If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/03/03/cnna.Dershowitz/ - Tbh they both make good points.
Er no...Although I might be working as an intern for AIPAC during my gap year.
David Duke is a big fan of John Mearsheimer and Walt isn't he? Anyway I haven't read the paper but since even Chomsky thinks the influence of the Zionist lobby is exaggerated (weapons, oil, big tobacco being far more significant) and given that even people like Hitchens - who is hardly pro-Israel are at best lukewarm to Mearsheimer/Walt I don't see how any inquisitive person could blindly accept the paper. Israel's critics are even sharply divided on it, hence I’d guess it’s hardly highlighting some fresh analysis grounded in facts and is more an opinion. Although when I get the time it’s something I’ll read up on.
As expected, and in true parrot fashion dis retorts with the same intellectually bankrupt drivel characteristic of his heros. Assertions that the scholarly expose of two notable professors must be wrong because some other dubious groups have also happened to raised certain similar points is a standard dodge for the AIPAC slander crowd.
Nevermind that AIPAC itself has been caught treasonously funneling national security secrets from inside the Pentagon to agents of the Israeli government. No, in dis's limited walled in mental world of exceptionalistic moral inconsistency no scrutiny of fact can be made if it has also been mentioned by those deemed "undesirable".
A truer display of your incapacity for true intellectual enquiry and factual consistency I could not have asked for. Thanks again little parrot.
A additionally sad reflection on your level of political discernment and personal integrity. I am however hardly surprised that you consider apprenticeship under those with a decades long record of undermining the principles of liberal democracy in the US (on behalf of a foreign government) to be an opportunity. More is the pity.
I can understand your posts perfectly well Clan – however I’m not sure what purpose there is to you using language that for argument’s sake I’ll call complex. The language you use isn’t typical of a broadsheet newspaper even and certainly not of a youth politics forum. The thing is you use unnecessarily complicated language when there’s no real need – it doesn’t result in any greater understanding of your posts even for those that understand you perfectly. I only guess therefore you do it to try and impress people and appear as some kind of academic – hoping that adopting the guise of an academic will somehow make your extreme opinions more plausible.
No matter, the leopard cannot change its spots after all. It suffices for me to simply expose your duplicity whenever necessary to let the rest here see you for the whack job you are.
You are the one being duplicitous.
You said it was a "categorical lie" to say that you believed 9/11 was a Jewish conspiracy. But now you say that's exactly what you believe but would prefer to call it something else. Your over-complicated way of expressing yourself gets in the way of what you are trying to say.
Keep grasping for straws groove, youre a day late and dollar short in your display of petty solidarity with dis and merry band of extremist parrots.
Poor dis...it's is Jewish propoganda, just like Labour spout of British propoganda and Republicans spout American propoganda.
Are you high?
read some history as blag would say.
we sat and watched armaments factories being built ...war machines of every description and dangerous man spouting dangerous shite ...i realy wonder sometimes ...universities must let just about anyone in these days!
Only on life baby :flirt:
This isn't the 1930's. The world doesn't work that way anymore. In fact, the only one's doing the invading and attacking and re-arming themselves is us.
If Israel can have nukes despite its continual refusal to obey the UN then why the hell can't Iran? As for Professor Dershowitz, I find his criticism of the Israeli nuclear programme truly deafening
Rolly, in the last ten years, how many international invasions has Iran led? And how many international invasions has the United States led?
I wonder who might be more dangerous :chin:
but this keeps detracting ...just what the mullahs are banking on probably ...from the fact that unstable people in a very volatile areaa who are almost always screaming about killing ...now have nuclear material.
even with the backing of the hated wests children it would seem.
Definitely. And Iran want to be of equal power as its enemy Israel. I don't see anything wrong with that.
If X (illegally) has a shotgun in their loft but says they will only use it for self-defence – and then Y down the street who repeatedly says he wants to kill X then himself tries to acquire a shotgun is it a good idea for him to be allowed to do that?
Israel has nuclear weapons, as do India and Pakistan. That’s not ideal but it’s accepted reality and no country with nuclear weapons is going to give them up – at least not for the foreseeable future. I don’t see why Iran has a ‘right’ to nuclear weapons because another country has them. The fact is Israel has never threatened to annihilate another country – and Israeli nuclear weapons do not present a danger to world peace. Iran's leader is not rational, he's a fundamentalist nutter.
The world will be a more dangerous place if Iran get nuclear weapons. I’m surprised you can’t see that.
What about their annihalation of the Palestinian people and the continuing grabbing of land on the West Bank. Cleverly disguised under the token gesture of removal from the Gaza Strip.
do israel actualy stop iran from having oil pipelines constructed ...the selling of oil to india pakistan and china ...have israel prevented iran from obtaining wealth ...building very modern infrastructure ...no ...thought not.
there are many wrongs in this world but for young people to believe that everyone should be armed with nuclear weapons is a clear sign that my way of life is soon to be over.
sad sad idiotic people.
Never said anything of the sort. No country should have nuclear weapons but in the current climate as it is today, i.e. Protectionism, Iran probably sees fit to have them. And we don't know for sure if they are preparing the develop nuclear weaponry, a lot of it is speculation.
The 25 year legacy of the monsterous Shah regime has not passed from the collective memory and neither has the content with which both the US and Israel upheld that status quo.
Unlike our young gullible and morally duplicitous apartheid apologist, I'd expect you to have the age and experience to appreciate the repetition of the same rhetoric today as was used then to justify western aggression, assassinations and illegal internal meddling by our respective nations.
Iran has suffered the consequences of brutal repression dressed up as "pro-Western Democracy", I for one do not fault them in the slightest for seeking to ensure their sovereignty is safeguarded from future such incursions.
That’s off-topic and a different discussion, create another thread and we can discuss Israel/Palestine yet again. (I only wish however some people had similar concern for Zimbabweans and Tibetans as they apparently do for Palestinians, if only Jews were occupying Tibet and I guess more people would care).
The fact is Israel while possessing nuclear weapons is unlikely to use them – it hasn’t went around threatening countries pledging to destroy them and hinting at nuclear destruction. Nobody benefits if Iran gets nukes. In your blind hatred for Israel and America you can’t see the simple truth – that the world could swiftly become a far more dangerous and troubled place with a nuclear Iran. The chances of nuclear war would suddenly vastly increase. The prospect of nuclear war is frightening. A nuclear Iran will automatically provoke some Arab states into acquiring nuclear weapons too – the Saudis will buy nukes off Pakistan if Iran gets its way. A Middle East armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons. Forget about America, Israel, Jews and whatever other fetishlike hatreds you have, use some common sense ffs. Iran with nukes isn’t a good idea.
Iran isn’t the Soviet Union. The president of Iran supports people who blow themselves up in nightclubs – as well as financially Iran has publicly stated its support for suicide bombers hoping to get 72 virgins in blowing themselves up killing innocent people. Part of the danger is you look at the president of Iran and there’s someone with fanatical and obsessive religious beliefs, this isn’t a rational human being you’re dealing with.
You have to look at the context, does he believe in killing everyone and anyone? No, Islam doesn't teach that.
And what really sets a part America and Iran, seriously though...sending young working class men into Iraq to do your dirty work might aswell be condoning suicide attacks, cos Iraq is a suicide mission. As will Iran if the decide to attack. One thing history has taught us, is that if you go into the Middle East for war, you better get ready for fierce resistance.
Indonesia: Bashir Wants Muslims to Embrace Nuclear Weapons
I guess it is Jemaah Islamiyah day: Embrace N-weapons: Bashir
ABU Bakir Bashir, the spiritual leader of Jemaah Islamiah, has outlined the religious justification for terror attacks in Bali, London and New York and urged jihadists to embrace nuclear weapons "if necessary".
In a chilling interview last month in the Jakarta cell where he remains after his conspiracy conviction in relation to the 2002 Bali bombings, the radical Muslim cleric also warned of a clash of civilisations that would not end until the West "accepts to be governed by Islam".
The alleged terrorist leader speaks of his hopes of meeting Osama bin Laden if he is released from prison and explains the justification for suicide bombers and terror attacks. "During battle it is different. Still, the whole notion revolves around martyrdom," he says. "But in places like London and in America there must be other calculations. In battle it is best to cause as many casualties as possible."
Published a fortnight ago by the Washington-based Jamestown Foundation, the interview was conducted by Scott Atran on August 13 and 15 at Cipinang Prison in Jakarta.
Got that folks? He would nuke us, "but only if necessary". And the Jihad will continue until the entire world submits to the Jihadis. We should at least give Mr. Bashir points for his refreshing honesty, in explaining the Islamic doctrine of Jihad without whitewashing it.
Incidentally, the Jamestown Foundation is one of the links in our sidebar. Their interview with Bashir is indeed chilling. You can read it all here: "There is no better deed than jihad. None."
http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/000342.html