you admire who seeks the destruction of Israel? Drop dead. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is a hero, you are an idiot.
The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei renewed his attacks on Israel and the United States in a speech to members of the Iranian public on Wednesday as reported by his official website http://www.khamenei.ir and his twitter account.
http://time.com/4026234/iran-attacks-u-s-israel/
So Pie, which of the statements by Netanyahu turned out to be correct?
Was it when he said Iran would have nuclear weapons capability by 1995?
Was it when he said they would have nuclear weapons capability by 1998?
Was it when he said they would have nuclear weapons capability by 2011?
Was it when he said they would have nuclear weapons capability by 2012?
Obviously, these statements couldn’t have all been true–and in fact, none of them were.
Are you denying that Netanyahu made these statements?
I have no idea what the actual objection is, other than “You criticize guy I like, you bad, Pie smash the bad man.” Seriously–that’s the level of discourse you bring to the table on your worst days.
Typically, when people don’t actually argue the point under discussion, it’s because they can’t argue the point of discussion. That you respond with nothing but incoherent rage, and no actual counter-arguments, only reveals that you have no valid counter-arguments. I suspect that’s what makes you so angry–not anything I say (who cares what some random stranger on the Internet says?), but your own intellectual weaknesses, which you see yourself as powerless to change.
But I think you can change. It doesn’t take that much effort to actually engage with arguments you disagree with. It just requires seeing those people as actual people, and recognizing that responding with nothing but insults makes you look foolish, not the target of your harassment.
So give it a try. Argue the point. Poop or get off the pot. What you’re doing now is just embarrassing.
Chris and friends…Monday morning quarterbacks; all opinion and zero experience or sense of responsibility.
Jewish Virtual Library:
Here’s more:
Oh c’mon Tina. Thanks to Chris we all now know that it is Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is the instigator of Middle East turmoil and responsible for Iran’s policy of exporting terror. We would all be better off if Netanyahu just lied down and died and Israel and Jews were wiped off the face of the earth. What gall that uppity Jew has!
Pie: “Thanks to Chris we all now know that it is Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is the instigator of Middle East turmoil and responsible for Iran’s policy of exporting terror.”
Nope. Try again.
“We would all be better off if Netanyahu just lied down and died and Israel and Jews were wiped off the face of the earth. What gall that uppity Jew has!”
Even further from the mark.
You’re a fundamentally dishonest person. You’re also not nearly as intelligent as you think you are. You purposefully misrepresent the arguments of others because you are incapable of arguing them on the merits.
My, my, my, Chris demands proof yet provides nothing but opinion? Opinion he swallows? I should waste my time on YOU? Yeah, I get it, you hate Israel and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
And you think I am a raging simpleton. The only thing that will satisfy you is when Iran actually follows through on their disgusting and vile threats. Got it, dude.
Well, that post sucked in the grammar, spelling, and completeness department. OK, I’ll try again.
My, my, my, Chris demands proof yet provides nothing but opinion? Opinion he swallows readily? I should waste my time on YOU? Yeah, I get it, you hate Israel and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
You think I am an a raging simpleton. The only thing that will satisfy you is when Iran actually follows out on their disgusting and vile threats. Repeated disgusting and vile threats you prefer to ignore. Got it, dude. It makes you comfortable.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu may have been wrong on timetables, but never the intent. That is something fools and tools like you will never understand. You love the enemies of freedom and democracy. Why?
Pie: “Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu may have been wrong on timetables, but never the intent.”
I never said he was wrong about Iran’s intent. You seem to have misread my entire argument. Is that why you’re so angry?
Iran has been very clear that it wants the destruction of Israel. No one can deny that.
What I think has been exaggerated is its capacity to achieve this. Netanyahu has been portraying Iran as an imminent threat for decades. The message: we must act against Iran now or the consequences will be dire. We’ve been told diplomacy, negotiations and inspections are impossible. That seems to leave military action as the only option.
We’ve been fooled by this type of rhetoric before; it was called the Iraq War. In that case the cure was worse than the disease.
All I’m asking for is a little historical perspective. Some of you seem to think I’m taking Iran’s side over Israel, which is crazy! Again, many Israelis are just as concerned with Iran’s threats but don’t favor Netanyahu’s policies or his rhetoric. Their voices are easy to find. It’s funny how many of you have rightfully complained about being called racist simply for criticizing Obama, and yet you say I’m anti-Semitic or hate Israel because I criticize Netanyahu.
Chris has effectively called Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu a liar and exaggerator. I think Chris and the left he represents are full of ****. Your purpose, Chris, is plenty clear, even though you remarkably deny it.
You characterize me as angry. Oh, really? Your “absolute proof” about Netanyahu is sheer bigoted left-wing lunacy from a very angry man who has no compass or sense of direction except to aid and abet terrorists.
Yep, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is, according to Chris, “crazy.” Don’t forget that you got it from the horse’s ***, er mouth. I plead “uncle”, having been bested by a grand and wonderful left-wing narcissist who thinks his mouth drips honey of wisdom. I have to wonder, do his supposed students really have to suffer him? I feel their pain.
“Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu may have been wrong on timetables, but never the intent.”
Excellent point!
“I never said he was wrong about Iran’s intent.”
Right, because a shallow and thoughtless hit piece on the guy that is NOT a religious fanatic, a sponsor of world wide terror, or an intentionally deceptive liar is the real issue.
Here’s the quote again in case you’ve forgotten what you were responding to:
Have you given any thought at all to the fact that terror sponsoring, religious fanatic favoring, power seeking nations at the UN have worked against Israel or left the room so they don’t have to make a stand? Have you given any thought to the willing, sincere efforts Israel has engaged in to make peace for many years with little acknowledgement or support?
And Chris the Iraq war was about much more than WMD’s. The left just chose/chooses to ignore all of the other compelling reasons to make Iraq the immediate centerpiece of a war expected to be “fought on many fronts” in “many ways” for many years.
The left used the WMD argument politically as a means to power grab after it was evident that the intelligence (of the world) had been overstated, although not completely wrong. The message worked on ignorant people who can’t see beyond the ends of their noses.
Wise Geek describes the purpose for the overall strategy fairly well:
Chris, other options were, of course, possible. There is no way of knowing that they would have been more effective. There is some evidence that a different approach has made matters much worse.
By focusing on just one justification for entering Iraq (WMD’s) you think you’ve actually evaluated the Bush decision and strategy adequately. How shallow, and how political, is your thinking about this very serious problem! A problem that will continue for some time that, in my humble opinion, has been set back significantly over the past seven plus years.
There are Israeli voices that speak out against Netanyahu’s policies, however, he won in the last election by a significant margin. His stance on this bloody threat was the reason:
My apologies to all horses. They are a noble species who deserve respect.
I have never met a liberal who was intellectually honest. Or intellectual, much less honest. Chris fits the mold.
“I have never met a liberal who was intellectually honest.”
Says the guy who has told at least five lies about me in this one conversation.
You can publish any falsehood you want with the disclaimer “Is it ‘true’? I don’t know.”
My pal James Toronto nails the left. I cannot afford the WSJ, but it appears that they are publishing opinion pages for all to see again. Yippie!
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324048904578316213186273802
The Ayatollah Khomeini Chris admires —
“Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Qur’anic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”
Bow down and obey in the name of political correctness and fool tools like Chris who attack Israel and Netanyahu.
Pie: “The Ayatollah Khomeini Chris admires”
Don’t you ever get tired of being a liar?
I just read an incredible article posted at The American Thinker, “The Most Dangerous Man In the World,” by Andrew Logar.
Yes, you guessed it.
The article addresses the Presidents background, his attitude toward America, his lack of strategy and his long list of failures in the war over there and here at home. It includes this gem, which I had never heard:
Undermining the Presidents efforts for America even before being elected.
Best read of the day. Thanks for the link, Tina. I visit The American Thinker, but obviously not enough.
Here’s another incredible article by Global Research. Issues it address are; Obama on Ukraine, Western Aggression, Putin: The Voice of Reason, NATO’s “Gross Violation” of UNSC Resolution 1973, Don’t Play with Fire, and Defeating ISIS.
Putin Lives in the Real World, Obama Lives in a Fantasyland:
“Listening to the speeches of the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, and the President of the United States, Barack Obama, at the United Nations General Assembly in New York on Monday, one is instantly struck by the polarization of the leader’s interpretation of world events. It is obvious that one leader resides in real world, whilst the other appears to live in a deluded fantasy.
You can understand why US Secretary of State, John Kerry, starts yawning 2 minutes and 47 seconds into Obama’s speech, as the US President’s delivery was completely devoid of vigour, spirit or honesty. An empty suit hypnotically going through the motions and reciting the usual propagated slogans, the US President spends as much time pausing as he does reading off his trusted teleprompter.
Unsurprisingly, Obama promulgated the usual slogans in relation to Ukraine and Syria. The US President referred to the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad as a tyrant “who drops barrel bombs to massacre innocent children”, then moved on to deceptively describe how the Syrian conflict started in addition to reiterating once again that Assad must go:
Let’s remember how this started. Assad reacted to peaceful protests, by escalating repression and killing, and in turn created the environment for the current strife… Realism also requires a managed transition away from Assad and to a new leader.
A declassified intelligence report from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) in 2012, a year after the violence erupted, completely contradicts the notion that the protests were “peaceful”, as the report documents that “the Salafists, the Muslim Brotherhood and AQI [Al-Qaeda in Iraq], are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria.”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/putin-lives-in-the-real-world-obama-lives-in-a-fantasyland/5479575
Peggy, Kerry bored by Obama. That is a triumph of the no-will!