Eye On Israel

[zubin]

Appearing before the court in defense of the devil...

Many people would reject memri as an objective source as it has links with Israel.

In any case, the disgustingness of Iran-state media needs to be put in the context of the world, and not in the context of heaven. In this context, you have a very strong and deceptive media in the US and Israel and so the issue is really media war. Furthermore, arguably the US and Israeli media are more powerful, deceptive and hypocritical as well as associated with today's human rights problems in a larger scale, and should be the first to compromise in this war. If they ease their media, the whole issue of human rights and free media is likely to improve in Iran, and in any case a better case for demanding these things can come from the people in those circumstances, because there is no enemy to divert attention to.

I'm being the devil's advocate here. What does the devil's advocate do? She comes to the scene exposing the logical problems of a person's argument.

It's easy to throw around terms like "anti-semitic" and "terrorist" as if you are making delicious pancakes in the morning. But it is clearly much harder to back these concepts up by objective analysis. You may be right. I'm at the least here to provide you with the adversary's perspective. What can you say to someone who exposes these problems with your argument? If you care about these issues alot, you must be able to present responses to even the stupidest of counter-arguments, unfortunately. Also, you may find real problems in your argument, like was found with a literal interpretation of MA's comments above.

On the other hand, who cares? You may just be having fun with me.


(p.s. Btw, I applaud you for having the courage to re-examine your argument when counter-evidence is brought forward. A will for objectivity is the key to solving our human problems, otherwise we will be fighting each other like cats and dogs, and mice.)

[mike435]

Many people would reject memri as an objective source as it has links with Israel.

In any case, the disgustingness of Iran-state media needs to be put in the context of the world, and not in the context of heaven. In this context, you have a very strong and deceptive media in the US and Israel and so the issue is really media war. Furthermore, arguably the US and Israeli media are more powerful, deceptive and hypocritical as well as associated with today's human rights problems in a larger scale, and should be the first to compromise in this war. If they ease their media, the whole issue of human rights and free media is likely to improve in Iran, and in any case a better case for demanding these things can come from the people in those circumstances, because there is no enemy to divert attention to.

I'm being the devil's advocate here. What does the devil's advocate do? She comes to the scene exposing the logical problems of a person's argument.

It's easy to throw around terms like "anti-semitic" and "terrorist" as if you are making delicious pancakes in the morning. But it is clearly much harder to back these concepts up by objective analysis. You may be right. I'm at the least here to provide you with the adversary's perspective. What can you say to someone who exposes these problems with your argument? If you care about these issues alot, you must be able to present responses to even the stupidest of counter-arguments, unfortunately. Also, you may find real problems in your argument, like was found with a literal interpretation of MA's comments above.

On the other hand, who cares? You may just be having fun with me.

First off i am not having fun with you

second off for you to say it is not objective well you might be right becuase it does not show the good of these media but so wat i saw with my very own eys and ears what they were saying their was no longer any room for interpatations

and regarding american media or israeli
i cant speak for israeli i havnt see their media
but american
i realy cant belive you are saying that man
when was the last time these tv throgh thier media taght hatrated subjactive thinking when was the last time they humiliated a muslim just because he was a muslim
in almost every form of american media you see this
from political comedy showes to childrens cartoons

and regarding devils advicote
stop playing that i want to see what you really belive if your aim is devils advicote games well sayit than ill play like that too but i want to know what yuo belive

Many people would reject memri as an objective source as it has links with Israel.

you this comment deservs its own post

you are crazy for saying this its likek saying hey listen the sky is blue but because it has israeli ties it could be some other color

i am seeing hearinh what the guy is saying in farsi thier is no faking that their is no game in that

thier might be some things in edditing but even that it would be rare because almost all the ones i saw were a whole staement
and the way the argumants were going you would notice if their was edditing going on

if i was playing games with you i wouldnt invest so much time going throgh the internet

and israelis they baisicly watch american televison in hebrew subtitles

its almost like an american state with a diffrant language and its own expression of social and military choosing

oh another thing regarding the israeli network it is i think controled by the israeli government maybe even the idf

if the media was like the arabs why would they show pictures of dead lebonies kids in anguish and hurt

tell me
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PWIK8YTZS8[/ame]

what do you say about this this is a good example of so called media war

[mike435]

jubin if i didnt care about what i persu i would keep it to myself to feel better both about myself and my views but i do care about achiving a truth and that is why i keep posting stuff here

true some times i dont answer you back but dont think that mean i ignore i go and i research it

please watch the above video all of it please watch it

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PWIK8YTZS8[/ame]

[zubin]

I applaud you for having the courage to re-examine your argument when counter-evidence is brought forward. A will for objectivity is the key to solving our human problems, otherwise we will be fighting each other like cats and dogs, and mice.


I actually believe most of what I say, but the point about devil's advocate stands, and it represents the fact that I am not expressing certainty, but a counter-argument to your argument, a logical point against your point.

The fact is that Iran exists in a historical and political context. To make any point about Iranian X and Iranian Y outside of this context is deceptive and very far from even, inaccuracy.

[mike435]

=D>

The fact is that Iran exists in a historical and political context. To make any point about Iranian X and Iranian Y outside of this context is deceptive and very far from even, inaccuracy.

tue but it is not the iran of 2000 years go, or iran of shah that i am talking about it is the iran of ahmadinejad and khamani it is this iran that i have problam with not perian heritage

look example is this i see in a video that says israeli doctors take out the eyes of palastinians

you are going to argu that that is not antisemetic

saying kill the jew he is a pig or ape that is not antisematic

what logic do you use to question when i say antisemetic

what gives anyone the right to say a jew is a pig or an ape
what gives the right for some one to think to that israeli take out palastinian eyes

jubin i am would very much like to see your opinion on the video and your reply

[donsaeid]

USE MULTI QUOTE THIS MESSEGE BOTTOM PLZ MY DEAR FRIENDS

[Khorsheed]

Oh my. . . its soo good to read such good arguments between the two of you !!

[Rasputin]

NEW HAVEN, Conn. - Israeli Vice Premier Shimon Peres appealed for united action against Iran Wednesday, saying the country appears stronger than it really is because of a lack of an international consensus over its nuclear ambitions.

Peres did not call for military action, but said a common approach such as economic sanctions was needed.

"There is a need for a common policy," Peres said at a speech at Yale University.

Peres described Iran as a largely poor country that has not been able to create enough jobs to satisfy its fast growing population.

"Iran is a great problem, but not necessarily a great country," Peres said during a news conference before his speech. "I think as a matter of fact it's a very weak country. What makes Iran so strong? My answer is the weakness of the international community."

The United States has been trying to force Iran, through the threat of sanctions, to act more responsibly both on its nuclear program and its support for extremists. But work on a resolution at the United Nations has been bogged down by disputes pitting Russia and China against the United States and Europeans.

Arab countries want to head off a U.S. or Israeli confrontation with Iran.

The U.S. alleges Iran is secretly developing atomic weapons, while Tehran claims its program is for peaceful purposes including generating electricity. Iran has repeatedly refused to suspend uranium enrichment, defying an Aug. 31 deadline set by the U.N. Security Council, and has said it will not halt the process as a precondition to negotiations over its nuclear program.

In May, Peres warned Iran that it could be threatened with destruction if it continues to vow to destroy Israel.

Peres discussed the prospects for peace in the Middle East amid a cease-fire and new diplomatic moves to revive long-frozen peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice planned to meet Thursday with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in Jerusalem.

Israel and the West are boycotting the current Palestinian government headed by Hamas, an Islamic movement listed by the West as a terror group.

Abbas, a moderate elected separately, is considered a logical partner for peace talks, but his status has been badly eroded by the sweeping Hamas election victory over his Fatah party last January.

Peres emphasized the role of the global economy is overcoming traditional conflicts over land.

Peres' visit brought out about 20 protesters, shouting and waving signs that said "End the Occupation." The group called Peres the "father" of Israel's atomic weapons program who held leadership positions when Israel killed hundreds of civilians in Lebanon last summer.

"He's not a man of peace. He's really a phony," said protester Stanley Heller, chairman of the Middle East Crisis Committee. "Shimon Peres has the blood of many people on his hand."

Peres rejected those arguments, saying Israel has given land for peace and was still attacked by Palestinians and Hezbollah. He said the civilian casualties were unintentional consequences of war.

Peres served as Israel's prime minister from 1984-1986, and again for a six-month period from November 1995 until May 1996 following the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin.

In 1994, Peres won the Nobel Peace Prize together with Rabin and Yasser Arafat, for their efforts toward peace, which culminated in the Oslo Accords.

[mike435]

Israel wont go quietly in the night

I've been thinking a lot about my father lately. He used to say, "If the world is prepared to stand by and watch Jews be slaughtered again, then the world does not deserve to exist."

That moment, I fear, has come. Israel's existence has become, in the eyes of much of the world, a big bother. References to the creation of Israel as a "mistake" not worth the price are now commonplace in European discourse.
Tony Judt (a Jewish professor) finds an ethnic-religious state like Israel to be an "anachronism" in a post-nationalist world. He sees no similar infirmity in all those Muslim states in which shari'a is the law of the land and non-Muslims are barred from citizenship.
Behind all this talk of mistakes and anachronisms lies the belief that if Israel disappeared the world would be a far happier place. Professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer in their infamous paper "The Israel Lobby" identify not one threat to world peace that is not directly attributable to Israel. Not Iran. Not North Korea.
The perfidy and trickiness of those sly Jews is beyond belief in Walt and Mearsheimer's telling. Israel, they charge, withdrew from Gaza with the deliberate intention of bringing Hamas into power and thereby ending the "peace process."
More recently, speaking before the Council on American-Islamic Relations, they claimed that Israel had long planned an invasion of Lebanon, and that Hizbullah's kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers was merely a pretext for doing so. Wasn't it clever of those Jews to trick Nasrallah into attacking Israel? I wonder how they did that.
The claim that support for Israel underlies virtually every act of Islamic terrorism is gospel in Europe. After British authorities uncovered a plot by native-born British Muslims to blow up 10 or more transatlantic carriers, Muslim peers and MPs in England audaciously wrote that England can only expect many more such plots as long as it does not alter its Middle East policy.
Rather than reacting with rage to the implicit threat from its own honored representatives, the British public lapped it up and forced Tony Blair into imminent retirement for daring to label the view that the West is responsible for Islamo-fascism more than a bit daft. Now Blair himself has lent credence to that notion by linking any progress in Iran and Iraq to further Israeli territorial concessions.
Yet even in the Middle East itself, the greatest losses of life have had no connection to Israel: the million lives lost in the Iraqi-Iranian war, the hundreds of thousands of Muslims slaughtered by their fellow Muslims in Darfur, civil wars in Algeria and Yemen, the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, Syria's murder of more than 25,000 of its own citizens in Hama.
MUCH OF the West not only laments Israel's creation, but is prepared to assist in reversing that historical mistake. Despite repeated threats to wipe Israel off the map, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is still treated to submissive visits from UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and a host of European dignitaries, and a fawning interview by America's toughest TV journalist focusing on his sweet family and sartorial tastes.
Three years of European dithering make clear that no serious sanctions will be imposed on Iran. President George W. Bush was the last hope that the West would act decisively to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. But with the Democratic takeover of Congress, he lacks the political capital for any such audacious step, especially given the inevitable shock to the world's oil supply and Western economies that would surely follow.
The Europeans may secretly hope that Israel will save their lunch with a preemptive strike on Iran (though whether Israel has the capability to render a significant blow to the Iranian program is much in doubt), but harsh international condemnation would follow an Israeli attack, as it did after Osirak in 1981. Europe would likely use an Israeli attack as an opportunity to offer Israel up to the Arab states by declaring her a pariah state.
The recent UN General Assembly condemnation of all Israeli actions to stop missile fire at Israeli civilians from Gaza - with the United States, Australia and Canada the only nations of significance opposing or abstaining - typifies the denial of Israel's right to self-defense.
The West has made the terrorists' tactic of embedding themselves among civilians a win-win proposition: If their missiles kill Israelis, that is a win; and if Israel strikes back at those firing those missiles and kills civilians as well, that is a win too.
Those who routinely condemn every Israeli attempt to strike back at those operating from among civilians populations as "disproportionate" or "war crimes," without ever specifying how Israel should protect its citizens, effectively deny Israel the right to defend itself.
The irony, however, is that by denying Israel the right to self-defense, the Europeans only make more likely the most disastrous possible outcomes. Given Israel's vulnerability to missile attack, and the world's condemnation of any response, the Palestinians will be tempted to use the more advanced weaponry currently pouring into Gaza to keep Israel in a permanent state of mobilization and to make life generally intolerable.
At that point, it will literally be them or us. Especially if the Palestinians were to unleash their missiles in the midst of a conventional war with Syria or Egypt or both, Israel would have no choice but to level Palestinian areas and send the population packing.
Where things would go from there no one wants to contemplate. But the West should not count on Israel to go quietly into the night.
By refusing to take Iran's nuclear threats seriously or permit Israel to defend itself in the same fashion as any other nation, the West could well be sowing its own worst-case scenario. Dad would have appreciated the irony.

[mike435]

i was wondering what people think about this

[Rasputin]

JERUSALEM (AFP) - The Israeli government has approved the creation of a new ministry for strategic affairs, to be headed by a controversial ultra-nationalist and deal mainly with Iran's nuclear ambitions.

During the weekly cabinet meeting, "all the ministers approved the decision to form the ministry for strategic affairs" under Avigdor Lieberman, whose Yisrael Beitenu party joined Prime Minister's Ehud Olmert's government in October, a official said on condition of anonymity on Sunday.

The ministry will be responsible "for coordination between the different bodies regarding the different strategic threats Israel is facing," most notably Iran's nuclear programme, which the Jewish state and the United States believe is aimed at acquiring a nuclear bomb, despite Tehran's denials.

Israel -- widely considered the Middle East's sole, if undeclared, nuclear weapons power -- considers Iran its chief threat, pointing to calls from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for the Jewish state to be wiped off the map.

Olmert said last month that "our position is that we must do everything in our power to make sure the Iranians do not cross a technological threshold that would allow them to develop nuclear weapons".

The decision still requires the approval of the parliament, where the government has a broad-based coalition.

Lieberman, whose party's main electorate comes from the large ex-Soviet immigrant community, will also head the Native Agency responsible for ties between Israel and the Jewish community in the former Soviet Union.

[Khorsheed]

I will tell you what i think mike .. . I am the kind of person that respects all religions i dont interfer with any other religion or say bad things about it.
and killing jews doesnt seem bright to me. .. because after all we are all flesh and blood and no one has the right to choose the day of a person expect god almighty !
But you have to consider . .did jews really respect the flesh and blood of other civilians ?

[donsaeid]

[mike435]

Holocust confrence

Iran to host Holocaust conference




Iran's Foreign Ministry will hold a two-day conference next week to have what an Iranian official on Tuesday described as a scientific discussion of the evidence for the Holocaust.
Deputy Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mohammadi said that the two-day conference, scheduled for Dec. 10-11, will be attended by 67 foreign researchers from 30 countries, the Iran's official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.
The gathering, sponsored by the Foreign Ministry's Institute for Political and International Studies, was initiated by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who described the Holocaust as a "myth."
"The president simply asked whether an event called the Holocaust has actually taken place... No rational response was ever given to Ahmadinejad's questions," Mohammadi gave as the reason for holding the conference.
Mohammadi said the conference seeks to "provide an opportunity for scholars to offer their opinions in freedom."
Iran has repeatedly announced plans for the gathering, including during United Nations chief Kofi Annan's visit in September to Iran when he said that an exhibition of cartoons denying the Holocaust, on display then, promotes hatred.
The planned conference is yet another step in hard-line President Ahmadinejad's public campaign against Israel. Ahmadinejad has called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."
Mohammadi rejected any suggestion that the conference would support anti-Semitism, saying that was a "Western phenomenon." The proof, he said, was Iran's community of 25,000 Jews. The deputy minister also said that a conference about Holocaust deniers would be held simultaneously in Germany, but he did not give further details and any plans for such an event could not be immediately confirmed.

[mike435]

this is a huge insult to jews and very hurtful to