Well, the Germans also killed six million Jews in WWI, did they not?
I saw it in the news paper. The BIG news paper. The NYT.
Didn’t I?
Oh, that’s right…. never mind.

So it seems that at least we can agree that they’re not equivalent terms. Therefore referring to Zionists does not include all Jews, nor does it exclude non-Jews.

On Iran:
“What I see is a country run by what is effectively a theocracy based on the bronze age mythology/ideology called Islam, complete with the implicit agenda of spreading that ideology throughout the world by any means, including warfare, which is specifically condoned and even encouraged by the religion (and history is witness to the fact that it makes liberal use of that means).”

“Spreading the word by any means” would hardly be a monopoly of Islam. Furthermore, if past behavior is the basis for present suspicion, Christianity wins the bloodshed pageant hands down. Just ask any Native American from Alaska to Cape Horn. And though past misbehaviours by one do not excuse present misdeeds by another, we might consider that as the “West” has become increasingly secular, the Christian iconography has been replaced by the ideas of Patriotism, and of Democracy and Freedom (for us), and therefore I would argue that there is much more reason to be afraid of this latest-and-very-much-present incarnation of the Crusaders than there is to be afraid of Islam. On a Grand Scale, can Islam even compare?

“And you should study the history of Islamic warfare (incl. the religion itself) a: Deception is expressly encouraged as a tactic. That means lying and appearing to be peaceful. Making the enemy look like the aggressor. Etc ad nauseum.”

So, after you’ve lambasted half the commenters here for being paranoid enough to believe that the whole world is under the Yoke of the Great Zionist Conspiracy (and maybe some are a bit paranoid, zugegeben), you wish to teach us that it’s the Great Islamic Conspiracy we should be REALLY worrying about? Hey, if they’re being peaceful, it’s only part of the deception…right? That’s how Muslims are, is this your point? Or have I misunderstood something?

“But I’ll leave you with some advice, too: Don’t come crying for Mommy when full-fledged Sharia comes to your town and has its way with you. ”

So…that’s where the Great Islamic Conspiracy is going, world domination which is “so perfect no one is outside its grasp”, to use your terminology, am I getting this right?

“The more genetic waste of your kind crawls around on this planet, the sooner that day will come.”

And…those whose ideas you dislike are obviously genetically inferior, correct? Sound familiar?

“Are you fucking serious? Yes, the whole world is under the yoke of the Big Zionist Conspiracy That Is So Perfect That Not A Single Person, Group Or Nation Is Left Outside Its Grasp! Your statement is the exact type of argument that Neo-Nazis here use to distort things. Congratulations!”

Well, apparently they draw some people’s attention…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

“Of course, other nuclear powers like Israel, Russia, North Korea, Pakistan, India, France or the U.S. might trigger a catastrophe too, but for their own various respective reasons, one can assume more restraint from them than from a country like Iran that is run by a bunch of religious and ideological crazies who leave no doubt about their intentions.”

So, no religious or ideological crazies ever run any of those 6 other countries, nope! What was that thing about George Bush talking to God again?

celts,picts, or gaels appear not have been expelled or slaughtered by anglosaxons. one can see even today an english person without a trace of germanic features.
this analyses are valid also for bulgars, magyars, croats, lombards, franks, et al.

however, more amicable melting pots took place because there were so few inhabitants in the regions to which so many peoples migrated.
in addition, ideas about nationalism were diff’t 15-18 centuries ago.
‘religion’ [i love to call that "cult"] was also absent.

palestine was invaded with expressed desire to drive out pal’ns from all of palestine. so, i’m not sure that if palestina wld be established that at least ashk’c folk shldn’t leave.
but i wld let pal’ns decide whom the want in their millennial habitat. tx

In Palestine, the Zionist colonizers, like the Boer colonists in South Africa, came into a land already inhabited and long-settled (thousands of years to be sure). That’s who the land belongs to. Why would anyone think otherwise? That European Jews have now been born there forseveral generations means they have no where else to go (at least not forcibly) – but no one should consider it the ‘Jewish state’ without a sense of irony. It’s still Palestine, after all.

I think if Iran had nuclear weapons, Israel would think twice – or should I say, Israel would not have massacred Gazans in January. Apparently, there is an upside to the possibility of mutual destruction.

And while Iran rightly rejects the notion of a “Jewish state’ in Palestine – it has said nothing of attacking it. (Israel on the other hand, has declined to say it would not attack first – in fact, it threatens Iran even now.) Iran has attacked no one in centuries. Not so re Israel they have not attacked anyone in days.

Speaking of drivel…

“What I see is a country run by what is effectively a theocracy based on the bronze age mythology/ideology called Islam, complete with the implicit agenda of spreading that ideology throughout the world by any means, including warfare…”

What an educated and enlightened perspective – especially the last part, considering the fact that Iran – in blinding contrast to the countries you are apparently most concerned about – hasn’t invaded another country for over 200 years.

No one is claiming that Iran doesn’t have faults, or shouldn’t be carefully scrutinized, but the notion that it shouldn’t be allowed to develop nuclear power because it poses some kind of dire threat to Israel and the U.S. is absurd.

http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/thorium-fuel-for-nuclear-energy

There is less Plutonium bred, but it is not entirely absent; and one needs a “starter” uranium nuclear reactor to introduce this technology. In any case, it remains nuclear power with the same types of security, radioactive waste, and processing/reprocessing problems.

A pro-nuclear (PN) letter-writer asks “about the practicabilty of thorium fuel in nuclear reactors [as] a realistic alternative to uranium.”

MG, Jr.: Thorium has its problems, and all nuclear power schemes have the same types of social costs. Nuclear power is unnecessary, there are much
better alternatives in wind and solar.

PN: “wind and solar have serious problems, too.”

MG, Jr.: It all boils down to what kind of society you imagine powering: who runs it, who controls it, who profits. Nuclear power is to energy use what capitalism is to economy, and fascism is to politics. With nuclear power the “problems” and “costs” are all social and maximally exploitative, while the benefits/profits are private and maximally exclusive. Concentrated power serves concentrated economics (i.e., plutocracy), distributed power — as solar and wind are intrinsically — naturally meshes with a flatter system of economic distribution.

Given human nature, it is inevitable that nuclear power will continue to be used widely around the world (despite my preferences or technical opinions).

Finally, I think it is possible to have strong opinions and to make forceful arguments without lapsing into personal insults — at least not freely. When you reach that point, you should take it as a signal that further discussion is pointless.

MG, Jr.

I can’t help beating a sophist on the ropes.

How can Israel have an attitude? You are using it same way as Moses? You are referring to Jacob father of Joseph?

Why are Palestinians, and Nazis individuated but “Israel” stands as one? This is nifty trick in accordance with trying to conflate Zionism and Judaism into the same thing. Which, as far as I know, is a trick only used by defenders of zionism.

The fact is Ray, we all know that Judaism was very split on issue of Zionism… in fact Lord Montague (a Jewish Brit) suggested Zionism=Anti-semetism, which is much more accurate than the sophistry that equates anti-Zionism with anti-Semetism, the day after the Balfour Declaration in 1917!

Ray, a little trivia, when did “Nazis” state they desired to exterminate the whole Jewish population? Could you please give me a quotation, or a date… a reference (not from Hollywood).

Ray, what was the reason for World War One? Did the results of WWI have anything to do with WWII and nazism?

Ray, I agree with you, the comparison between Nazi Germany and Israel is not perfect, mostly because almost all Israelis are recent immigrants (last 100 years) with only ‘mystical’ connection to land, and persecuted population is indigenous. In this way, Israel is closer to U.S. of A or South Africa, and is clearly a colonial experiment…

We all know what the issue is Ray, you’re a sophist.

seems the israelis are working pretty hard to affect your desires here.

Those are not my desires, you brainless dimwit. Holy shit, you’re even more mentally deprived than I suspected. Can’t you read? Never mind, you’re not alone. Fuck you for trying to put words in my mouth, thank you.

Israhell — you really, truly believe that’s wonderfully clever and original, don’t you?

It seems that to you guys this is all an entertaining little game to make yourselves feel better about your pathetic existence. In the real world, nobody listens to you (I don’t blame them) so you take refuge in deluding yourselves that you’re taking part in serious discourse here, when in fact you’re all just wanking each other off, your common Vaseline being the same old leftist wannabe revolutionary ideas that we’ve been hearing for the last 40 years or so. Yawn. I should stick to talking to adults.

I wonder what Iran’s reception would be to a Th232/U233 fuel technology.

the minute the jews get some power thay turn around and do the same thing to the palestinians that the germans did to the jews.

Another classic piece of idiocy, conveniently used by the likes of you over and over again. The comparison must make any sane person vomit who actually knows the slightest bit about the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei and its ideology and practices.

Let me assure you that you can be one hundered percent confident of the following fact: If Israel had the same attitude towards the Palestinians as the Nazis had towards the Jews, there would not be a single Palestinian alive in palestine/Israel today.

Over and out. You people make me sick.

Our dear Imam said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement.” M.A., Oct 2005

If you read that in the context of the whole speech, you’d know that it’s about terrorist governments being ultimately unsustainable, and not a call for attack. But translation quibbles aside, you did notice that word regime, right? Regime. Remember that. Regime. It’s important. Regime. Obviously, there’s an enormous difference between a state and its regime. Besides which, you’d have to stretch logic beyond all credibility to turn Mahmoud’s quoting that as “a wise idea” into an actual threat.

You know damn well [Ahmadinejad] has the power to [do something violent or other].

That would be news to Khameini, since Iranian law is clear about the Supreme Leader being the one with all power over the military and foreign policy. Last I heard, this particular Supreme Leader had decreed a fatwa against nuclear weapons production, and — in the same speech you so blithely misquote — declared “the Islamic Republic has never threatened and will never threaten any country.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/apr/05/comment.military

And you know what? In the past century, despite being invaded more than once, and while Israel (with its 250 nukes) has conducted sixty-year occupations, uncounted aggressions and constantly violated every international and moral law in existence, Iran has attacked and threatened….. no one.

Besides, why should Iran have such an interest in questioning details?

As Shabnam said, understanding. Because since the holocaust is Israel’s single biggest excuse for committing genocide against others and deflecting all criticism of its crimes against humanity, it’s in everyone’s interests (especially those in Israel’s crosshairs, like — say — Iran) to dispel the hysteria around it. At the very least, the world needs to regain enough perspective to realize that “people did it to our parents/grandparents” doesn’t translate to “it’s ok for us to do it to others.”

It’s not even so much about the holocaust itself as it is about further debunking the delusion that Jews are special, that they’re above the law or that they must never be questioned or criticized. It’s about fighting the injustice of people being locked up for nothing more than asking questions.

Oh, you think you’re the type that thinks if A and B do something bad, then it’s OK if C does it, too.

Not in the least, but I do wonder why you were singling out C when it’s by far the least of the offenders, especially in today’s world.

Evidence?

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-12/04/content_10456538.htm

http://consortiumnews.com/2009/030409a.html

http://tinyurl.com/6jh4q8

http://tinyurl.com/25cu6n

Any person or group who intentionally kills civilans, no matter in what context, with the intention of instilling terror as a martial tactic is, hence, terrorist. It doesn not matter one bit whether it’s part of resistance, invasion/occupation, or whatever.

And so you neatly sidestep the thorn of resistance groups that don’t intentionally kill civilians. Convenient, that.

we have no tanks, artillery, jets, warships, etc.; we merely educate.
so ray join us in education. join us in giving adequate and accurate information.

however, judging by ray’s last post, i don’t think anyone is going to waste time in such a wasteland. tnx