BS: Live and let live?

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 15 Dec 05 - 03:47 PM

The left-wing Green member of the European parliament, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, has demanded that the Iran team may be forbidden to compete in the football world championship for which it has qualified as a reaction to Ahmadinejad's statements. Several Greens in the German parliament have supported that idea.

Wolfgang (who's sure that that will not happen)

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 14 Dec 05 - 11:48 AM

And 100 posts

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 14 Dec 05 - 11:45 AM

Bigotry Rules !!

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 14 Dec 05 - 10:24 AM

The Iranian president has added some clarifications to his former statement which makes some of the more charitable interpretations untenable now. The Jews have to disappear from where now is Israel and not just the state of Israel. Ethnic cleansing is the most benevolent interpretation I read now in his words.

The sickness bequeathed by the west to the Muslim world (opinion from the GUARDIAN)

Welcome to the world view of Neonazis, Mr. Ahmadinejad.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 11 Nov 05 - 05:10 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/11/11/iran.nuclear.reut/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Nov 05 - 02:55 PM

How strange! I'm sorry about my posts of Nov. 9th. This must be the wrong thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Nov 05 - 12:55 PM

Well it's a nice change to have someone not automatically taking every mention of Germany as implying a reference to the Nazi era.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 10 Nov 05 - 08:32 AM

Wolfgang - The last time I checked, Germany was not engaged in an ongoing struggle with Poland. (Dianavan)

You didn't get it. I thought that the 'brown uniforms' were a clear enough indication that I was talking about the chancellor of Germany in the 1930s.

Maybe Ake didn't get too so he couldn't see the many similarities.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: dianavan
Date: 09 Nov 05 - 09:25 PM

Of those held at Guantanamo without trial, 73 have been sent to other governments (I think its called out-sourcing torture) and another 179 have been released. About 500 remain.

That means about 1/3 (after how many years of detainment without trial?) have been released from Guantanamo. Looks like they are trying to empty Guantanamo before outside pressure becomes to intense.

Are you saying that they are trying to legitimize this practice in Britain?

If Britain allows it, it will be considered the standard for the so-called 'free world.

It has to be stopped or none of us are safe from persecution.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: dianavan
Date: 09 Nov 05 - 08:44 PM

Not only is it mad, it isn't even original. Can't Blair come up with any evil ideas of his own?

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Nov 05 - 04:04 AM

As an example of a "dangerous" leader.

Today Blair attempts to introduce internment without trial to the UK.
A dangerous ploy to use terrorist scare tactics, not for party political advantage, but for personal advantage.

Whether Blair wins or loses todays vote , he will portray the opposition (both left and right ) as being "soft on terrorism".

Theis legislation is a real danger to our civil liberties, not just potential "wrong doers" but every one of us who wish to protest over any domestic matter.
It will also be counter productive as a deterrent to terrorism, as was proved in Northern Ireland.

The most dangerous man in Britain is not a "mad Mullah", but our mad Prime Minister...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 08:52 PM

"One interpretation is a threat with genocide."

That is indeed true. But it is not the only interpretation, although it has been widely reported in terms that implied that it was. The non-genocidal understanding of the words apears to have been that taken by ordinary Iranians, talking to Western reporters in Iran.

It was clearly a very stupid thing for the Iranian president to say, and any leader who is capable of that kind of stupidity is a danger, most especially to his own people.

I am reminded of when Bush shot his mouth off about how it was time to wage "a crusade" in response to 911.

At that time it would have been a very good idea for anyone writing in a Muslim context to explain that Bush's use of the term did not have to be interpreted in what would probably seen by many (most?) Muslims as the obvious way, as indicating a determination to wage a holy war against Islam on the part of a Christendom with massive miltary superiority, and equipped with a horrifying arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

In the same way it is a good idea now to suggest that the language used by another loose-mouthed president need not mean what it has been widely taken as meaning.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 07:50 PM

Wolfgang - The last time I checked, Germany was not engaged in an ongoing struggle with Poland.

What the Iranian leader said was in the context of an international day of struggle against Israel and for the liberation of Jerusalem.

They have always felt that their country was stolen and have never given up hope of reclaiming Jerusalem. Why is everyone so surprised and shocked?

Yes, he is dangerous but no more dangerous than George Bush and far less threatening.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 12:21 PM

Careful Wolfgang, if you keep putting such things in such simple and powerful terms, you might just get through to people.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 12:13 PM

No more dangerous that our own "Dear Leader"!

Your example Wolfgang, has no similarity to the situation between Israelis/Palistinians, as you probably know very well.

I dont really blame the Israelis for trying to hold on to to land the were given and annexed. I blame the people who created the situation in the first place, and after 60yrs, dont make any real attempt to construct a solution.

Ben Gurion knew that a great wrong had been done to the people of Palistine and admitted it openly . He was a fine man!

If only our politicians and certain posters here were made from the same stuff...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 10:57 AM

Just imagine for a moment a German chancellor would say Poland should be wiped from the map.
I'm sure you'd agree that he only meant to say a bit awkwardly that the map of the world changes every couple of years and that just theoretically that could happen to Poland as well. I'm sure you'd post that he has only said that for the home audience (they like to hear some strong words when drunk and wearing the brown uniforms). And then you'd say that people were not meant, only borders, and could the Poles not live equally well in just another friedly and humane country? Ake would find a quote from a Polish politician who said one could see that from a German point of view there could be some grievances due to former German land taken over by Poland.

Perhaps you are right and the nicest possible interpretation is the correct one. I hope so. But if I was a politician in Israel I'd at least consider the possibility that a less nice interpretation is meant. One interpretation is a threat with genocide.

At the very least I expect from a politician to consider how his words could be interpreted from an outside view. The present leader of Iran is a dangerous politician.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 07:09 AM

"of putting additional pressure on Saddam to cooperate in demonstrating that he had in fact complied with earlier resolution to get rid of his weapons of mass destuction. "


Which the UN determined, by his non-compliance, that he had NOT demonstrated.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Nov 05 - 08:08 PM

The USA failing to fulfil its international obligations? Perish the thought. For example it's obligations under the UN Charter.

"Serious consequences" quite intentionally left it open for those consequences to be determined at a future time. And the only body with the authority to determine what that action should be, and whether it was justified, was the Security Council, not the government of individual countries.

It was on that understanding that Resolution 1441 was approved, as a way of holding back the rush to war, and of putting additional pressure on Saddam to cooperate in demonstrating that he had in fact complied with earlier resolution to get rid of his weapons of mass destuction.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Nov 05 - 06:56 PM

Ake,

You are correct. The decision for war was when Saddam invaded Kuwait, and then did not comply with his obligations and the UN Resolutions. Had the US NOT made plans ( note the word- PLANS) to take action, we would have been failing in both reason and our international obligations. The TRIGGER that set off the ACTION was Saddam's non-complance with 1441. As stated by the UN. He was told what would happen if he did not comply, and chose not to.

Perhaps the people who should be held accountable are those who stated that there would be no action taken if he continued to violate the cease-fire terms....

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 08:21 PM

My God!!   were surely not still arguing about whether or not Saddam was complying.

Leaked documents have made it abundantly clear that the decision for war had been taken long before 1441.
All the play acting at the UN was simply an attempt to legitimise the process.

This is a tactic used by a few remaining pro war posters on Mudcat...get the discussion bogged down in pointless arguments which are impossible to prove.

The bastards wanted a war, they wanted to prove their strength to the American people, they wanted control of Iraq and eventually the whole Middle East
They were wrong and we were right. They created a catastrophy, killing thousands in the name of America and Britain.

One day they should be held to account, often the crimes of our leaders are covered up. we just move on to something else and the past is left to the historians.
But in this case, the Iraq war....we have them...it dosn't happen often, but we have them;   and if we've any guts we'll try them, lock them up and with a bit of luck lose the key!!....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Nov 05 - 06:48 AM

MGOH, what complete and utter twaddle:

"All fifteen members of the security council voted unanimously for a motion that provided n apparent way of stopping a pre-emptive American invasion, by kicking the issue into the long grass until Blix had had a chance to carry out inspections that would determine it one way or another."

I have to assume, judging by the content of the post, that the 'n' between provided and apparent is 'an' and not 'no'.

All 1441 said was that Iraq failed to comply in full with the letter and intent of the resolution they would face serious consequences, the US stated very clearly what they deemed those serious consequences to mean. Further the US reinforced that declaration of intent by placing an armed force of 250,000 men on Iraq's door step, it was the presence of those troops and the urging of the US administration at the time that got Blix & Co back into Iraq, nothing else - even Blix agrees with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Nov 05 - 01:41 PM

All fifteen members of the security council voted unanimously for a motion that provided n apparent way of stopping a pre-emptive American invasion, by kicking the issue into the long grass until Blix had had a chance to carry out inspections that would determine it one way or another.

The understanding was that the decision as to what to do about it still rested with the Security Council, without which an invasion would be illegal. Which it was in the opinion of virtually all experts in international law.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Nov 05 - 01:02 PM

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/nuclear-doctrine-05r.html

"Iran's main intents lie in two efforts: one is asymmetric warfare, and the other is weapons of mass destruction," said Anthony Cordesman, strategic analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a public policy think tank in Washington.

Cordesman, author of "Iran's Developing Military Capabilities," a CSIS-sponsored report assessing Iran's armed forces, and a former high-ranking Pentagon official, also noted that in light of uncertainties about Iran's nuclear capabilities, a military strike on the Islamic republic would be "disastrous" and so a diplomatic approach is the way to go, even if that might not entirely stop Iran from pursuing a military alternative, he said.

Although the United States publicly says it prefers to deal with Iran through diplomacy for now, Vice President Dick Cheney, in a television interview earlier this year, did not rule out the possibility that Israel might hit Iran's nuclear facilities.

Cordesman's remarks come just days before foreign ministers from France, Britain and Germany - the so-called European Union 3 - will meet Iranian officials to negotiate a permanent halt to Iran's already-suspended uranium enrichment program. The step is a key part of both civilian and military nuclear programs."





"permanent halt to Iran's already-suspended uranium enrichment program"















still waiting...

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 04 Nov 05 - 12:42 PM

" pursuing a course of action which would have led to the aquisition of nuclear weapons!!"

and

" had a nuclear capability"

are different things. The UN DID state that Iraq was in NON_COMPLIANCE with the last chance resolution. The UN inspectors stated that, on the deadline date specified in that resolution.

FACT

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Nov 05 - 08:18 AM

FACT my arse!!

Your so called facts are getting thinner by the day.

Nobody thought Iraq had a nuclear capability, not even the guys sent out to Niger to fabricate a reason for Bush and Blairs war.
And certainly not the UN inspectors ...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 10:14 PM

akenaton, 03 Nov 05 - 05:35 PM

"Iraq was also "believed" to be pursuing a course of action which would have led to the aquisition of nuclear weapons!!"

Absolutely correct ould son, that belief was so strong that all fifteen members of the United Nations Security Council voted unanimously for a Resolution to put the matter to rights and establish beyond doubt that this was not the case. The information they were acting on was supplied by their own inspectors - not by George W Bush, not by Tony Blair - FACT.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 05:35 PM

Iraq was also"believed" to be pursuing a course of action which would have led to the aquisition of nuclear weapons!!

This "belief" was based on lies and misinformation, and used to make a case for an illegal war of aggression...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 05:25 PM

Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country.

That is a statement of what David Ben Gurion thought of the treatment of the Palistinians.....and no amount of wriggling will alter it!!

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 04:04 PM

Maps get redrawn every day, and countries get wiped off the map with increasing rapidity. That doesn't mean the places and the people are destroyed.

The world map used to be dominated by something called "the British Empire". You won't find it there today. You won't find the Austro-Hungarian Empire, or the USSR, or the Roman Empire...

"Lo all our pomp of yesterday is one with Nineveh and Tyre...

All wiped off the map, for good or ill. That's the way the world goes, and there's no reason to think it's stopped changing.

.........................

That quote from Ben Gurion was pretty obviously given by dianavan for whatb it was, his understanding of the way that Palestinian Arabs must inevitably feel. The ability to put yourselves in the shoes of your opponents, and see the world through their eyes is a pretty basic requirement for anyone who aspires to be a political leader. Well, it should be, because if you can't do that you are wearing a blindfold.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 02:48 PM

Talking about things being taken out of context:

""They only see one thing: we came here and stole their country. Why should they accept that?" Ben Gurion

That is a statement of what Ben Gurion believes to be the Arab perception of the situation.

Now the Iranian President, at a Conference rejoicing under the banner World without Zionism, said something suggesting that it would be beneficial if Israel was wiped off the map. At the same time this man's country (a signatory of the Nuclear NPT - Israel is not) stands accused by the IAEA of being in breach of the NPT and is believed to be pursuing a course of action that will lead to the acquisition of nuclear weapons. Now what context would you as an Israeli take those remarks to mean?

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Nov 05 - 02:08 PM

dianavan,

"statement taken out of context."?????????


Can you please tell us what you mean? How was it out of context? He even defended saying it, explaining that he meant it just as we had understood it.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Peace
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 10:25 AM

"What a simplistic life and mindset you lead. Have a happy one anyway."

Doesn't change the fact that you are a racist.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 01:53 AM

If the U.S. is a colonial monster, what does that make the Zionists of Israel? Seems to me they are doing a pretty good job of convincing the rest of the world that they are the good guys.

The Italians are actually protesting the remarks made by the Iranian president by organizing pro-Israel marches. Why is it that nobody seems to be able to understand the words of Ben Gurion, "They only see one thing: we came here and stole their country. Why should they accept that?"

Get ready folks, the U.S. is getting ready to invade Iran and this time they have created enough fear in the rest of the world to actually have support. It isn't WMD's this time its the nuclear threat that they have been harping about for months and now they have siezed on a statement taken out of context.

I am disgusted that so many would fall for this propaganda.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: GUEST,David Hannam
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 06:39 PM

What a simplistic life and mindset you lead. Have a happy one anyway.

Next will be the dreaded headlines that Iran is undertaking a weapons of mass destruction programme. The US is a colonial monster, and is playing dangerously close to the edge here i think.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Peace
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 06:35 PM

When it comes to you and your racism, YES.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: GUEST,David Hannam
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 06:31 PM

must you always see everything in black and white peace?

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Peace
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 05:18 PM

Right, Hannam. Like you give a shit about anyone who's not white.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 04:24 PM

Now that was one "friend" Iran would definitely be better off withiout.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: GUEST,David Hannam
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 04:12 PM

In retrospect the term 'the powers that be' was a vague notion by me, but equally as incorrect i think is to say the 'whole civilized world'.

The US tentacles spread far. Iran has being making anti-israeli statments for many many years, so why the huge interest by the US and certain members of the UN?

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Peace
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 03:35 PM

"The powers that be, have pounced on this merely as the excuse for an iranian invasion"

The powers that be are the whole civilized world.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 11:43 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: GUEST,David Hannam
Date: 28 Oct 05 - 01:11 PM

Iran has been making anti-israeli statements for many many years. The powers that be, have pounced on this merely as the excuse for an iranian invasion that was inevitable from the start prior to these hateful remarks made by the Iranian president.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: GUEST,Boab
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 12:46 AM

What David Hannam said, concisely and truthfully.The rest of us are merely point-scoring.....

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: Peace
Date: 30 Oct 05 - 02:29 PM

"And then, added that the answer to this question is absolutely positive as the same thing was happened in Iran Monarchy case, USSR case and Saddam dictatorship case."

If memory serves, America was instrumental in the fall of these governments.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Oct 05 - 01:59 PM

Good post Diana....

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Oct 05 - 09:09 PM

From the Turkish Weekly:

"He said "Lots of hopeless people ask whether a world without America or Zionism is possible or not"? And then, added that the answer to this question is absolutely positive as the same thing was happened in Iran Monarchy case, USSR case and Saddam dictatorship case. He pointed out that the famous iron curtain collapsed and it can be found only in history books nowadays. He told that "A recent similar case is Saddam, who assumed himself immortal and eternal, but today his legs and arms are chained and he is adjudicated by his former collaborators today" and following these examples he made a quotation from the Imam Khomeini's speech and said "As the Imam said, the Occupier regime of al-Qods must be wiped off the map". Than he continued to defend the Palestinians right of having their own territories and own government."

So why is everyone so upset by this speech? He didn't say anything about killing the Jew or the Americans. It was clearly a reference to the governments of those people.

I'd like to wipe out the present government of the United States, myself, but that doesn't mean I want to kill anyone. I'm also quite sure that there are Jews in Israel who do not approve of Zionist politicians.

Take a deep breath, people and don't let fear control your mind. This is exactly what the Bush regime wants.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Oct 05 - 08:50 AM

"He didn't mean wiping the Jewish people off the map. We don't have a problem with them," said Muhammad Ali Chitsaz, 36, a dentist. "We can have peaceful coexistence with them. What we are against is their treatment of the Palestinians. They should allow the Palestinians to return to their homeland and then decide the government on the basis of who is the majority." From this report about a big demo in Tehran yesterday.

It was a stupid and provocative way of putting it by the Iran president all right. But there are no grounds for interpreting it as some kind of call for genocide, and using it as a pretext for war.

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: stevenrailing
Date: 29 Oct 05 - 08:23 AM

The worry i have is that if the Iraq war could fuel the fans of hate amongst muslim extremists in the UK to bomb us, what will happen in the UK if Iran is attacked?

more blood on Blairs hands. we should not send our boys to another war that does not concern us

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Oct 05 - 06:45 AM

I Agree Carol, and my worry is our reaction to that strategy.

The time cant be far off when the powerfull will begin to take what they want in the way of energy resources, without the cover of "spreading democracy" or "world policemen".

Once that happens the vulnerable in our own countries become under threat.

Fascism ...Police state....Dictatorship, all horrors if we dont find an alternative way to live.
People are selfish and rather than face a cut in "living standards " many would settle for piracy and domination of our brothers and sisters.

All this is the inevitable result of "organised society", "progress", technology, but "organisation" of humanity to serve the purposes of our economic system is the most virulent of all.....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: GUEST,bani
Date: 29 Oct 05 - 06:35 AM

Testing and trying to live

Subject: RE: BS: Live and let live?
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Oct 05 - 02:53 AM

My guess is that Israel and the United States will implode economically without one nuke ever being fired by Iran or any other country.

This is what I think their (Iran and some other countries, as well as Bin Laden) long-term strategy is, in a similar fashion to what happened to the Soviet Union, which has been, as McGrath pointed out, "wiped off the map". I think they are conducting a very long, drawn out war of attrition. And I think they are winning.