Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Justifying War with Iran

Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 17, 2012, 8:06 p.m. EST by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement


By Russ Baker December 26, 2011 WhoWhatWhy.com

A growing body of evidence points to a concerted campaign to prepare Americans and the world for war against Iran. This is not idle speculation. It fits a pattern that repeatedly preceded previous hostilities.

Here are the recent examples on Iran:

-The claim that Iran is a WMD threat. Pretty much everyone is familiar with the long-term, continuing efforts to paint Iran as some kind of nuclear threat. This ignores the possibility that Iran is telling the truth in contending it is embarked on solely non-military nuclear research (debatable), and serious doubts among many experts that Iran is preparing nuclear weapons. Perhaps most important, it discounts the fact that many countries (including Iran's arch-enemy Israel) have nuclear weapons, and disregards the undoubted truth that if a country like Iran ever did launch nuclear weapons, it would be wiped out in a nanosecond, creating a very strong disincentive for offensive use. At the same time, by encouraging other countries and internal foes to believe that it has nuclear weapons, Iran creates an inexpensive protective shield for its regime. A dangerous game, to be sure, but without further evidence of Iranian nukes, hardly a reason to launch a war that would surely cause even more death and destruction than the misguided Iraq invasion.

-The claim that Iran tried to hire Mexican drug cartel hit squads to kill a Saudi ambassador on US soil (fizzled). Remember this one? So ludicrous that even ultra-cautious corporate news organizations laughed it out of the spotlight. Still, it may have been a test of what will fly--and likely did impact a percentage of the population, particularly those getting their info from jingoistic outlets like Fox.

-The claim that Iran was complicit in the 9/11 attacks (current). A federal judge, reviewing evidence presented in a lawsuit on behalf of 9/11 victims, concluded this month that it proved Iran "provided direct support to Al Qaeda specifically for the attacks ... on September 11, 2001." This one may gain traction due to powerful lingering emotions on the topic. (For complaints about the general operating style of the judge who ruled in the case, click here.) Because this ruling and the underlying lawsuit are based largely on the claims of defectors (and past experience shows that defectors frequently trade politically valuable assertions for personal benefits), more research is needed on this. (Remember discredited CIA Iraq source "Curveball"?) The cited "NSA intercepts" also bring to mind the intercepts put forward as proof that Saddam had WMDs.

It is further worth noting that the defendant, Iran, was not present to challenge the assertions. In addition, examination of many of the plaintiff assertions shows that they may misrepresent circumstantial evidence. (Example: "Several of the 9/11 hijackers transited Iran on their way to or from Afghanistan, taking advantage of the Iranian practice of not stamping Saudi passports." This ignores the fact that Iran, which is an enemy of Saudi Arabia, makes a practice of not stamping Saudi passports so that Saudi nationals, especially minority Shiites, do not get in trouble with Saudi authorities on their return--similar to Cuba's practice of not stamping American passports.)

This story has yet to break big, but count on the ruling to be cited increasingly in the months ahead by those pushing for war.

And here are a few past examples (1990 to 2011). Add your own in the COMMENTS section below (at the source):

-Blame Saddam for Incubator baby deaths and plots against Bush's father; provoke him by slant drilling from Kuwait, then imply no objection if he takes action; blame him for 9/11 complicity, falsely tie him to Al Qaeda, claim he possesses WMDs and poses an imminent threat, misrepresent claims to make it seem that he did not destroy WMD stocks as ordered.. More here and here and here.

-Blame Qaddafi for Lockerbie bombing, mass rapes, mass murder, fund an uprising, then bomb him for "humanitarian" reasons when he responds in order to assure his survival. Click here and here for more on this.

You don't have to approve of these regimes to see that these appear to be (and in many cases certainly were) false provocations that reek of ulterior motives (hint: how many of these countries are oil exporters?) In fact, you can abhor these regimes and hope that they will not survive, and still realize how problematical it is for the American government to repeatedly foist big lies on its own people. This kind of thing is beneath any administration claiming lofty ideals and purporting to serve the public interest--and something that none of us should feel comfortable being party to.

If the public interest is defined as "seizing oil wherever it may be found," then, well, that's a conversation we need to have ... and quick. There are severe consequences of this definition. Among them, the empowerment of those forces, both corporate and governmental, that profit most from the unbridled development of fossil fuels--and that have good reasons to block the development of renewable sources of energy. They're known today as the One Percent, and they are destroying our world.


Crackpot Anti-Islam Activists, "Serial Fabricators" and the Tale of Iran and 9/11 29 December 2011 by Gareth Porter Truthout Report

Behind a mysterious December 22 Associated Press story about "finding of fact" by a District judge in Manhattan Friday that Iran assisted al Qaeda in the planning of the 9/11 attacks is a tapestry of recycled fabrications and distortions of fact from a bizarre cast of characters.

The AP story offers no indication of the nature of the evidence in the case except that former members of the 9/11 Commission and three Iranian defectors provided testimony. What it didn't say was that at least two of the Iranian defectors have long been dismissed by US intelligence as "fabricators" and that the two "expert witnesses" who were supposed to determine the credibility of those defectors' claims are both avowed advocates of crackpot conspiracy theories about Muslims and Shariah law who believe the United States is at war with Islam.

The ostensible purpose of the case brought by families of 9/11 terror attack victims was to win damages from those responsible for 9/11. Dozens of such cases involving different terrorist attacks have been brought to US courts over the years, in which "default judgments" have been made against Iran over various attacks in which Iran was allegedly involved, but there is no chance of getting any money for the families.

The only real effect of the case is to promote right-wing political myths about Iran. One of the peculiarities of such cases is that the witnesses are not subject to cross examination in court. The witnesses have every incentive, therefore to indulge in false testimony, knowing that there will be no one to challenge them.

"A Fabricator of Monumental Proportions"

The lawyers and the "expert witnesses" behind the accusation of Iran in regard to 9/11 hoped to sell the press and public on recycled claims first made by Iranian "defectors" several years ago that they had personal knowledge of Iranian participation in the 9/11 plot. The lawyers produced videotaped affidavits by three such defectors who were identified, with a dramatic flourish, as Witnesses "X," "Y" and "Z."

Continued at source.

Oh, and lest we forget ...

Iran Gave U.S. Help On Al Qaeda After 9/11

September 4, 2009 CBSNews.com

(CBS/AP) Iran rounded up hundreds of Arabs to help the United States counter al Qaeda after the Sept. 11 attack after they crossed the border from Afghanistan, a former Bush administration official said Tuesday. Many were expelled, Hillary Mann Leverett said, and the Iranians made copies of almost 300 of their passports.

The copies were sent to Kofi Annan, then the secretary-general of the United Nations, who passed them to the United States, and U.S. interrogators were given a chance by Iran to question some of the detainees, Leverett said in an Associated Press interview.

Leverett, a Middle East expert who was a career U.S. Foreign Service officer, said she negotiated with Iran for the Bush administration in the 2001-3 period, and Iran sought a broader relationship with the United States. "They thought they had been helpful on al Qaeda, and they were," she said.

For one thing, she said, Iran denied sanctuary to suspected al Qaeda operatives.

Some administration officials took the view, however, that Iran had not acknowledged all likely al Qaeda members nor provided access to them, Leverett said.

Many of the expelled Arabs were deported to Saudi Arabia and other Arab and Muslim countries, even though Iran had poor relations with the Saudi monarchy and some other countries in the region, Leverett said. Iranians are Persian, not Arab, and most belong to the Shiite sect of Islam rather than the Sunni, the majority sect in most Arab countries.

James F. Dobbins, the Bush administration's chief negotiator on Afghanistan in late 2001, said Iran was "comprehensively helpful" in the aftermath of the 9-11 attack in 2001 in working to overthrow the Taliban militias' rule and collaborating with the United States to install the Karzai government in Kabul.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by 1ofus (29) 12 years ago

What we need is balance. We need to balance the needs of the individual with the needs of the many. The right represents the perspective of the individual and the left represents the needs of the many (we the people). Personnaly, I put myself on far left, however with the recent assault on personal liberties I find myself agreeing with a lot of same sentiment in tea party. The only way our adversary can defeat us is to keep us divided. We need to look for and find all the points we agree on and work from there, and most importantly we have to recognize who our enemy really is and unite. Unfortunately, there isn't a canadate that represents the left, Obama is a joke and a vote for either republican or democrat, except Paul, is a vote for status quo or worse more war. Too bad Paul's position is absent any social balance.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 12 years ago

the military industry is interested in war


building bombs 'til bunkers boil *

getting paid for shell filled toil

  • if I am to work tomorrow *

lobe the load on foreign soil


[-] 1 points by TedIV (40) 12 years ago

How much is true? cause I seem to recall a young Bush who was with a government agency who helped to put a lot of the pawns in place in the Middle east. and to my knowledge is another good part of our foriegn policy problem with the middle east..Then lets get into "DUKE" goes to the middle east..Does anyone remember or read about this? This article on some of it: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236014,00.html would you trust a country that has our track record with Politicians, and I will say it again SOLD OUR monetary system only to be hostage to that country?? I would well arm myself my people and my country against such assinine people of that assine states of was america..what would u do? legalize pot for what medical purposes OK woa why we opening all these smoke shops and Cafes??? are they the new Hospital???or just the new Doctors office?? sorry got a little carried off....

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 12 years ago

I don't know for sure but I think you have taken your meds directly prior to making this comment.

[-] 1 points by TedIV (40) 12 years ago

what did you change ur posting name and now ur all sudden some one else and gonna run around name calling and being overly abusive with a very good lack of understanding the posts..yeah in 1999 a bunch of us would be in chat and when some one like u came in we would chase them out, and it's very simple I had 10 user names and each one of my buddies had 10 and we had T hook up for our comps so each one of us would have ten windows open a piece and when some one like u came in we would have a field day with some intellectual such as urself and they never new of course they did not stay long shame...LoL 10 of us looking like a hundred people pretty Kewl.. But hey U maybe right about my meds, VitaminC, acai, and water, right now a cup of tea with freshly squeezed orange juice from the orange I picked off the tree outside my door and fresh honey from down the road from a freind..MMMMM yeah me Im on some good meds..How bout u..maybe its the water I am by the ocean with a river full of shrimp shark Dolphin crabs and lots of delicious fish..??? our crops of tomatoes? lettuce..onios, ocra, all this fresh meds cause where I live in the USA we are armed and are not Kidding..good thing Im a sober thinking man with the weapons I have and 53 and the only kills I have are Military..maybe I should think more about that mass murderer and serial killer stuff..Less arguing less corruption yeah but then because some learn slower than others which then means that much longer it takes before they can actually read and understand so I would then not be a killer which is someone protecting them self and or family I would be a Murderer who is some one that lacks intellect on dealing with the situation appropriately damn u mean I have deal with u..shit...maybe their right put Newt in so I can just be ignarint...Thanks for pointing all this out to me....psyche 101 I did my report on Night and anne frank the professor liked it..he was kewl he was one of those psych hypnotists that would get people up on stage and they would let him hypnotize them he did a group of people funny as hell they ran a round the stage hugging themselves and trying to cover themselves with their hands, he had them thinking and seeing themselves naked LoL funny, but not as funny as u and the others trying to put others down with that meds bullshit....again thanks for helping me to point this out..wow ur good at this.... : )

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 12 years ago

That's a lot of good information, but I think a more important point which you are not making is that the intention behind provoking such a war with Iran is to trigger a greater regional war which would overflow into Russia and China.

These countries would retaliate against the US as the perceived source of the war with a nuclear strike. After the nuclear exchange, the oligarchs would emerge from their bunkers to reclaim what was left of the earth.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

That's speculation.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 12 years ago

It is speculation, but you have had Russian generals warning against a third world war, and US Joint Chiefs of staff have expressed concern about this possibility also. Hu Jin Tao recently warned the Chinese navy to increase preparations for war with the US.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 12 years ago

do you have a cite to the hu jin tao warning? i'd like to learn about that.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 12 years ago

You can do a search at google on "hu jintao warns navy". I just reread some of the articles. Looking back, he may not have warned specifically about war with the US, but this is what some western analysts are interpreting.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 12 years ago

ha! i didn't think the search would work. BBC article was concise. i suppose if i were him, i too would be gearing up, and frankly tell my diplomats to tell the US guns down, or else. US military force is about 9 times china's size and expenditure.

[-] -2 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

Speculation is your forte, no?

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago


[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

That Iraq was blamed for 911 is not speculation. That Iran is now being blamed is not speculation. That the 911 Commissioners themselves say that their investigation was hampered by governmental resistance and official lies is not speculation. That hundreds of engineers say that the official version of the events could not possibly be true is not speculation. I don't speculate as to why you make it your mission to squelch these not speculative facts.

The rules of this website bar "conspiracy theory". None of this is conspiracy theory.

[-] -2 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

Are you a Truther?

[-] 3 points by BannedForTruth (233) from Christiana, TN 12 years ago

Are you an liar?

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

Do you mean that a person who does not believe in the 9-11 conspiracy theory is an (sic) liar?

[-] 1 points by BannedForTruth (233) from Christiana, TN 12 years ago

No just a retort to you question "are you a truther".

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

I want the truth about 911. The lies about 911 that have come from official sources have justified terrible things. The facts that over 3,000 people were murdered in broad daylight in Manhattan and there never was a police investigation, that not even the FBI could make a case against Bin Ladn, that the Taliban twice offered to turn him over FOR TRIAL and WERE REFUSED should make anyone with a brain want to get to the bottom of it.

I don't take offense at being called a "truther." I want the truth. I think it matters.

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

The truth matters, but Truthers aren't finding it because they use pseudoscience to search for it. That's why they have unearthed nothing of worth after 10 years of research. They are complete failures when it comes to investigative work.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Hundreds of engineers differ with you.



What do you infer from the facts I cited? Do you think the truth has been told about the events of that day? Do you think it should or would matter to Occupiers? Will you continue persecuting anyone who raises this matter here?

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

Will you continue persecuting anyone who raises this matter here?

Yes, I will continue persecuting anyone who brings up conspiracy theories on this forum. It has become a hobby of sorts, and just like you really deeply care about 9-11 conspiracy theories, I really deeply care about logical thought.

The fact of the matter is truthers bear the burden of proof and they haven't provided any evidence that hasn't been debunked ten times over. If they had evidence of worth, then they wouldn't be desperately looking on random forums in order to convince random strangers that their claims are correct. They would be publishing their evidence in serious peer-reviewed journals and the NY Times.

9-11 trutherism is pseudoscience at its very best.

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

I want the truth about 911. The lies about 911 that have come from official sources have justified terrible things. The facts that over 3,000 people were murdered in broad daylight in Manhattan and there never was a police investigation, that not even the FBI could make a case against Bin Ladn, that the Taliban twice offered to turn him over FOR TRIAL and WERE REFUSED should make anyone with a brain want to get to the bottom of it. I don't take offense at being called a "truther." I want the truth. I think it matters.

[-] -1 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 12 years ago

If you want the truth about 9-11, then stay away from Truthers because they only confuse matters more with their nonsensical pseudoscientific investigative methods. They spread entertaining lies to young gullible minds so they can sell books and make lots of money. The Alex Jones of this world are extremely dangerous people. They kill healthy minds.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

If you want the truth about 911 you have to start with the knowledge that the government has lied. As for burdens of proof, I'd put that on the US Government. They have only proven that they have the power to do what they want to do and to ignore reality. They have not proven their story about 911 and in fact they don't really think they need to - what with people like you running around squelching questioners.

US Senator Max Cleland was a member of the official 911 Commission but he resigned.


9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story Old-Thinker News | September 11, 2009

By Daniel Taylor

On the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, there remain unanswered questions surrounding the events that transpired that day. These questions demand answers, and far from being a “fringe” movement as cast by the mainstream media, many of the 9/11 commission members themselves doubt the official story.

The following are a few examples:

Senator Max Cleland, who resigned from the 9/11 Commission after calling it a “national scandal”, stated in a 2003 PBS interview,

“I’m saying that’s deliberate. I am saying that the delay in relating this information to the American public out of a hearing… series of hearings, that several members of Congress knew eight or ten months ago, including Bob Graham and others, that was deliberately slow walked… the 9/11 Commission was deliberately slow walked, because the Administration’s policy was, and its priority was, we’re gonna take Saddam Hussein out.”

Cleland, speaking with Democracy Now, said,

“One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”.

In 2006 the Washington Post reported that several members of the 9/11 Commission suspected deception on part of the Pentagon. As reported,

“Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon’s initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.”

9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerry also has unanswered questions. As reported by Salon, he believes that there are legitimate reasons to believe an alternative version to the official story.

“There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version,” Kerrey said. The commission had limited time and limited resources to pursue its investigation, and its access to key documents and witnesses was fettered by the administration.

Commissioner Tim Roemer, speaking to CNN, stated that Commission members were considering a criminal probe of false statements. As quoted,

“We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting,” Roemer told CNN. “We were not sure of the intent, whether it was to deceive the commission or merely part of the fumbling bureaucracy.”

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 12 years ago

And yours is what? Interior decorating?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 12 years ago

"All warfare is based on deception"

  • Modern Warfare 3
[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 12 years ago

can we think of shiite an sunni as catholic and babtist? and they kill each other ? lol there is no hope for those people. but there of course will be war. teach your kids now to stay away from the armed forces cause the purpose they proclaim has been corrupted.. they do not protect any american freedom they kill for the government.

[-] 3 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

I think the point of this post is that Iran actually helped the USA in Afghanistan and now they are being blamed for 911.

[-] 3 points by Scout (729) 12 years ago

wasnt that the same with Gaddafi and Sadam ?

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Yes. Lot of good it did them...

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Catholics and Protestants have murdered each other quite happily in the past. In fact similar things happened in our own country:

Missouri Executive Order 44 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lilburn Boggs, who issued Missouri Executive Order 44, the so-called "Extermination Order".

Missouri Executive Order 44, also known as the "Mormon Extermination Order"[1] (alt. exterminating order)[2] in Latter Day Saint history, was an executive order issued on October 27, 1838 by the governor of Missouri, Lilburn Boggs. The directive was issued in the aftermath of the Battle of Crooked River, a clash between Mormons and a unit of the Missouri State Guard in northern Ray County, Missouri, during the so-called "Mormon War" of 1838. Insisting that the Mormons had committed "open and avowed defiance of the laws", and had "made war upon the people of this State," Boggs precipitously directed that "the Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the State if necessary for the public peace—their outrages are beyond all description."

While the order is often referred to as the "Mormon Extermination Order" due to the phrasing used by Boggs, relatively few people were killed as a direct result of its issuance. However, the state militia and other authorities used Boggs' missive as a pretext to expel the Mormons from their lands in the state, and force them to migrate to Illinois. Mormons did not begin to return to Missouri until 25 years later, when they found a more welcoming environment and were able to establish homes there once more. In 1976, citing the unconstitutional nature of Boggs' directive, Missouri Governor Kit Bond formally rescinded it.[3]

But my point is that Iran actually tried to help the USA after 911 and is now rewarded with blame for the event- a false flag it is clear.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 12 years ago

in the past. . why then have they evolved and yet sunni and shiite have not? and you are talkin waaaay in the past. yes.. it seems any arab nation that helps usa becomes a target.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Christianity has been around much longer than Islam has been. And this "evolution" has been quite recent a thing, and not even now completed.


[-] 1 points by TedIV (40) 12 years ago

Christianity has been around a very long time due to the thought before Jesus is that the Christ was coming and those who believed this are of course Christ-ians, as far as evolution it is writt we are all created from the dust and the dust is then in all of us so the misconception of evolution is cause we all come from the earth and of course there will be dna of all other creations in ALL ah's (ALL of us)

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Virtually all of science agrees that we are the products of evolution.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 12 years ago

it is written into government law. it is not just some crazy that kills the sunni and shiites.. they do this with the blessing of the government and the citizens. they have national laws that say its is required . a huge huge difference. also.. normal people that realize there is a bomb school would seek to close it. these people do not. they accept it .another huge huge difference. also a pipe bomb is minimal compared to the bombs they use to kill each other.. and they do it on a daily basis not once in a while. its not an anomoly its a way of life. as far as 'recent' i can only know what ive actually heard in my life time and those of my living ancestors.. so for at least scince 1884 christians have not killed other christians enmasse. sunni and shiite have and will do so tommorrow and everyday after. the comparison is ridiculous.

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

The great state of Missouri repealed its extermination order against the Mormons in 1976. Show me a Muslim state that officially called for the extermination of any Muslim sect in the year 1976 or since.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 12 years ago

as you stated.. 'extermination' in america is not literal it is figurative. by putting this into the islamic law.. there is no need to 'call' for it. just kill as many as you can everyday. so.. i think they called for it about 6000 years ago and it has never been rescinded.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

There was no Islam 6000 years ago. But guys like Moses and David sure liked a good genocide from time to time.

And they did kill quite a few Mormons while expelling thousands from their homes.

[-] 1 points by TedIV (40) 12 years ago

Do not forget the recent ousting of a christian from his home in Israel cause a jew wanted his home! You do know that in Israel an Jew can take land from non jews when they want too..

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

I didn't know about this particular incident and can't find a reference to it. I know that Jewish people have priority over everyone else in Israel. Even a Jewish person who has never been to Israel can arrive and declare himself a citizen and get benefits that a non Jewish Israeli born person can't get. How we can call this a democracy is a mystery, no?

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 12 years ago

so you found one instance. in the last 250 yrs. and i doubt it was thousands. still no comparison

[-] 1 points by TedIV (40) 12 years ago

comparison? to kill any creature human or otherwise is not a good thing whether it be one or thousands..Any of the wars were a good comparison..A lot of people went into these and or thru propaganda due to their faith.. yet the use of religion was used to fuel the population into those wars and justify the means...

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Point was and is. The State of Missouri had a standing extermination order in 1976. I challenged you to find any legal order or any law in a Muslim country mandating murder of another Muslim sect. You have failed so far.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 12 years ago

ok so it isnt mandated. it is encouraged and not prohibited to say the least. there are never any mention of pursuing or apprehending or prosecution of the murderers ,, it just goes on.. nothing is done,, the state obviously turns a blind eye, im sure ,, if the people themselves stopped killing each other,, the state would then issue a mandate but as it stands there is no need.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Shiites and Sunnis coexisted in Iraq before we brought "freedom and democracy" to them. I'm not saying they loved each other, but they weren't killing each other like now. For that to happen they needed the help of the USA.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 12 years ago

before the us there was saddam. he controlled the crazies by killing them himself that is the reason you never heard about all the killing. if your reasoning was correct they would have taken this opportunity to NOT kill each other instead of escalating as soon as they had no control in place.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Saddam was no sweetheart but Shiites and Sunnis were not murdering each other like now. The US not only destroyed the Iraqi state but destroyed the standard of living which tends to pit group against group. Also Al Qaeda was not present on the streets and in the towns blowing people up prior to the "emancipation."

[-] 1 points by TedIV (40) 12 years ago

You mean the foreign legion of the french or the occupying of the English (not American English)? who were shoving a religion down their throats that came from their region in the first place?

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 12 years ago


[-] 1 points by TedIV (40) 12 years ago

I was posting to gestopomillyy post: Before the US there was Saddam (and to add Saddam was helped into power by Bush) I was referenceing to the French and English occupation of Civilizing the middle east...which was way before the US got fully involved..

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 12 years ago

i dont understand what your asking

[-] 1 points by TedIV (40) 12 years ago

I was adding to the post of yours on before the US there was saddam..I was adding that before us there was the french and englich occupation which was to civilize the inhabitants of the middle east with the help of the KJV Bible.

[-] 1 points by leandroBR (24) from São José dos Campos, São Paulo 12 years ago

Well, i don't live in the Middle-East so i don't know which one of us are right, but what we learn in Brazilian schools is that only a very small percentage of them are actually willing to kill others for religion and when they do, people tend to exaggerate it. I guess that if that weren't true, you'd see 9/11s everyday. Besides, another thing we comment is how Americans can easily mistake Arabs for terrorists. No intend to offense, but that's how i see it...

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 12 years ago

how can you exaggerate something that happens every few days? 20 here , 50 there, 13 over in the next town. im sure if americans came to brazil to kill brazilians , vocally hated brazilians, stood in the streets and screamed for the distruction of brazil, then you would also easily mistake americans for terrorist

[-] 1 points by leandroBR (24) from São José dos Campos, São Paulo 12 years ago

Maybe then it's just that, we just have no real motive to fear them. Thanks for explaining it to me!

[-] 0 points by WanderingJewess (6) 12 years ago

Iran has made explicit genocidal threats against the Jewish. The protocols of the elders of Zion is a best seller all across the middle-east. Is this a subject worthy of discussion?

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Iran has done no such thing. The protocols of the elders is bad news I agree, but the fact that Iranians read it or not has nothing to do with any need of the US to attack Iran or to unleash its attack dog Israel to do the same. There is a prosperous (at least until the recent Us sanctions) Jewish community in Iran. It has explicit representation in Iran's parliament and has religious freedom.

[-] 1 points by Mowat (164) 12 years ago

There are tens of thousands of Iranian Jews living happily in Iran. They are not being exterminated as you are suggesting.

You want to provoke a war with Iran and you have your reasons (AIPAC, FED, CIA, HALIBURTON, BECHTEL, etc.) But Iran harming the Jews is not one of them.

[-] 1 points by toukarin (488) 12 years ago

So let us be clear... are we attacking them because of genocidal threats against the Jewish? Or their (yet unproven) nuclear weapons ambitions.