U.S. And Iranian Envoys Talk In Iraq

At Summit, U.S. Calls On Iraq's Neighbors To Help End Violence

(AP)  U.S. and Iranian envoys spoke directly with each other Saturday about Iraq's security, trading harsh words and blaming each other for this country's crisis at a one-day international conference that could ease their 27-year diplomatic freeze.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki opened the conference with an appeal for all participants to help ease his country's plight and prevent the violent conflict here from spilling over into the entire Middle East.

But the conference underscored the wide gulf between American and Iranian views over the nature of the crisis and the ways to end it.

U.S. envoy David Satterfield pointed to his briefcase which he said contained documents proving Iran was arming Shiite Muslim militias in Iraq.

"Your accusations are merely a cover for your failures in Iraq," Iran's chief envoy Abbas Araghchi shot back, according to an official familiar to the discussions who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release the information.

The U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, only said that American delegates exchanged views with the Iranians "directly and in the presence of others" during talks, which he described as "constructive and businesslike."

But Labid Abbawi, a senior Iraqi Foreign Ministry official who attended the meeting, confirmed that an argument broke out between the Iranian and American envoys. He would not elaborate.

Before the talks, U.S. officials said the Baghdad conference would allow all sides to spell out their positions frankly and pave the way for more substantive discussions on resolving the Iraq crisis.

Al-Maliki, a Shiite, appealed for international help to sever networks aiding extremists and warned that Iraq's growing sectarian bloodshed could spill across the Middle East.

Khalilzad also urged nations bordering Iraq — which include Syria and Iran — to increase their assistance to al-Maliki's government, saying "the future of Iraq and the Middle East is the defining issue of our time."

"(Iraq) needs support in this battle that not only threatens Iraq but will spill over to all countries in the region," al-Maliki said.

Al-Maliki urged for help in stopping financial support, weapon pipelines and "religious cover" for the relentless attacks of car bombings, killings and other attacks that have pitted Iraq's Sunnis against majority Shiites.

Underscoring the security crisis, at least two mortar shells exploded near the Foreign Ministry where the talks were held but caused no casualties. A suicide car bomber also killed 20 people in the Shiite militia stronghold of Sadr City.

The participants at the talks included all of Iraq's neighbors — Iran, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Kuwait — as well as the U.S., Russia, France, Britain, China, Bahrain, Egypt, the U.N., the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the Arab League.

At a news conference after the meeting, Araghchi restated Tehran's demands for a clear timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces, which he insisted had made Iraq a magnet for extremists from across the Muslim world.

"For the sake of peace and stability in Iraq ... we need a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign forces," said Araghchi, Iran's deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs.

"Violence in Iraq is good for no country in the region," he said. "Security of Iraq is our security and stability in Iraq is a necessity for peace and security in the region."

Araghchi said he had no face-to-face, private talks with Khalilzad and that the discussions were "within the framework of the meeting." He spoke of "very good interaction by all the delegations."

Khalilzad, too, called the meeting a "first step."

"The discussions were limited and focused on Iraq and I don't want to speculate after that," said the Afghan-born Khalilzad, who greeted Araghchi in the Persian language.

Nevertheless, the discussions illustrated the deep differences between Tehran and Washington, although each insists that full-scale civil war is in neither country's interest.

"Regarding security, we have channels that we can put to use," Araghchi told The Associated Press. "We are ready for any help we can give to Iraq."

Reza Amiri, a senior official at the Iranian Foreign Ministry, dismissed American claims that Tehran was destabilizing Iraq by arming Shiite militias. The U.S. military has insisted that Iranian weapons, including a new generation of powerful roadside bombs, have killed more than 170 U.S. and coalition troops here since mid-2004.

"They're lying because it is just not true," Amiri told the AP. "Iraq's borders with Iran are the most secure of Iraqi borders. The Iraqi government has not even once said Iran is interfering in its affairs."

But Amiri said Saturday's conference was "very positive" because "everyone promised to cooperate with each other and to control the borders."

The delegates proposed an "expanded" follow-up meeting, which could include the G-8 nations and others, in Istanbul, Turkey, next month. Iraqi officials, however, say they will urge that the next meeting take place again in Baghdad.

For Iran, opening more direct contacts with Washington could help promote their shared interests in preventing full-scale war between Sunnis and Shiites. Iran has influence among Shiite political parties with ties to militias.

"Security of Iraq is our security and stability in Iraq is a necessity for peace and security in the region," Araghci said at the news conference.

The Baghdad talks come as the U.S. administration has toughened its rhetoric on Iran and flexed its muscles at the U.N. over Tehran's disputed nuclear program. The tough talk has been accompanied by the arrival of two U.S. carrier battle groups near the Iranian shores in the Persian Gulf.

Iranians increasingly fear that a U.S. attack is imminent despite American insistence to the contrary.

The U.S. and Iran severed diplomatic ties after Iranian militants seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran following the 1979 Islamic revolution. In the late 1990s, U.S. and Iranian envoys were part of an eight-nation group studying Afghanistan's troubles under the Taliban, and both nations took part in meetings to establish an interim Afghan government after the Taliban's fall in 2001.

In 2000, a four-member U.S. congressional delegation met with Iran's parliament speaker, Mehdi Karroubi, and others for informal talks during a worldwide gathering of lawmakers in New York.

Iranian analyst Saeid Leylaz said the Baghdad conference would be a non-starter if it's not followed by a one-on-one dialogue between Washington and Tehran.

"How can you expect us to talk to them about Iraq's security without Iran's security being part of the talks?" said Leylaz.

He said only a "constructive and strategic dialogue between Tehran and Washington" would resolve the Iraq problem.

"Tehran could help temporarily in Iraq," said Leylaz, "but for an everlasting solution, talks should comprise of security guarantees for the whole region," said Leylaz.

"The Americans must understand the question of security is a matter of life and death for Iran," he said. And no where is that security as vital for Iran as on its borders with Iraq.

[tuckerndfw]

Establishing a stable government in Iraq supercedes any other concerns the US or any other nation may have.

Allowing the dialogue to be sidetracked negates any point to having negotiations.

The US should be grateful other nations are willing to participate. And, if the US does not restrict its dialogue to the situation in Iraq, it is pointless for the US to participate.

Discussions of Iran's nuclear weapons' programs, Israel's "security," or any other unrelated issues should not be allowed.

Stabilizing Iraq benefits the US most of all. And the US should act accordingly. "Staying the course" of war mongering and threatening people is no longer an option. It is demonstrably ineffective.

As is the Bush administration. Which will unfortunately probably lead to more of the same until Bush is thrown out of office.

[tbweb]

-- tuckerndfw

Someone has to speak up for the kids too. The kids have no voice in the Iraq conflicts. The kids just suffer in silence! The adults on all sides, every single adult group, have failed the kids. Imagine being a kid in Iraq, the Iraq kids don't even have the distraction of school! Recently the kids were playing soccer and they were still targeted and blown up as they were trying to play. Kids are innocent, kids have no real agenda, kids are the future, kids are just kids! All the adults involved on all sides dropped the ball big time on the issues related to the Iraqi kids.

[tuckerndfw]

Tbweb,

I agree with your point, but if adults are not secure, they can hardly be expected to provide security for their families.

Unfortunately, children will always be the first victims in any conflict, whether it is a heated argument without violence, or a full blown war.

But, such is life.

The fact remains that the only real issue on the table is how the parties can best come to an agreement on how to work together to end the violence and instability.

No other issue is of a greater concern than that one. And, it is in the US's own best interests to do whatever it takes (within reasonable limits) to ensure all parties can work together.

Threatening Iran and Syria (or anyone else) will not lead to that conclusion.


As an aside and totally off topic, the point you raise is one I strongly consider when I read about the mindless violence between Palestinians and Israelis. I don't care who did what to whom or when, it appears neither side is concerned about what they are doing to the children, including their own.

Oh, well.

[karlimhof]

WHO IS OUR "CHIEF US DELEGATE" SATTERFIELD ?????
(WIKIPEDIA)
David Michael Satterfield (born December 18, 1954) is an American diplomat who served extensively in the Middle East, including the Persian Gulf, Lebanon, and Iraq. He now serves as a Senior Advisor on Iraq for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

His name came up in the AIPAC/Larry Franklin Pentagon mole case. The indictment, however, did not accuse Satterfield of any wrongdoing, and he was never indicted.

In the indictment: U.S. v. Lawrence Anthony Franklin, Steven J. Rosen, Keith Weissman, USGO-2 is mentioned, and in a New York Times article: David Satterfield, deputy chief of the United States Mission in Baghdad, is identified as USGO-2. In early 2002, Satterfield discussed secret national security matters in two meetings with Steven J. Rosen. The meetings, on January 18, 2002, and March 12, 2002, were confirmed by classified documents. The indictment, however, did not accuse Satterfield of any wrongdoing.


Satterfield "discussed" secret national security matters with AIPAC ????

This guy is tainted and now doing what for us to end this war? Starting another one with Iran?

[tbweb]

--tuckerndfw

Usually when adults disagree and can't resolve their differences there was always hope that the next generation, the kids inheriting the future would be able to resolve old issues and differences through education and understanding and learning from past mistakes. The war torn environment in Iraq does not allow the planting of seeds (The Children) to take hold. Iraq must protect its future, kids should be given a top priority and a safe haven, kids are Iraqs future. The current situation in Iraq is not only destroying the present but the future as well. There should be a way to remove the kids from the conflict into safe zones so that the Iraqi kids can at least attend school. The same applies to all kids in conflict zones around the world!

[bluestardad]

THE DELIGATES SHOULD HIT BUSH UP FOR FUNDING AL QAEDA IN LEBANON!

Bush is playing all of us for suckers! He is supporting al Qaeda in Lebanon with funds from Iraq! The recently resigned terrorist Czar ask for a demotion to deputy Secretary of State Because he did not want to be tangled up with another Iran Contra style Funding Fiasco that is going on in Lebanon. While you are at it Can the Democratic Leadership really deliver on getting America out of Iraq as America wanted November 7, 2006? Here is the stream read it yourself!

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/070305fa_fact_hersh


Thank GOD that Alien Secretary Rice is not involved with these talks. That gives them a limited chance for success!

[tuckerndfw]

tbweb,

Once again, we agree in principle.

But attempting to take people's kids away, for whatever reason, would probably not lead to a good outcome.

While it is true that exposing kids to violence quite often leads to more of the same, we can only hope that the situation can be stabilized as quickly as possible to mitigate that outcome.

Having said that, the legacy of the invasion of Iraq, and subsequent violence, will most likely be a generation of people who resort to violence or "terrorism" to resolve their disagreements.

That was predicted before the invasion and has not changed. And is one reason it is valid to claim that the invasion produced more "terrorists" than it eliminated.

The US will be hated for at least one generation as a direct result of the invasion of Iraq. And, removing the children at this point would only increase that resentment when the kids grow up without their natural families and come to realize they lost their families due to US policies.

It is truly a no win situation at his point. The best we can hope for is to lessen the potential for future violence or "terrorism" by resolving this as quickly as possible.

I am not disagreeing with your principle argument, but we disagree that removing kids from their families would be an effective solution.

[tuckerndfw]

Thank GOD that Alien Secretary Rice is not involved with these talks. That gives them a limited chance for success!

Posted by bluestardad at 07:20 AM : Mar 10, 2007

*ROFL*

Thanks for the laugh, I needed that.

Maybe the US should outsource the State Department. If we hired professional diplomats and negotiators, we would stand a far better chance than allowing anyone in the Bush administration to do the negotiating.

[karlimhof]

Thank GOD that Alien Secretary Rice is not involved with these talks. That gives them a limited chance for success!
Posted by bluestardad


Did you not see my posting about our "chief" delegate, Mr. Satterfield ?

He's for sure a "shadow neocon" - this guy talked national security with AIPAC!

How is he going to push for peace through negotiations when that isn't his objective. This type of guy will use this forum to blast Iran and Syria as best he can. Doesn't give a hoot about Iraq now that it is ours.

[bluestardad]

Remember AIPAC, Israeli and Saudi Arabian Neocon Supporters are pushing America to fight their wars for them!

Founded in 1953 by Isaiah L. "Si" Kenen, AIPAC's original name was the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs. According to UCLA political science professor and author, Steven Spiegel, "the tension between the Eisenhower administration and Israeli supporters was so acute that there were rumors that the administration would investigate the American Zionist Council. Therefore, an independent lobbying committee was formed, which years later was renamed [AIPAC]." [SPIEGEL, p. 52].[citation needed] Today, AIPAC has over 100,000 members.[1]
Activities and stated goals
AIPAC's stated purpose is to lobby the Congress of the United States on issues and legislation "to ensure that the U.S.-Israel relationship is strong so that both countries can work together" to meet the challenges of "stopping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, fighting terrorism and achieving peace".[2] It regularly meets with members of Congress and holds events where it can share its views. It also provides analysis of the voting records of U.S. federal representatives and senators with regard to how they voted on legislation related to Israel. The New York Times described AIPAC on July 6, 1987 as "a major force in shaping United States policy in the Middle East."
READ AIPAC AD BELOW
http://www.aipac.org/forms/join_aipacClubs.htm

[tbweb]

--tuckerndfw

It just seems like removing the kids from the war zone is the lesser evil, kind of like going away to school for a while until the bloodshed ends. The inconvenient truth is the violence on both sides is removing parents and love ones from the kids anyway and do the kids need to watch it "LIVE" while it happens? It almost like pick your poison! The Iraq war has now lasted longer than WWII.

[bluestardad]

karlimhof; I read your post and know what you are talking about to be true. But what do we do except inform our leadership and hope they do something. America people are not ready for an uprising yet because these AIPAC neocons permit enough of us to experience a semi good life but right on the edge of open Revolt. Now with this war they started America is finally opening its eyes to their meddling in our National affairs! The Time is coming when we will purge them from our midts

[tuckerndfw]

tbweb,

If it's any consolation, there are currently millions (??) of refugees who have fled the war zone with their families.

Most of them are in Iran, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon or other places the US seems to want to attack.

There is no easy solution.

But, the longer we drag this out by threatening everyone in the region except Israel, the worse it will be.

[karlimhof]

The chief U.S. delegate, David Satterfield, said Thursday that "we are not going to turn and walk away" if approached by Iran or Syria to discuss Iraq. But Satterfield, the top State Department adviser on Iraq, added that the United States plans to use the meeting to reinforce its accusations against both nations.

-David Satterfield-

Our local AIPAC neocon conspirator, of course, would NOT dare to say:

"we have high hopes that together with the regional partners, we can find solutions to end this violence and permit American troops to return home"

no, he prefers confrontation.

Far as I'm concerned, this conference is dead in the water with neocon jokers, and AIPAC lackies like satterfield there.

[skyk-2009]

It is my sincere hope that Iraq can come out of this conference with an understanding with it's neighbors. The ONLY hope for that is that the U.S. skip the Fascist lingo and allow for serious discussions of the differences. I say I hope because so far the Administration of Sir Lies-A-Lot has NOT inspired anyone, let alone me, to believe they can do anything but bomb people to the stone age.

[tuckerndfw]

Bluestandard,

The World Zionist Organization (WZO) was formalized in 1897 in Basel, Switzerland. The stated goal of the WZO was to influence governments to support a "Jewish Homeland."

Zionists have infiltrated nearly every major (US, UK, Soviet Union - Russia) government to more or lesser degrees. Zionists were largely responsible for instigating both world wars.

Zionists have a single minded purpose and agenda. That agenda is global domination. Their method is by influencing governments to support their agenda. Which is usually counter to the host governments' own national interests.

And, they have been quite successful thanks to their organizational skills, including the ability to amass extraordinary wealth. Which they use very effectively to further undermine governments.

There are currently (app.) 70 million American Christians, including all mainstream televangelists, who actively promote the Zionist message.

We cannot blame Zionists, we can only blame those who allow their subversive ideology to gain control of our governments.

It is highly unlikely that Zionists will lose their influence over the US and UK governments in the foreseeable future. They have over 100 years of experience in subverting governments. And the organization and money to do so.

WZO history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Zionist_Organization

[tuckerndfw]

The point of the previous comment about the WZO is that AIPAC is part of a much larger global organization.

[tuckerndfw]

All races of people are entitled to have a homeland.

Posted by SHURCH4TRUTH at 08:44 AM : Mar 10, 2007

My comment is unrelated to race or the merits of having a homeland.

My comment was intended to clarify the discussion about AIPAC. AIPAC is part of a global organization and is promoting their agenda.

I consider the Zionist agenda to be a subversive agenda based on the history of Zionist organizations world-wide.

The "Balfour Declaration" was the direct result of Lord Balfour catering to Baron Rothschild, the head of the Zionist party in Great Britain.

The "Balfour Declaration" became the foundation for the claim that Europeans were entitled to "free" land in the Middle East.

Without the WZO, there would probably be no Israel, and there would most likely be very little violence in the Middle East other than the violence associated with powerful nations attempting to gain control of Middle Eastern oil & gas.

But, I do not blame Zionists. They are a political party promoting their agenda. And are very effective at what they do. I just disagree with their agenda and methods.

And consider them subversive to host governments.

But, it has nothing to do with race. Zionists are not a race, they are a political party.

[karlimhof]

. Zionists were largely responsible for instigating both world wars. tuckerndfw

I'll jump in if you don't mind - I take the issue seriously and I respectfully submit that your statement goes a little too far.

The reasons for WWI & II have been pretty well documented and WWII was practically a continuation of WWI. In a nutshell these wars were the results of european power struggles that also has their roots in the previously centuries.
It would not be accurate to say the zionist movement, as you correctly say was founded in 1897, has anything to do with them.

Conversely, this movement, whose sole objective was to find support for a jewish homeland in Palestine, has today become an impediment to peace in the Middle East. Why? Simply because the "die-hard" zionists (actually a minority in Israel)want control over all of Palestine to the detriment of the Pleastinian people who have resisted since 1947.

Our problem here in the US is that AIPAC groups and others have successfully blinded us from the reality of what's happening. Israel has stolen Palestinian land and won't give it back under pretenses of "security".

We must realize that until israel returns the stolen lands and makes reparations, we will not have peace in the ME.

[karlimhof]

A good example of vilifying a group, unnecessarily, to create fear and hated, is the incessant proclamations that certain groups in the Middle east are out to get the US because they %u201Cdo not like our way of life%u201D.

SHURCH4TRUTH

this is a good example of what AIPAC does every day. AIPAC proclaims, referring to US-Israel relations, that we have "shared values", meaning we don't have any shared values with other ME countries. They play the "judeo-christian" card against the "muslim" card - and we, Americans, are the losers.

[karlimhof]

To keep on the same page - Balfour Delaration of 1917:

""His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours 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".
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.


It is important to note:

"nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"


It is implicit and factual that it was known that at that time there were indigenous peoples living in Palestine. It was not, as AIPAC mythology would have it - "an empty wasteland"

[mbcsmith]

It is my sincere hope that Iraq can come out of this conference with an understanding with it's neighbors. The ONLY hope for that is that the U.S. skip the Fascist lingo and allow for serious discussions of the differences. I say I hope because so far the Administration of Sir Lies-A-Lot has NOT inspired anyone, let alone me, to believe they can do anything but bomb people to the stone age.
Posted by skyk at 08:10 AM : Mar 10, 2007

Typical LIB blame America fist drivel. Your hatred of this President clouds your perception. You won't be satisfied until your DEFEATIST party hands Iraq to Al-Quaida.

[tuckerndfw]

I'll jump in if you don't mind - I take the issue seriously and I respectfully submit that your statement goes a little too far.

Posted by karlimhof at 09:04 AM : Mar 10, 2007

Karl,

I love a good debate or discussion. If we all agreed, the world would be a very boring place.

WWI was instigated because the Ottoman Empire controlled Palestine. The goal was to defeat the Ottomans so England could take control of Palestine.

When Zionists were not appeased (given Palestine) following WWI, they began laying the foundation for WWII.

Adolf Hitler was a Zionist but I'll bet you never read that in a history book. Adolf Hitler actively supported a "Jewish homeland" in Palestine. And, assisted Zionists in their efforts to bypass immigration controls implemented by Great Britain.

WWII was the catalyst that achieved the Zionist objective, to wit: a "Jewish homeland." And the non-Zionist Jewish casualties of the holocaust were irrelevant to Zionist Jews because Zionist Jews considered them enemies or opponents. Same as they do today.

Harry Truman was a Zionist and he was largely responsible for UN Resolution 181 that established the idea that Europeans had a legal claim to land in Palestine.

The details will never be known, but it is obvious that Zionists had very large hands manipulating events in both world wars.

[radiob-2009]

tuckerndfw,karlimhof,SHURCH4TRUTH

Read the Harry S. Trumans Institutes survey taken in Dec. of 06, a majority of both Palestians and Israelis want the Camp David Peace Accords to become a reality, the major stickler is the Golden Dome itself. Politicians from both sides of the conflict are not in agreement with their constituents. Resolving the Palestian Israeli conflict would deter recruitment of terrorist worldwide.

[karlimhof]

You won't be satisfied until your DEFEATIST party hands Iraq to Al-Quaida.
Posted by mbcsmith


But mbcsmith, you're contradicting yourself !

We all know Al-Qaeda was already in Iraq - that's why we invaded them! At least that's what Bush told us......

[kstrisha]

Quote:

...Iraq's growing sectarian bloodshed could spill across the Middle East.

---------

Our government insisted on "going it alone" and now we have the Iraqi PM begging the world (on our behalf) for help because what we are doing isn't enough--this is a signal to terrorist that what they are doing is working in their favor. This is a signal that things are far worse that this administration will ever admit.

If this guy wasn't a puppet dictator, he would be demanding that 500,000 United States soldiers to be sent in to straighen out the mess that the United States has made in Iraq because that is what it would take to squash the violence and bring temporary peace. Our own war games in 1999 suggested an invading force of 400,000 with no guarantee of success...

[harryr5]

The real criminals need to be punished. They are the George Bush administration, the project for new century (new U.S. imperialism) and criminal reporting such as J. Miller, all major networks (CBS, etc.) of which we're aware.

Anything less would be an immoral affront to the hundreds of thousands already killed along with the millions of refuges.

The U.S. has too long sown the seeds of violence throughout the third world. More people in the U.S. than many realize will have little sympathy when some of that murder comes back here.

[karlimhof]

The details will never be known, but it is obvious that Zionists had very large hands manipulating events in both world wars.

Posted by tuckerndfw


Well, I for one, haven't found such details - yet. But I do know it's a historical fact that the zionists were negotiating both with the UK and Germany during WWI because they didn't know which side was going to win. It was only in 1917 when America really entered the war, that they were assured about dealing only with the UK.

To our friend radiob:

Politicians from both sides of the conflict are not in agreement with their constituents. - radiob


True - but these same politicans always seem to be in power doing whatever they choose. For example, I always thought of Simon Peres as liberal thinker (in positive sense!)and a force for peace - but his reaction to Israel's destruction of Lebanon was incredible - he supported it!

I think even in Israel they have their "neocons", a vocal minority calling for "greater israel", "palestinians out" - and until our own moral majorities in both countries take the lead, we will not solve the conflict.

[harryr5]

The real criminals need to be punished. They are the George Bush administration, the project for new century (new U.S. imperialism) and criminal reporting such as J. Miller, all major networks (CBS, etc.) of which we're aware.

Anything less would be an immoral affront to the hundreds of thousands already killed along with the millions of refuges.

The U.S. has too long sown the seeds of violence throughout the third world. More people in the U.S. than many realize will have little sympathy when some of that murder comes back to its country of origin.

[tuckerndfw]

It is implicit and factual that it was known that at that time there were indigenous peoples living in Palestine. It was not, as AIPAC mythology would have it - "an empty wasteland"

Posted by karlimhof at 09:17 AM : Mar 10, 2007

Thanks for posting the Balfour Declaration. Most people, including shrieking, hysterical Zionists, are unfamiliar with the document upon which their claims rely.

Having entered into debates or discussions with many Zionists, it's been my experience they are typically ignorant. Most of them repeat Zionist propaganda as if it were fact.

Very similar to those who continue to insist Iraq had WMD's, or that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the events of 9/11/01.

[karlimhof]

The U.S. has too long sown the seeds of violence throughout the third world. More people in the U.S. than many realize will have little sympathy when some of that murder comes back here.
Posted by harryr5


It's a fact - and will not stop until we start showing the world we can be a force for peace, not only conflict.

Every year since 1967 the UN takes the same vote - asking Israel to return to her 1967 borders -
and every year we veto it - for 40 years !!!

In the meantime the israeli subjugation of the palestinians, and expansion (= theft) of illegal settlements on palestinian land continue with resulting deaths, imprisonments, deportations.

And the whole Muslim world watches, mostly in silence but with bitterness, while small groups of "terrorists" decide to make a statement.

If we settle the Palestinian question, 90% of the terrorists will lose their reason for existence.

[tuckerndfw]

Karl,

Zionists historically play all sides.

They played all sides during both world wars.

That is their primary strength. That's what makes them subversive. Zionists would sell out the US (or any other nation they have subverted) in a heartbeat.

And, they use the smokescreen of religion to conceal their political agenda. Which is really amusing given the fact most Israelis are atheists.

[karlimhof]

Having entered into debates or discussions with many Zionists, it's been my experience they are typically ignorant. Most of them repeat Zionist propaganda as if it were fact. tuckerndfw

Yes, it's all part of the enormous effort to keep Americans informed of only a part of reality;

small israel surrounded by hostiles, they sometimes even go as far as to compare themselves with our western migration - the indians are arabs! in their view, what they're doing to the Palestinians, we did to our indians !

But by far its the big "lobbying" groups which are so effective in brow-beating and intimidating elected congress persons are the most dangerous. Just look at Joe Lieberman as a prime example - this guy was filmed kissing Chalabi (Iraqi National Congress) before the war - the same Chalabi who gave us all those dubious and false intel reports which the Feith office made "official" and passed on to Cheney.

Our government officials, elected or appointed must be better vetted - serving the country without agendas - respecting our Constitution and actively supporting our principles of justice and decency.

[mbcsmith]

We all know Al-Qaeda was already in Iraq - that's why we invaded them! At least that's what Bush told us......

Posted by karlimhof at 09:36 AM : Mar 10, 2007

Look at the current situation. Should we leave Iraq to Al-Quaida as the LIB congress is proposing?

[karlimhof]

That is their primary strength. That's what makes them subversive. Zionists would sell out the US (or any other nation they have subverted) in a heartbeat.


Posted by tuckerndfw


I, for one, do believe there is a minority, but an influential one, subverting our government for some years. Especially with regards to the ME.

This subversion is not overt but it is effective. It's result is that our government seems to always find itself boxed into one policy corner. Or it treats the problem it's facing with preconceptions, or preconditions, which do not allow for any real negotiation.

As examples; why does Elliot Abrams follow Sec.Rice all around the middle east? He's not in State, he's a WH "advisor"? What is he doing?

A second example: Why do we sent another neocon like David Satterfield to the first Bagdad conference where he says "he will use the meetings to reinforce accusations against Iran & Syria"?

For me this is a subversion of the will of a majority of americans to find solutions to pressing problems in Iraq and Palestine.

[tuckerndfw]

Karl,

That was the point I was attempting to make with the original comment about the WZO.

No politician will be elected to national office, especially the presidency, in the US without Zionist support.

Zionists are extremely well organized and funded. No US president has been elected in modern times without explicitly supporting Israel.

Unless someone can finance and organize a counter organization that has no agenda other than opposing Zionism, the chances of countering Zionist influence is roughly zero.

I do not blame Zionists. They are to be admired for their tenacity, organizational skills and ability to stay on message.

But, that does not mean I support them. And, I do the best that I can with my limited abilities to counter their propaganda. Because most of it is propaganda and bears no relation to the truth.

Zionism is a subversive ideology to host nations' governments but I surely do not expect any mainstream US media outlet or politician to make that statement or support anyone who does.

[emtak1]

The average American has more relevant things to do with our lives during this short stay on Earth than attack whine and complain and terrorize other people outside our country. We make war on our enemies not terror.
We don't cut off the heads of our enemy while their alive when we capture them, but we do treat them when they are wounded. We would be fully willing to meet any hoonrabnle Muslim enemy army on a field of battle to preserve our freedom.
At home we invent good things that people of foreign countries can use too--like electricity, airplanes, cars, antibiotics, computers, the internet, peanut butter, and sports games...
If thats not good enough for the rest of the world, maybe the rest of the world should go and *** itself. And leave us Americans the hell alone. You started this war with us. One way or the other we will see it through to the end.









Six other Iranians were arrested Jan. 11 at an Iranian liaison office in northern Iraq. The U.S. military said they were members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard %u2014 a charge Tehran rejects.

[emtak1]

The average American has more relevant things to do with our lives during this short stay on Earth than attack whine and complain and terrorize other people outside our country. We make war on our enemies not terror.
We don't cut off the heads of our enemy while their alive when we capture them, but we do treat them when they are wounded. We would be fully willing to meet any hoonrabnle Muslim enemy army on a field of battle to preserve our freedom.
At home we invent good things that people of foreign countries can use too--like electricity, airplanes, cars, antibiotics, computers, the internet, peanut butter, and sports games...
If thats not good enough for the rest of the world, maybe the rest of the world should go and *** itself. And leave us Americans the hell alone. You started this war with us. One way or the other we will see it through to the end.









Six other Iranians were arrested Jan. 11 at an Iranian liaison office in northern Iraq. The U.S. military said they were members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard %u2014 a charge Tehran rejects.

[emtak1]

I'm pretty frickin' sick of hearing about how terrible my country, the United States is. We died for the freedom of those in other countries in World War One and World War Two. We defeated the dark oppresion of communism in Soviet Russia, and now we are fighting alongside the Iraqi people to bring order and individual liberty to the people there.
We're not saints. We ain't perfect. We've done evil things too. Capitalism has evil but its less evil than Communism. Our population is often morally week these days. But we remain true to respecting each other as individuals.

[karlimhof]

For me it's no longer a question of "leaving" - we're stuck with limited options;

but now there is a first conference and its objective should be to reunite all parties around a first agreement, namely, that all will respect the international borders and national sovereignty of Iraq.

it would send a strong signal to those thinking of breaking the counry up - the terrorists for example.

next step to organize with the same partners joint border patrols to stop terrorist from freely crossing the borders (big job!)

while all this is going on the Iraqis have to get their shias,sunnis,kurds, all around a table of their own and divide the pie.

the diehards terrorist will dwindle and fade away and we can go home - tired and bloodied, but with some sense of having saved Iraq from our mad attempt to export american democracy.

[karlimhof]

mbcsmith

For me it's no longer a question of "leaving" - we're stuck with limited options;

but now there is a first conference and its objective should be to reunite all parties around a first agreement, namely, that all will respect the international borders and national sovereignty of Iraq.

it would send a strong signal to those thinking of breaking the counry up - the terrorists for example.

next step to organize with the same partners joint border patrols to stop terrorist from freely crossing the borders (big job!)

while all this is going on the Iraqis have to get their shias,sunnis,kurds, all around a table of their own and divide the pie.

the diehards terrorist will dwindle and fade away and we can go home - tired and bloodied, but with some sense of having saved Iraq from our mad attempt to export american democracy.

[karlimhof]

Six other Iranians were arrested Jan. 11 at an Iranian liaison office in northern Iraq. The U.S. military said they were members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard %u2014 a charge Tehran rejects.

Posted by emtak1


last week a retired iranian general went "missing" in Istanbul, Turkey.

what is happening? some kind of intel-op ?

are we going to hear soon: "we have indisputable proof that Iran has 20kg enriched uranium ?"

and then ?

[emtak1]

A conference is a very good idea I think. Even if it is not succesful it is a decent thing for all sides to do: particularly America/Iraq and Iran/Syria.

Even if these sides remain hostile to each other, a conference will show that these two groups have the decency and respect to be transparent in their differences. If the Middle East is to be divided and we are to be enemies, let us be enemies who are as honorable to each other as possible.

I believe both Allah and Christ would find that to be a good quality in their people.

But I do hope that conference could bring a Just Peace and reasoned compromise there instead, and that it can start putting an end to the fear and hatred that is present today in the Middle East within the hearts of every people there (including Americans).

May the Creator and his Son smile on this conference.

[karlimhof]

There are Muslim imams right here in the United States who support Hezbollah, call the enemy the "zionists" and accuse Israel of stealing their land. They say the same things you are saying. They also praise Iran's president.

I wonder if you are Muslim.
Posted by singinrick


Rick - rwad the Balfour Declaration 1917 to start your ME education - then you can begin to join in the discussion which it obviously over your head.

"Accuse israel of stealing land" - what are then what the israeli call "settlements" as if they were somewhere in the Rocky mountians in 1835.

"Zionist" is a term used to describe the movement Herzl founded - it's objective was to find a homeland for the jews in PALESTINE, A PLACE WHERE OTHER PEOPLE LIVE, and their request was granted by the UK government under the condition that the civil and religious rights of the people living there would not be infringed upon -

And finally, like a great american before me - sympathizing with the plight of Palestinian people as he did with the beleaguered Berlin people - I say to you, dear Rick:

I AM PROUD TO BE A MUSLIM !!

[tuckerndfw]

Rick,

A "Jew" is a resident of Judea, a Roman province that no longer exists, or a person who practices Judaism.

Unless an atheist is 2,000 years old, he is not a "Jew."

Most Israelis are atheist communists.

[tuckerndfw]

Israel requires immigrants to claim they are Jews before they are allowed citizenship, so it is little wonder all those atheists from E. Europe and the former Soviet Union claim to be Jews.

But, they aren't. They are atheists pretending to be Jews.

[h0rseracer05]

Most of what I've read reiforces my belief most if not all on the left Scream out for justice, however they're facing in the wrong direction. They are of the ideological view that the United States is Evil. In Fact the Left is probably the most Murderous of them all. Look at the Communist Party, they killed millions in China, Russia, N. Korea and other clone States around the World. They couldn't win the Cold War then and they won't win World Opinion Now.

Iraq is just the beginning of a much bigger struggle the Free World is engaged in. The left really believes the Islamic Radicals will accept them, Never. They will be the first to be eradicated. There will be no Gay Marriage in Islam, no speking out, addicts will be beheaded as will the scurge of the drug world. The left Hates the United States for the Freedom it represents. We are tolerant society, Islam is not, yet the left blames the U.S. for all the Worlds ills.
China, let's go there, the left doesn't say anything about the abuses there, you can bet when they showed for a WTO riot like they did in Seattle, they wouldn't be met like in Seattle, they'd destroyed and rightfully so.

Russia, it kills Dissidents regardless of who they are, maybe we should treat the left like they treat others.

In closing I am of the poersuasion that America is the last bastion for Freedom, Love it or Leave it. And yes if you believe we are evil, you are not a patriot.

[karlimhof]

The Israelis are able to accomplish so much with so little and hence, if we want to be honest with ourselves, we have to ask if jealousy plays a role in the hated? Not a statement, just a question.


Posted by SHURCH4TRUTH

First allow to say it's not hate which has driven the Palestinians these last 60 years - it's the hope to have their land (1967 borders) returned to them. They want to live on their land, that's all - free, in their own country. The zionist myth is that hate drives them but it's LAND.

Fianlly, don't forget israel gets billions - the count is around 300 billion dollars since 1948 - and the arms are for free.

[emtak1]

karlimhof:

Yeah. It is probably to reasonable to think that there is a full-fledged Intelligence/black-op war going on right now between the United States and Iran.

It would be preferable to having to fight a full fledged war.

The issue with United States Intelligence officials saying something like that again to the American people(about Iranian Uranium--hey that rhymes!) is that we Americans can't afford to take Our President's or our militaries word for it anymore, after the Iraq-WMD errors.

We have to consider that this could be our old Texas boy crying wolf again, I think. Or else we run the risk of entering a war under false pretenses again.

This is why we should never really go to war, I think unless, there is a formal Declaration of War. That requires more leg work on facts and unification of the American republic.

Our founders knew this when they wrote teh constitution. The caliber of the thining oif those men was extremely high, whereas our curren tmembers of governement woudl be lucky to qualify as carriage drivers to thos emen, I think.

And so it comes down to the efforts of the American people themselves to get all this right.

[karlimhof]

I find it quite comical that someone can come on here and claim that Israel is mostly atheist when Israel is the holiest country on the planet and contains the holiest city, Jerusalem.

Posted by singinrick


you missed his point, again, Rick. I understood him as meaning most israeli are not practicing their religion or at least do not base their daily life decisions on their religion -

this I know to be true because I have lived there and have israeli friends who scoff at those orth. jews on the roads fridays screaming at everyone to go home to do the schabat.

your problem is you're not sufficiently acquainted with the realities, statistical informations don't proce anything.