Comment 11868

By Genghis (anonymous) | Posted September 20, 2007 at 15:30:52

Hi Ryan;

Thanks for your reply.

After reading your logic, I was inclined to meet it point for point, but trying to score points back and on the Middle East would take hundred of thousands of text and more Servers..

If we are going to deal with Facts, then lets agree to deal with one source, say Wikipedia.It is open and is opinionated with a global base and corrections to errata done in milliseconds.At lest it keeps it away from LEft vs Right.

( somehow I think you have managed to use your own opinions for these statements and not facts at all.I can blow your arguments away in one fell swoop...

IF you agree on the format than can you provide your sources for the following:

"I wrote that the creation of the state of Israel was a crime, since it involved the forced removal of people who were already living on the site. "

"I'm not saying the *existence* of Israel is a crime, but the manner in which it was formed is a crime, and its ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories, with related settlement expansions, bombing and bulldozing sorties and collective punishment are crimes."


"The construction of the wall has encroached on Palestinian land, separated people from their own properties and torn Palestinian communities asunder. "

"Israel has illegally occupied Palestinian territories for decades. When it launches attacks of collective punishment against those people for resisting the occupation, that is not "self defence" by any reasonable definition."

"Again, that's not what I wrote. I wrote that the way Israel was created (with ethnic cleansing) would be regarded as a crime today."

"Nevertheless, he did not say he is going to "wipe Israel off the map", since the expression doesn't even exist in Farsi. He said he hopes the regime occupying Palestine will be "wiped away from the page of time", much as the Soviet regime occupying the SSR clients was wiped away from the page of time."(
In other words, he's calling for a change in the government of Israel, not for its destruction.
PS
>(I Really think you are being really disingenous here that we all know what he meant in the tone )


"This is also entirely consistent with Ayatollah Khamenei's stated policy toward Israel, which is to give all its citizens full rights of representation by their government through a referendum."

( They recognize them alright..but do nothing about them I will grant you that)

"The US insisted that Iraq was still stockpiling biological and chemical weapons and had resurrected its nuclear weapons program in secret. The UNMOVIC and IAEA inspectors disputed this, saying they had Iraq's cooperation to inspect anywhere in the country and could find no evidence of the US claims. "

"The US insisted by contrast that it could no longer wait for the UN and would invade anyway to stop Iraq's "imminent threat". ( This I agree with wholeheartedly)"

"After the invasion, the US inspection team led by David Kay scoured the entire country and reluctantly came to the same conclusion as the UN - Iraq had, in fact, disarmed in compliance with UN Security Council Resolution 687.
>( This is false but I await your source.the UN were blocked endlessly from confirming if there had a program or one in secret or not.ore on this later.. Han Blix agreed there were mass amounts of WMD unaccounted for.Not confirmed destroyed.)

"The same situation is happening today. The US insists that Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons while the IAEA, which has been investigating Iranian nuclear facilities, says it sees no evidence of this."
>( Are we watching the same newscasts??)

"Iran is obeying the Non Proliferation Treaty in its efforts to develop civil nuclear power. The US, by contrast, is violating it by not disarming its nuclear weapons and by giving nuclear technology to India, which also has nuclear weapons but is not a signatory to the NPT. (Israel, you will recall, also has nuclear weapons and is not a signatory to the NPT.) "
>OK I have to see this source..


To enrich uranium for nuclear power, you have to raise the Uranium-235 to about 3-4 percent of the total. TO enrich uranium for nuclear weapons, you have to raise the U-235 to about *90 percent*.

>( Well except Pakistan managed to use spent fuel from CANDU Canadian reactors for civil use in the 70s and 80s to make its first nuclear bomb..not an expert but if it walks like a duck



Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds