Syrian Nukes: the Phantom Menace

Joe Hill · 04-28-08, 09:26 AM

The Media Falls for Fake News Once Again.

* Syrian Nukes: the Phantom Menace* : Information Clearing House - ICH

Quote:

Syrian Nukes: the Phantom Menace

By JOHN W. FARLEY
25/04/08 "Counterpunch" -- -- Last September 6, Israel bombed a Syrian building at Dair el Zor. In the immediate aftermath of the bombing, little was said in public, by either Israel or Syria, but later the Israelis started claiming that the Syrians were building a nuclear reactor. On the radio today (April 25), I heard NPR's Tom Jelton repeat, as if it were undisputed fact, the US. government claim to have "proof" of a Syrian-North Korean nuclear connection. Now I see that AP writers Pamela Hess and Deb Reichmann have a story headlined "White House says Syria 'must come clean' about nuclear work," while ABC news has a video entitled "Syria's Nuclear Reactor".
Are the wonderful mainstream media, who gave us Saddam's mythical Weapons of Mass Destruction, lying to us again? The answer is yes. ...

CUT. . .

The truth that makes men free is for the most part the
truth which men prefer not to hear: Herbert Sebastien
Agar

Joe Hill · 04-28-08, 05:44 PM

It is hardly surprising that Israel bombed Syria. It claims the right to bomb anywhere it likes, including US ships (the USS Liberty).

YouTube - What did Israel bomb in Syria?

obvious Child · 05-01-08, 02:15 PM

alright Joe, humor me this:

If it wasn't for civilian energy production:

1) Why where there no electric lines leading away from the reactor?
2) Why was the design a slight variant on the type specifically used by the UK to make weapons grade plutonium?

DivineComedy · 05-01-08, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Hill

It is hardly surprising that Israel bombed Syria. It claims the right to bomb anywhere it likes, including US ships (the USS Liberty).

Alright, that is it, I have had it with those back-stabbers:

Since the acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible to the United Nations (of tyrants too), therefore, no Mandate conceived from war can for all time deprive a people of their right of enfranchisement to vote as to the deposition of their land.

Since all men were created equal, therefore, enfranchisement is a requirement before a people give up possession of a franchise.

Since the Palestinian people were not endowed with enfranchisement to legally give up their rights, therefore, we must return all of Palestine to an enfranchised Palestinian people, with full right of return all the way from the Jordan to the sea.

GO NAVY!

scourge99 · 05-09-08, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DivineComedy

Alright, that is it, I have had it with those back-stabbers:

Since the acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible to the United Nations (of tyrants too), therefore, no Mandate conceived from war can for all time deprive a people of their right of enfranchisement to vote as to the deposition of their land.

Since all men were created equal, therefore, enfranchisement is a requirement before a people give up possession of a franchise.

Since the Palestinian people were not endowed with enfranchisement to legally give up their rights, therefore, we must return all of Palestine to an enfranchised Palestinian people, with full right of return all the way from the Jordan to the sea.

GO NAVY!

We better give all of America back to Native Americans too. Same with Canada. All Spaniards need to leave South America and Mexico.

Land is yours if you can protect it just like human rights. No one "owns" land or is endowed with rights. Welcome to reality.

Billo_Really · 05-10-08, 09:27 AM

Now Syria has nukes?

bub · 05-10-08, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

Now Syria has nukes?

I don't think so, Billo

bhkad · 05-10-08, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billo_Really

Now Syria has nukes?

Not now.*

*- Nukes, meaning a nuclear reactor under construction.

bhkad · 05-10-08, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DivineComedy

Alright, that is it, I have had it with those back-stabbers:

Since the acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible to the United Nations (of tyrants too), therefore, no Mandate conceived from war can for all time deprive a people of their right of enfranchisement to vote as to the deposition of their land.

Since all men were created equal, therefore, enfranchisement is a requirement before a people give up possession of a franchise.

Since the Palestinian people were not endowed with enfranchisement to legally give up their rights, therefore, we must return all of Palestine to an enfranchised Palestinian people, with full right of return all the way from the Jordan to the sea.

GO NAVY!

I say there are a few ways of determining rightful ownership:

The Historic Way.
The Biblical Way.
The Legal Way.
Or by way of War.

Before there was a Muhammad or Islam the land belonged to no one. It was just there until Jews and Christians settled it. Historically, the land belonged to the Jews. The Bible says that God gave the land to the Jews. Later, in 1948, the leading legal body on Earth in a matter such as this, representing all the nations on Earth, declared that Israel would be an independent nation.

So we have the Israelis having an historical, Biblical and legal right to the land.

But now we come to the story of 'ownership' of the Holy Lands by way of War. (The method the Koran teaches.)

And to tell that story I refer you to a CNN report and to help us follow the ownership story more easily I will color code the passages to mark which group was sovereign at the time.

The JEWS will be marked in BLUE.
The CHRISTIANS will be marked in RED.
The MUSLIMS will be marked in GREEN.

Quote:

The Torah teaches that the land was given by God to the Jews' patriarch, Abraham, and his descendants as a birthright for his faithfulness. In 1000 B.C., David, the Jewish king, established Jerusalem as his capital. His son, Solomon, built a temple in the city, for the faithful to worship and make sacrifices.

Four centuries later, the Jews were conquered and forced into exile in Babylon, their temple left in ruins. They were allowed to return in 538 B.C. and built a second temple. But the Holy Land remained under non-Jewish rule and eventually fell into the orbit of the Roman empire. After a series of Jewish rebellions, the Romans again destroyed the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. and forced them into exile.

Jews would not hold sway again in Palestine until the founding of modern Israel in 1948. During nearly two thousand years of exile, persecution and genocide, the land of Israel remained the home of their heart. For example, the hopeful ending to the Seder -- the traditional meal of the Passover celebration -- is "Next Year in Jerusalem."

It was during the Roman occupation of Palestine that Jesus was born to Jewish parents in Bethlehem and raised in Nazareth. For Christians, he is the Son of God, the Messiah whose coming was prophesied in Jewish scripture.

Jesus' ministry through various places throughout the Holy Land is chronicled in the four Gospels of the Christian New Testament.

Charged with apostasy against the religious order of his day, Jesus was crucified near Jerusalem. Christians believe he was resurrected from the dead three days later, and tradition holds that the tomb was located where the Church of the Holy Sepulcher is today, completing an atonement for the sins of the world.

Though the Holy Land gave birth to Christianity and remains central to its history, the faith went elsewhere, particularly Europe, to take root. Christians are a minority religion in the Holy Land, and, compared to Jews and Muslims, have ruled the area for a relatively short amount of time.

After the Roman emperor Constantine adopted Christianity in 313 A.D., the Holy Land was subject to Christian rule for three centuries. But in the 7th century, shortly after the death of Mohammed -- who established Islam and whom Muslims believe was a prophet of Allah, their name for God -- Muslims conquered Jerusalem.

Except for short periods in the 11th, 12th and 13th centuries when Crusaders from Europe conquered parts of the Holy Land, Muslim forces held power in the area until the Turkish Ottoman Empire disintegrated after World War I and the British took over administration.

CNN - Israel at 50

The JEWS owned the land until the CHRISTIANS (Romans) CONQUERED IT.

Then the CHRISTIANS owned the land until the MUSLIMS CONQUERED IT.

Then the MUSLIMS owned it until it was CONQUERED by the Allies after WWI.

Then there was a decision made to reconstitute the land which was sparsely populated and was in decline.

Quote:

For many centuries, Palestine was a sparsely populated, poorly cultivated and widely-neglected expanse of eroded hills, sandy deserts and malarial marshes. As late as 1880, the American consul in Jerusalem reported the area was continuing its historic decline. “The population and wealth of Palestine has not increased during the last forty years,” he said.12

Myths & Facts - Israel’s Roots

Quote:

In 1917, Britain issued the Balfour Declaration:

His Majesty’s Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

The Mandate for Palestine included the Balfour Declaration. It specifically referred to “the historical connections of the Jewish people with Palestine” and to the moral validity of “reconstituting their National Home in that country.” The term “reconstituting” shows recognition of the fact that Palestine had been the Jews’ home. Furthermore, the British were instructed to “use their best endeavors to facilitate” Jewish immigration, to encourage settlement on the land and to “secure” the Jewish National Home. The word “Arab” does not appear in the Mandatory award.11

The Mandate was formalized by the 52 governments at the League of Nations on July 24, 1922.

Myths & Facts - Israel’s Roots

Then in 1948, after being granted statehood, FIVE of Israel's Arab neighbors declared war on the tiny new nation but the Israelis defeated the aggressors.

And every time since then the Israelis have defeated the aggressors.

And so, by virtue of WAR, and to the victor of war go the spoils - the way that the Muslims claim gave them previous rightful ownership of the land - the Israelis have a valid claim to the land...they have fought for it and have retained it through several wars, none of which they started.

So, by historic right, by Biblical decree, through legal 'deed' and by virtue of their war claim to it, Israel belongs to the Israelis.

Quote:

“Israel is the only state in the world today, and the Jews the only people in the world today, that are the object of a standing set of threats from governmental, religious, and terrorist bodies seeking their destruction. And what is most disturbing is the silence, the indifference, and sometimes even the indulgence, in the face of such genocidal anti-Semitism.”

— Canadian Minister of Justice and Attorney General Irwin Cotler

Myths & Facts - Israel’s Roots

DivineComedy · 05-14-08, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

I say there are a few ways of determining rightful ownership:

The Historic Way.
The Biblical Way.
The Legal Way.
Or by way of War.

And so, by virtue of WAR, and to the victor of war go the spoils - the way that the Muslims claim gave them previous rightful ownership of the land - the Israelis have a valid claim to the land...they have fought for it and have retained it through several wars, none of which they started.

So, by historic right, by Biblical decree, through legal 'deed' and by virtue of their war claim to it, Israel belongs to the Israelis.

If the historical right is revoked for one group, logically, it must be revoked for any other group. Since repossession of land by the Cherokee (my cousins in Oklahoma) is taken off the table (by force of power), therefore, the repossession of land by Israel (by force) must be taken off the table. Israel can have no more historical right to own land than anyone else. But, even if that argument is invalid, you opened the door for another. Since "The Torah teaches that the land was given by God to the Jews' patriarch, Abraham, and his descendants as a birthright for his faithfulness" and Palestinians are Arabs and descendants of Abraham, therefore, Israel has no historical right to own the land exclusive of the other faithful descendants, consequently, right of return is as much a historical right for ALL the Arabs as it is for Israel.

Since the Bible part giving the land to Jews was written by Jews, therefore, Jews could give themselves any land they want just by writing a new book and saying G-d made me do it {sounds like the Koran}. Since Israel has the right to give itself land by saying "G-d gave it to me," therefore, Islam can give the land to themselves using the same legal precedent.

One cannot legally give rights to another they do not yet possess for themselves. A tyrant cannot give land ownership to a people, while depriving his own people of land ownership. Since all of the Nations of the United Nations (of tyrants too) were not representing their disenfranchised people, therefore, their people (nations usurped by tyranny) could not have used a legal way to declare "that Israel would be an independent nation" able to exclude right of return to Arabs.

Since "by virtue of WAR, and to the victor of war go the spoils" gives "a valid claim to the land," therefore, the rule of law and all other rights Historic, Biblical, and Legal rights are suspended, and the law of the jungle (Darwin Award) applies as to the ownership of Israel (the land).

Since the historic right is revoked by hypocrisy or birthright, a G-dly decree can be written by whoever whats to write one, the legal "deed" was given by illegal Nations (rife with tyranny), and the virtue of war claim is no more valid for Israel (the people) than it is for any other people, therefore, Israel or Palestine (the land in question) legally belongs to whoever can take it and hold on to it.

Since the WAR spoils argument is inconsistent with the rule of law, and the United Nations Charter (which the United States ratified), and our foreign policy with regard to Palestine is in violation of the United Nations Charter ("To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples"), therefore, my original argument still stands as valid and is augmented by your contributions.