hilarious Hillary

[94extreme]

Entrenched Hypocrisy: Hillary Clinton, AIPAC and Iran

 

By Joshua Frank

 

President Bush’s position on Iran is “disturbing” and “dangerous,” reads a recent screed written by AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee). Recently, the Bush administration accepted a Russian proposal to allow Iran to continue to develop nuclear energy under Russian supervision and AIPAC is downright pissed.

 

In a letter to congressional allies, mostly Democrats, the pro-Israel organization admitted is was “concerned that the decision not to go to the Security Council, combined with the U.S. decision to support the ‘Russian proposal,’ indicates a disturbing shift in the Administration’s policy on Iran and poses a danger to the U.S. and our allies.”

 

Israel, however, continues to develop a substantial nuclear arsenal, and in 2000 the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) reported that Israel has most likely produced enough plutonium to make up to 200 nuclear weapons. So, it is safe to say that Israel’s bomb building techniques are light years ahead of Iran’s dismal nuclear program. Yet the major U.S. ally in the Middle East still won’t admit they have capacity to produce such deadly weapons.

 

And while AIPAC and Israel pressure the U.S. government to force the Iran issue to the U.N. Security Council, Israel itself stands in violation of numerous U.N. Resolutions dealing with the occupied territories of Palestine, including U.N. Resolution 1402, which demands that Israel withdraw its military from all Palestinian cities at once.

 

AIPAC’s hypocrisy is stomach-turning, to say the least. The goliath lobbying organization wants Iran to be slapped across the knuckles while the crimes of Israel continue to be ignored. And who is propping up AIPAC’s hypocritical position? Senator Hillary Clinton of New York.

 

As the top Democratic recipient of pro-Israel funds for the 2006 election cycle thus far, pocketing over $58,000 as of October 31 last year, Senator Clinton now has Iran in her cross-hairs.

 

During a Hanukkah dinner speech delivered on December 11, hosted by Yeshiva University, Clinton prattled, “I held a series of meetings with Israeli officials [last summer], including the prime minister and the foreign minister and the head of the [israeli Defense Force] to discuss such challenges we confront. In each of these meetings, we talked at length about the dire threat posed by the potential of a nuclear-armed Iran, not only to Israel, but also to Europe and Russia. Just this week, the new president of Iran made further outrageous comments that attacked Israel’s right to exist that are simply beyond the pale of international discourse and acceptability. During my meeting with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, I was reminded vividly of the threats that Israel faces every hour of every day ... It became even more clear how important it is for the United States to stand with Israel ...”

 

As Sen. Clinton embraces Israel’s violence, as well as AIPAC’s duplicitous Iran position, she simultaneously ignores the hostilities inflicted upon Palestine, as numerous Palestinians have been killed during the recent shelling of the Gaza Strip. Over the past weeks Israel continues to mark the occupied territories (what it calls “buffer zones”) like a frothing-mouth K9 on the loose.

 

Hillary Clinton’s silence toward Israel’s brutality implies the senator will continue to support AIPAC’s mission to occupy the whole of the occupied territories, as well as a war on Iran in the future. AIPAC’s right—even President Bush appears to be a little sheepish when up against Hillary “warmonger” Clinton.

 

from: http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/ful.../frank01022006/

 

this article is rather interesting.. it manages to bash shrub and h. clinton all at the same time.. i do wonder where the "warmonger" came from though.. i didn't read about her saying we need to attack iran.. i think maybe she is saying that we need to apply more pressure.. not sure about that either.. all she said is that we should stand with Israel.. agree or disagree with that statement but where do you get warmonger from?

 

 

her silence on Israel's brutality? now that's interesting... seems most americans are silent as well.. how can we justify sticking with the UN resolutions with regards to Iraq but completely ignore UN resolutions in regards to Israel? talk about hypocricy.

 

[derogate]

tooo. much.... politics... brain... hurtsss

[dnodog]

Whoever is the author of the article, must be one of the great critics as he/she has not offered any intelectual input from themselves, except their ability to type.

The author appears to be the type that should their child come home with 99.9% on his report, he would ask the youngster why did he not score 100%!!)

[Vsicks Pathy]

Whoever is the author of the article, must be one of the great critics as he/she has not offered any intelectual input from themselves, except their ability to type.

The author appears to be the type that should their child come home with 99.9% on his report, he would ask the youngster why did he not score 100%!!)

Well you seem to be a lot smarter than the author. Why don't you post up the facts as you see them? Sorry, I know I should not use the term "facts" when it comes to politics on this board. Just feel free to distrort bend and ignor the facts like DSM guy, vengeful, k9sar and jj do. You can post up any old lie, call it truth, then remove the lies you just posted up like they do. It seems to work a treat. I call it slander and run.

[Vsicks Pathy]

Shame on you mz for posting up things like this. Shame! Not one ounce of BS in there mz? Come come!

 

I read what Hillary Clinton said with regard to Iran. You are correct, no war mongering at all. Just pressure followed by more pressure. It is on the net and there for all to see. I would put a link in here but no one would look at it. Correction, some would look at it but just ignor it. For some odd reason the truth doesn't matter here? I was actually more concerned about her attitude toward Palestine.. It shows that she too just does not care about the unlawful occupation of Israel onto and into Palestinian lands, not to mention the terrorist activities that are thrust upon the Palestinian people by the Israelis. I mean the whole world gets it, but she too doesn't? You know that Israel is in breach of well over 200 UN resolutions, including nukes and nothing is ever done. We all just sit back and cop it. I bet you did not know that Israel attacked an unarmed American spy ship in 1967 though did you? Look it up. The year and Israel are the only clues for you.

 

Now back to why this thread is here........

I just don't know why some people are compelled to post blatant lies, like the post that was removed recently, to name just one example of many and supposedly "moved temporarily to the Moderator's Forum for discussion". I do hope that it is put back asap because some of the things that were claimed in that post need to be addressed as well as some of the replies.

 

I will take little sips of air untill it is back and open to discussion?

 

 

sip.

Edited January 22, 2006 by Vsicks Pathy

[94extreme]

oh come one mr v6. links are always good. if nobody else wants to participate in the discussion then fine.. at least you and i can..

 

sooo, she is a warmonger and old shrub isn't?

[Vsicks Pathy]

This is what she actually said....

 

"I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and to outsource the negotiations. I don't believe you face threats like Iran or North Korea by outsourcing it to others and standing on the sidelines. But let's be clear about the threat we face now: A nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel, to its neighbors and beyond. The regime's pro-terrorist, anti-American and anti-Israel rhetoric only underscores the urgency of the threat it poses. U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal. We cannot and should not — must not — permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. In order to prevent that from occurring, we must have more support vigorously and publicly expressed by China and Russia, and we must move as quickly as feasible for sanctions in the United Nations. And we cannot take any option off the table in sending a clear message to the current leadership of Iran — that they will not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons."

 

Though it is disheartening and worrying, she did not actually say what DMS guy said she said. No need for a link to it, it is every where. No half truths either.

 

A good read.......... Just a touch of blow back for Hillary. Well, you do reap what you sow after all.

http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/1/2006/1304

 

Bill Clintons thoughts on the Middle East... This was about a year ago and the opening statement is a pisser. It certainly puts DMS guy's assertions to bed. Remember when he wrote this little beauty? "the common people HATED us because of what we had done in teh past. we would go into a coutnry, liberate them". I still get a good laugh from that one. And not because of the spelling!

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/interview...inton_rose.html

 

Did you look into the US ship being attacked in 1967? Your thoughts?

[Vsicks Pathy]

A very long but very good read here.

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11631.htm

[94extreme]

well, those are some strong words from HC but i still don't see warmonger or an approval for war with iran..

 

good article rose/clinton.. maybe shrub is learning that things are a bit more complex then they may seem. he seems to have cooled it just a bit too much now.. we are in an election year now (congressional) so nothing will happen until next year at the earliest..

[Vsicks Pathy]

Hillary Clinton is a fence sitter and can't make up her mind on the Iran issue. She never said anything about wanting a war or going to war with Iran. What DMS guy said was just another one of his lies. I hope the US does push into Iran though. The sooner WW111 starts, the better. It will be on their own this time though. How is the stock market perfoming today?? No one else trusts what comes out of the White House anymore and they can't get support for an Iranian attack.

 

You are a little quite on the US spy ship question mz?

 

Do you like the free elections in Palestine that the US Government is interfering in? Makes amock of Iraq doesn't it! Yes good old 'W' is giving finantual support to the incumbents. What a f*cking joke!

[94extreme]

well, she may be a fence sitter but has always been in the back pocket of the israelis..

 

i know nothing of the spyship you refer too... might have missed something somewhere along here..

 

it's kind of funny that abbas gets the win but israel is hard pressed to deal with him.. and sharon's demise doesn't help the whole deal at all..

[Vsicks Pathy]

This should whet your appetite to know more mz.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=836131

[Vsicks Pathy]

Perhaps this is how DMS guy jumped to the 'Hillary for war' conclusion.

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8428

 

DSM guy leans (or should I say lays) right, the author of that peice leans left. It is amazing how they came to the same conclusion.

 

It is a good read anyway.

[94extreme]

This should whet your appetite to know more mz.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=836131

2 words: collateral damage!

 

for a way longer read check this out: http://www.couplescompany.com/Features/Fro...es/Liberty1.htm

[94extreme]

 

Do you like the free elections in Palestine that the US Government is interfering in?

so, do you think US meddled up north too? http://apnews.excite.com/article/20060124/D8FAQDAG4.html

[Vsicks Pathy]

so, do you think US meddled up north too? http://apnews.excite.com/article/20060124/D8FAQDAG4.html

I could not fot the life of me see where it was reported that the US Government supplied money to or supported one side against the other in that artical?

 

So my question is..... did they?

[94extreme]

i was being facetious..canadians got a conservative gov now; looks to be about as right as ours.. seems they want to support US in the worldly endeavors. just thought you might also think that US played there.. very similar results to latest iraqi elections, coalition government and all.

[Vsicks Pathy]

i was being facetious..canadians got a conservative gov now; looks to be about as right as ours.. seems they want to support US in the worldly endeavors. just thought you might also think that US played there.. very similar results to latest iraqi elections, coalition government and all.

After so many years in power change is expected. The new guys in town can not Govern in their own right. They did not get enough of the primary vote. They will have to have a coalition so it still might just work out for the better.

 

As for the Iraqi elections, that's one joke that will come back and haunt some.

[94extreme]

http://tinyurl.com/2v4avg

[Vsicks Pathy]

http://tinyurl.com/2v4avg

 

 

Long live truth, justice and the American way. Nothing happening here... move on!

[Earth1]

V you sure do get hot about American politics for an oz. If all Americans were that engaged we'd be a lot better off. It's funny how that whole Hillary financing thing just blew threw the media, another reason my vote will be for Nader if Hillary wins the primary. The combination of her momentum and the disenfranchised republicans is starting to scare me.

[Vsicks Pathy]

V you sure do get hot about American politics for an oz. If all Americans were that engaged we'd be a lot better off. It's funny how that whole Hillary financing thing just blew threw the media, another reason my vote will be for Nader if Hillary wins the primary. The combination of her momentum and the disenfranchised republicans is starting to scare me.

 

 

The dumbing down of both our countrymen is remarkable we are a long way behind hind you guys but I fear we are catching up rapidly. The dumb arses think "FOX" is a news service. FFS, my uncle (who should know better) thinks Bill O'Reilly is intelligent and tells the truth. We just had a blew (argument) about him and the whole "FOX" entertainment show. When you have the majority of your fellow Americans watching crap like "FOX" and lapping it up, there's little hope left.

 

As for getting hot about the US politics..... It just happens that it effects the whole world. Most on this site don't have a clue that it does and bag me for saying what I say. They seem to love having their collective heads deep in the sand. They either don't have the intellect to form sound opinions regarding politics or just don't care. In any case, both scenarios are as bad as each other. I suppose it is easier to denounce an Aussie for interfering in US politics. It is refreshing that you are a cut above the rest and take an interest. Yes, if only other Americans would do the same.

 

For what it is worth, Obama seems to be the best choice (IMO) for president. He is against another illegal war in the gulf region (Iran) and for this reason alone, he is well worth electing.

 

While we are touching on politics again I wonder if you or mz came across this little tidbit? I got a laugh out of it. See if you do.

[94extreme]

help us god, if obama wins.

 

came across this little tidbit? I got a laugh out of it. See if you do.

 

nope, but thank you.. about time.. tommy franks had to run from germany after we "won" the war in iraq too. he hasn't left US since.. i bet rummy won't leave again either.

[Vsicks Pathy]

The only reason I say Obama is because he is clear and concise with his stance toward Iran. Iran does have a legal right to nuclear energy and he knows it. The whole world knows it. Is there any other candidates out there that are saying stuff like this and putting it on the record? If so, then you have choices.

The war mongering lies just might stop with him if he was to become the next "leader of the free world". And besides that, America is on the verge of bankruptcy with this insane regime in power at the White House. America can nil afford to start yet another war. If America does fold I think the world will just pass it by. There was a time when I worried about the economic situation in the US and the impact it might have had across the globe. You guys are melting at a rapid rate and it is having little effect outside of the USA. China is taking up the slack quite nicely thank you very much. And on reflection, a bankrupt and impoverished America wouldn't be a bad thing. We might just get some "world" peace if it couldn't afford to interfere in every other countries politics. No, I am not forgetting that desperate countries do desperate things either. History (Nazi Germany namely) teaches us this. I personally think that history is repeating itself now anyway. Read into that what you will.

 

It was good that this topic came up again. A lot has changed in this time. Hillary not war mongering... lol. She certainly is now. Aussie $ now $US 0.93, it was around $US 0.75 when this topic was started. The only constant is the Israel lobby and the hold it has on the USA.

[94extreme]

The only reason I say Obama is because he is clear and concise with his stance toward Iran. Iran does have a legal right to nuclear energy and he knows it. The whole world knows it. Is there any other candidates out there that are saying stuff like this and putting it on the record? If so, then you have choices.

 

 

yeah but that won't fly with most folk. this is what does unfortunately:

"The idea of begging your enemy to negotiate with you is a fundamentally flawed position. You've got to have a position of strength."

 

begging? i think not.. in position of real strength one can almost dictate many of the issues.. unfortunately US is actually not in a very strong position and thus resorts to threats. the days for favorable negotiations past 5 years ago.. postion of strenght went about the time of the "win."