Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Sunday, 7th September 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Nuclear watchdog warns against Iran strike



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 22 June 2008
THE UN nuclear watchdog chief warned yesterday that any military strike on Iran could turn the Middle East into a "ball of fire" and lead Iran to a more aggressive stance on its controversial nuclear programme.
After US officials said they believed recent large Israeli military exercises may have been meant to show Israel's ability to hit Iran's nuclear sites, Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said: "In my opinion, a milita
ry strike will be the worst... it will turn the Middle East to a ball of fire."

It also could prompt Iran to press even harder to seek a nuclear programme, and force him to resign, he said.

Iran also criticised the Israeli exercises. A government spokesman reportedly said the exercises demonstrate Israel "jeopardises global peace and security".

Israel sent warplanes and other aircraft on a major exercise in the eastern Mediterranean earlier this month, US military officials said on Friday.

Israel's military refused to confirm or deny the manoeuvres were practice for a strike in Iran, saying only that it regularly trains for various missions to counter threats to the country.

But the exercise in the first week of June may have been meant as a show of force as well as a practice on skills needed to execute a long-range strike mission, one US official said.

The New York Times quoted officials as saying that more than 100 Israeli F-16s and F-15s staged the manoeuvre, flying more than 900 miles, roughly the distance from Israel to Iran's Natanz nuclear enrichment facility, and that the exercise included refuelling tankers and helicopters capable of rescuing downed pilots.

Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert has said he would rather Iran's nuclear ambitions be halted by diplomatic means, but has pointedly declined to rule out military action.

The US also says it is seeking a peaceful, diplomatic resolution to the threat the West sees from Iran's nuclear programme, although US officials also have refused to take the threat of military action off the table.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice refused to comment on the Israeli manoeuvres in an interview with National Public Radio yesterday but said: "We are committed to a diplomatic course." Russia's foreign minister warned on Friday against the use of force on Iran, saying there is no proof it is trying to build nuclear weapons with the programme, which Tehran says is for generating power.



The full article contains 409 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 21 June 2008 11:17 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: Iran , Middle East conflict
 
1

Muskrat,

22/06/2008 00:50:24
Doesn't Mohamed ElBaradei have an Iranian wife? Come to think of it, he never was suitable for the job he's supposed to be doing with the IAEA, too many biases.
2

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 22/06/2008 00:57:26
Too many biases and too many payoffs.
3

Muskrat,

22/06/2008 01:14:18
Unfortunately, payoffs are all too common, virtue is not a qualification for the job. Elbaradei's wife is a first cousin of one of Iran's most powerful people, Ayatollah Mahdavi Kani.
4

Let's have the truth,

Queensland 22/06/2008 02:19:22
All I can say to respond to the first 3 posts is "The world can thank its lucky stars that the UN Nuclear Watchdog Chief is not an Israeli or American.

Bias would take on a different meaning altogether and the world would be in for another round of needless bloodletting.
5

Dema,

Canada 22/06/2008 04:26:36
There does seem to be a conflict of interest here. ElBaradei cannot be neutral toward Iran because of his wife's relationship to Mahdavi Kani. How much influence does Elbaradei's wife have on him? Her cousin is the head of the Iranian Militant Clerics Association, one of the main political groups in Iran's Theo-Nazi government, a very powerful man.
6

Guga II,

Rockall 22/06/2008 05:10:28
Why is it that so few people, especially Americans, complain about the fact that the terrorist state of Israel has 3-400 nuclear weapons, and refuses to sign the NPT? This is the same state that is in breach of literally hundreds of UNGA and Security Council resolutions.

Why are there no international sanctions imposed on the terrorist state of Israel? Why are the Americans still supplying them with money (e.g. the $30 billion given to them recently by the war criminal Bush, to buy more weapons).

Do the Israelis intend to take on Pakistan after they bomb Iran? After all, it too is a Muslim nation, with nuclear power, and nuclear weapons.

It is time that the international community woke up and realised just how dangerous the terrorist state of Israel is, to both the Middle East and to the world.

7

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 22/06/2008 05:10:38
Dema, you can't tell that to LHTT...he would find an excuse for it..find a reason to appease it, and then at the same time spew out all the hatred for America and Israel.. Of course this is their fault, becasue theyare at the cause of all the world's problems according to LHTT and his ilk.
8

Let's have the truth,

Queensland 22/06/2008 08:18:03
1,2,3,5,7

Why are you peple so bent on attacking a country that hasn't invaded or attacked anyone else in centuries?

If the fault lies anywhere as to why Iran is how it is, it is America's.

You people so conveniently overlook the US overthrow of a democratically elected government in Iran and the installation of a crazy despot.

I'm beginning to wonder if you people will ever get anything right.

#7 Lynne

I don't hate America but you obviously hate Iran. It's time you took a long hard look at yourself.
9

bill2,

22/06/2008 08:36:10
Fortunately very few Americans are like Lynne, or the planet would have been blown sky-high by now.

The ordinary people of the USA do have some residual control over the Bush gang, so he has to use his Israeli attack dogs to do the dirty work.

Unfortunately, McCain (bombbombbombbombiran) shows every sign of being an even bigger criminal than Bush, if that were possible.
10

Let's have the truth,

Queensland 22/06/2008 08:40:57
"Why are you people so bent on attacking a country that hasn't invaded or attacked anyone else in centuries?"

....I'll answer that for you:

1. Because you can't help it.

2. You don't like the look of Ahmadinejad.

3. You find the possibility of Iran having a greater influence in the middle east than the US demeaning.

4. Because you are a bunch of schoolyard bullies.

5. Because the Jewish lobby in the US will have a significant influence in the republican vote in the upcoming election.

6. Because you've got bigger and more guns than anyone else and you like to point them at people.

7. The gun culture on the US mainland is ripe for export.

It would be better for the world if you used your guns on yourselves, as is quite common, than other nations.


11

Linus,

at arm's length 22/06/2008 09:14:19
Let's have the truth,
Quit trying to make sense and quit trying to tell the truth. You're confusing the American rednecks in this forum, the truth doesn't fit into their little photo album, and sense just doesn't wash. They go through life with the 'blinders' on, hiding behind their military and spending all their money on 'defence'. They just go through life patting themselves on the back for 'a job well done', and tell the rest of us that we have it all wrong. Don't you just wish that we also had these suicidal young people shooting up our schools and showing the rest of the world what a peaceful society we have, just because we have more guns than everybody?
12

Silence of the Yams,

22/06/2008 10:39:42
The regular unwashed, anti Israel, anti American, soft on terror, pro Islamist, pro Taleban, Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran posters are getting a tad worried, eh? I suggest the likes of A-nus and Muga strap on their suicide belts and make a dash for their virgin quota while stocks last!
13

Guga II,

Rockall 22/06/2008 11:13:35
#12 Yam Brain.

As one of the unwashed, uneducated rednecks, you would know. Why don't you give me an e-mail address and I'll send you a copy of the Yearly Update on Rednecks.

14

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 11:21:20
2

Would Israel go it alone without US backing?
I doubt it.
Israel acts like a wee boy in a playground when his big brother is his watching his back.
Its pathetic.
15

Cerberus,

Hades 22/06/2008 11:29:01
L-Y-N-N-E

A Nobel prize winning man, selected by the US/UN for the task is now accused by you of pay offs; no evidence, again, I notice. The only evidence you seem to require is "He is not performing his role as creator of an excuse to kill humans."

Mohamed ElBaradei has repeatedly stated, unequivocally, that Iran IS NOT making nuclear weapons. If you were remotely interested in truth and justice you would simply visit the IAEA site and read the latest report.

The HEAD of IAEA says that IRAN IS NOT MAKING Nuke Bombs.

Deal with it.
16

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 11:31:14
12

And the regular unwashed bacca chewing foreskin rippin zionist yeehah inbred terrorist supporters are off again on their never ending blood lust and war mongering.
Its about the oil dummy and Israelli foreign policy.
Your being led by your nose in support of Israelli security and control of natural resourses.
17

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 11:50:40
Why are all of the stories on Israel blocked from comments?
18

Big Jock McDoc,

Scotland 22/06/2008 11:51:45
#17

Because of idiots like you.
19

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 11:54:08
18

Or feardies like you who cant debate or face the truth eh?
20

Big Jock McDoc,

Scotland 22/06/2008 11:56:57
#19

Debate like 'And the regular unwashed bacca chewing foreskin rippin zionist yeehah inbred terrorist supporters are off again on their never ending blood lust and war mongering.'

What truth?
21

,

22/06/2008 12:04:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
22

,

22/06/2008 12:04:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
23

,

22/06/2008 12:11:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

Big Jock McDoc,

Scotland 22/06/2008 12:20:29
#21

Lol. I find metrosexuals like you funny.



25

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 12:23:11
24

Lost the arguement already eh? trying to get this blog closed as well? what a troll.
26

Silence of the Yams,

22/06/2008 12:25:38
Zoosexual I reckon, him and his verminous pal Muga! Small furry creatures beware!
27

Big Jock McDoc,

Scotland 22/06/2008 12:34:30
#25

Not really, you and your buddy is doing too good a job at it yourselves.

The sad thing is that if you and your ilk devoted as much energy towards important things that is what is happening here in Scotland rather than in some far off country, a lot of our problems would be solved.

I guess it is better to sit back and give yourself a pat in the back for doing your bit by helping those poor foreign people rather than the responsibility of having to deal with problems closer at home. It's good having that feel good factor.
28

Linus,

at arm's length 22/06/2008 12:39:08
#25 Mister N,
The name Big Jock McDoc says it all, he's trying to hide his obvious shortcomings behind his chosen name.
29

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 12:39:42
27

So just exactly what is it you think is happening in Scotland then that relates to this story?
30

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 12:40:25
28

A troll by any other name is still a troll.
31

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 13:18:07
2 Lynne

You accusing anybody of bias is just unbelievably flabbergasting. I dont believe there is any other poster so blinkered or predudice on any of these blogs than yourself.
32

Moreen,

Scotsdale, AZ 22/06/2008 13:19:31
looks like bill2 has brought other FH trolls here using new IDs to spew hate.
33

Moreen,

Scotsdale, AZ 22/06/2008 13:19:31
looks like bill2 has brought other FH trolls here using new IDs to spew hate.
34

Let's have the truth,

Queensland 22/06/2008 13:26:08
On a slightly different but appropriate theme:

By Eric Margolis

PARIS -- The ugly truth behind the Iraq and Afghanistan wars finally has emerged.

Four major western oil companies, Exxon Mobil, Shell, BP and Total are about to sign U.S.-brokered no-bid contracts to begin exploiting Iraq's oil fields.

Saddam Hussein had kicked these firms out three decades ago when he nationalized Iraq's oil industry. The U.S.-installed Baghdad regime is welcoming them back.

Iraq is getting back the same oil companies that used to exploit it when it was a British colony.

As former fed chairman Alan Greenspan recently admitted, the Iraq war was all about oil. The invasion was about SUV's, not democracy.

Afghanistan just signed a major deal to launch a long-planned, 1,680-km pipeline project expected to cost $8 billion. If completed, the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline (TAPI) will export gas and later oil from the Caspian basin to Pakistan's coast where tankers will transport it to the West.
35

Moreen,

Scotsdale, AZ 22/06/2008 13:26:32
6 Guga II

How many people do you friends in your oil rich country of Iran send around the world to help out other countries when they have natural disasters? How much money does your friends in Iran give to poor Countries?
36

Moreen,

Scotsdale, AZ 22/06/2008 13:37:18
#34 Let's twist the truth

I'm glad BP is on the list but see no reason for Total. Is not Total a French company? The French are finally on board now because Chirac was taking bribes from Saddam and the French people and Sarkozy are seeing the success in Iraq now.
37

Neil,

Glasgow 22/06/2008 13:40:35
My suspicion is that a lot of the "speculative bubble" in the oil price is fear that Bush will launch a major bombing strike on Iran, which, as a result would not only close off its own oil supplies but be able to stop any tankers going through the fairly narrow entrance to the Gulf. If so that speculative bubble may have been big enough to discourage him from ending his presidency that way.

Or it may not.
38

Moreen,

Scotsdale, AZ 22/06/2008 13:41:21
#34 Let's have the truth

An idiot wrote - "As former fed chairman Alan Greenspan recently admitted, the Iraq war was all about oil. The invasion was about SUV's, not democracy."

LOL - Even if he did say that.. LOL, what does a FED chairmans opinion have to do with foreign policy? LOL
39

Moreen,

Scotsdale, AZ 22/06/2008 13:44:51
#37 Neil

Whether Iran gets bombed by the US, Israel, or anyone else has always been Iran's choice.
40

Tiang,

22/06/2008 13:51:10
N #17

To stop people like you from spewing hate! Why should Scotsman.com accommodate your desire to incite hatred here?
41

Hemingway,

Ayr 22/06/2008 14:06:01
#40 Tiang

Precisely, people like Mister, Guga, bill2, and others turn those threads into anti-Semitic boards spewing their hate of Jews.
42

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 15:32:35
39

So if the choice is with Iran and they say dont bomb does that mean there is no chance of them getting bombed then?

35

Thats a fair point actually the first I have ever seen from a zionist neocon. Iran could do themselves a favour by joining in International aid to unfortunate counties mind you I dont ever remember Israel joining in any International aid initiatives do you?

40

So who is it that I am supposed to hate apart from the ignorant on these blogs?
43

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 15:50:34
36

Sarkozy is a neocon which explains his parties affiliation with the Bush regime. He doesnt however represent the majority view of his country a bit like our Gordon. If Sarkozy gets France involved with this so called war on terror then he can kiss his political a*se goodbye at the next elections.

38

Is that your opinion then? and what do you think it is worth more or less than the FED chairmans?
44

Laurie A.,

22/06/2008 15:55:28
We should be very suspicious of anything that comes out of the IAEA. They failed to detect Iraq's nuclear weapons programs in the 1980s and, much more recently, Libya's.

Mr. El Baradei did not protest when Iran repeatedly banned the best and toughest inspectors in the IAEA from entering Iran by denying them the visas they needed to do their job.



45

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 16:01:03
44
"We should be very suspicious of anything that comes out of the IAEA"

Because its not controlled by zionist neocons?

"They failed to detect Iraq's nuclear weapons programs in the 1980s and, much more recently, Libya's."

Thats because there wasnt one. And the best being Americans (CIA) of course?
46

Tiang,

22/06/2008 16:11:39
N #42

That's a darn stupid question to ask, you ignoramus. Are you too old and blind to have not read Hemingway's post #41? I am not the only poster to have figured out what you're trying to play up with comment like this at #17. Creating a new ID again does not make you any more a new poster.
47

LD,

22/06/2008 16:53:16
#45 MisterN

44
"We should be very suspicious of anything that comes out of the IAEA"

Because its not controlled by zionist neocons?


Why shouldn't we be suspicious of anything that comes out of the IAEA?
Because its' controlled and headed by Mohamed ElBaradei who has an Iranian wife?
48

Guga II,

Rockall 22/06/2008 17:09:23
#41. Perhaps you should check up on who the Semitic races are. I think you'll find that the Arabs are also Semitic.

Why is it that nondescripts, like yourself, who are unable to muster a decent argument, always try and play the race card. Our argument is not with the Semitic race, or even the Jewish part of that race; our argument is with the Zionists that run the terrorist state of Israel, as well as their American paymasters.



49

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 17:13:41
47

So if he had a Jewish wife that would be ok then?
50

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 17:21:19
46

That posts smacks of hatred to me. Try practicing what you preach then maybe we wouldnt be able to accuse you of being a hipocrite as well as an hate filled Islamaphobe.
51

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 17:23:38
47

what about the other members where are their wives from? Should all public bodies and organisations only be affiliated with certain "appoved" countries then?
52

LD,

22/06/2008 17:33:49
#49/51 MisterN

Get a life! Mohamed ElBaradei's wife is an Iranian; that has nothing to do with your new brought up topic of being Jewish and from where the other members' wives!
53

Cobbie,

Manitoba 22/06/2008 17:56:04
Libya's Col. Qadhdhafi, on 19 December, 2003, admitted that Libya had pursued a covert nuclear weapons program. Prior to this admission Libya had continually lied to and mislead the IAEA to cover the real scope and intent of its nuclear program and the IAEA chose to believe the lies rather than rock the boat, which may well be what's happening presently with their dealings with Iran.
54

Vote SNP !!! !!!,

Kilbarchan 22/06/2008 18:01:59
#53 Cobbie

Who believes Iran? Other than a few of the terrorist apologists that continully attack us here on these threads.
55

Vote SNP !!! !!!,

Kilbarchan 22/06/2008 18:11:35
43 MisterN

Hey numpty, how do you feel about Merkel then?
56

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 22/06/2008 20:15:21
#15 Deal with the fact the UN is the most corrupt organization there is. The amount of payoffs just in the Oil-for-Food scandal alone proves this point.
The fact that the UN troops are responsible for the rapes and killing of women and children should alone tell you, that its charities are probably the only parts of the UN that MAY BE working.
It is time for the UN to fold up it's tent, and leave NY, go the way of the League of Nations.

A parallel organization should be made with ONLY democracies involved..if you are so worried.
This organization (UN) is an utter failure, as it sits by and allows one group of people to threaten the very existence of another group of people and do nothing about it, but try and punish the very people being threatened.
Enough..pay their parking fines, turn in their diplomatic plates and get lost in another country that wants them.
Heavens knows NY could turn the building into profit-making, tax-paying Condos or Co-Ops..


57

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 22/06/2008 20:16:11
#17 because of people like you.
58

Cerberus,

Hades 22/06/2008 21:11:16
L-Y-N-N-E

I'm sure you are aware that the military wing of the US of A also kill and rape. They do it in a highly organised manner plus they also torture people.

I agree that the UN needs a substantial overhaul. The very first thing that should be altered in the ridiculous power of VETO.

If it wasnt for the US veto, there would be no nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

The idea that democracy is some kind of enlightened state of civilisation is moot anyway, but the idea that the US of A and UK are democratic is an absurdity. Look at the last few elections in each country.

So to the notion that the US of A and UK want to spread democracy. If these nations wanted to spread democracy, why do they constantly pull down democratic initiatives: such as pre-USSR invasion Afghanistan and Chavezs government? (to name but two). The US funded the very people in Afghanistan that didnt want democracy or eduction for women etc (that were in evidence at that time). The US funded a coup against Chavez and tried to install a non democratically elected , pro US, replacement. So, its a nonsense to claim that a/the US of A is democratic and b/ wants democracy in other areas of the world.

There is also the problem with the idea that the world should adopt a system based upon a UK principle of control rather than representation. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on whats for lunch. Other areas of the world have their own way of doing things. Surely you wouldnt deny them the right to be free to select their own system of government?

Back to the UN. The Security Council is made up of 15 countries. 11 of the current members are functioning democracies operating within a non democratic UN system (the veto is undemocratic).

This article is about Iran, a democratic country with 50% female attendance in tertiary education, a poverty rate that is similar to the US of A and a nation that hasnt started a war in over 300 years.Its also a nation that has welcomed in a
59

Cerberus,

Hades 22/06/2008 21:11:51
L-Y-N-N-E

continued

This article is about Iran, a democratic country with 50% female attendance in tertiary education, a poverty rate that is similar to the US of A and a nation that hasnt started a war in over 300 years.Its also a nation that has welcomed in any UN inspectors. Isreal, on the other hand, insisted on having inspectors from only the US of A, and even then they hid things from the group.

I cannot understand why you would say that the UN is an utter failure when its current system of veto has protected Israel from sanctions so many times.

(sorry, apostrophe key broken).
60

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 21:25:38
52

Read the posts first then comment not the other way around.

53
Admitted it to who? is it on public record?

54

Iran is a country not an opinion or a statement of fact.

55 numbnuts

Never met the woman.

56
True but then they dont have the monopoly on corruption do they? Name me one government in this world that isnt?

57

Youre the biggest complainer to the moderator on these blogs thats well known dearie.
61

Alec in Chicago,

Chicago 22/06/2008 22:20:30
You've got to love the audacity. Lynne wants an organization that runs parallel to the UN, but comprising only democracies.

She obviously doesn't see the irony, as the US would not be allowed to join such an organization. She lives in a former democracy and hasn't yet awoken to that fact. (Of course, living in perhaps the most anti-democratic state might have blinded her to reality.)
62

Cobbie,

Manitoba 22/06/2008 22:47:18
MisterN 60: You really will have to try and keep up, there was no end of info. on radio, tv, and newspaper coverage on Libya's admission that they were trying to build the 'bomb'. The Scotsman had several articles, see their December 22, 2003 story 'Gaddafi: Send U.N. Inspectors'' Now, that's all the clues I'm going to give you, good luck!
63

Carolyn 1,

22/06/2008 22:58:27
#61 Alec
McCain spoke of a league of free nations a month ago:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OR8DTG0&show_article=1

I think it makes sense.
I think a League of Democracies would be productive; by working together the free nations could accomplish great achievements for their people; and, without being bound and tied by corruption and the veto of the dictators at the UN, they could more freely extend a hand to more countries who need our help.

By the way, it's you who doesn't see the irony: you're living in a state under the thumb of corrupt Chicago Politics, not Lynne.
64

MisterN,

Edinburgh 22/06/2008 23:29:38
62

No evidence then eh? imagine my shock.
65

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 23:32:41
63

You may be right only problem will be in finding any democracies let alone "free nations" to form a league. I wouldnt even know where to begin looking certainly no on this planet anyway.
I wish I was a dreamer and fantasist but all I can see is reality.
66

Alec in Chicago,

Chicago 22/06/2008 23:39:10
The state is under the thumb of Chicago politics? Chicago rules the state? Chicago allowed a bunch of partisans to block vote counts? Chicago has high-ranking officials of a political party overseeing state-wide voting procedures?

Having lived in Chicago for many years, I have learned how power works - and I get my information from unaligned sources. (Nor will you find me spouting the Chicago-line.)

As usual, you missed the point: Florida has played a leading role in destroying our nation's democracy.

You're living in a dream world.

Doesn't matter what McCain (or anyone else) spoke of - or when. It doesn't change the facts: the US is *not* the democracy you like to say it is, and it would not qualify for membership in an organization of democratic countries. Whether the idea does or does not make sense is something I never commented on. (What *you* 'think' is less interesting than what my budgies think.)

Start with: a democracy cannot function without a free and unbiased press. We don't have such. We have corporate media that 'report' only what will benefit corporations. We have a president, vice president, etc., that lie and are not challenged by the corporate media. They aren't challenged by the corporatists in the Democratic phony opposition, either.

We would be blocked from joining a league of democracies: that's what I said; that's what I meant; that's what I repeat. We are living in a former democracy.

You are as blind - and as gullible - as Lynne.
67

MisterN,

Scotland 22/06/2008 23:56:19
66

Neither Lynne nor Caroline are blind nor gullible they are simply party political and will lie through their teeth on public forums in order to support their agendas. They dont care about the rights or wrongs of their support and no amount of arguement or even evidence will make them admit theyre wrong about anything Daithi is another party political animal and will argue nonsense and bullsh*t til she's blue in the face without regard to truth justice and the American way.
But it can be entertaining to see them tripping over themselves with their incoherant babbling.
68

right of center,

Chicago 23/06/2008 00:06:42
#66 Alec in Chicago

I see you are still part of the blame America first group of haters.

Of course we are not a democracy, name one country that is? Nothing would ever get done in a democracy. The USA has a representative government.
69

Tiang,

23/06/2008 00:07:41
N #50

So you get so upset that I expose your true colour. That is, coming to Scotsman on purpose to incite anti-Jew hatred. Be honest with yourself. You are not fooling anyone! You hypocrite at best as well as hate filled Christianophobe.

#57

You’re the top whiner to the moderator of Scotsman!
70

Tiang,

23/06/2008 00:14:51
N #60

You’re the top whiner to the moderator of Scotsman! (in reference to your response to #57)
71

Tiang,

23/06/2008 00:17:45
Lynne

Regarding my post #69 directed to you at #57. Very sorry Lynne, not for you but for terrorist apologist at #60.
72

MisterN,

Scotland 23/06/2008 00:33:37
69

anti Jew hatred? does that mean you think I hate folk who are anti Jewish?
Probably not obviously a typo so where have I expressed my so called hatred for Judasim?
I am agnostic and have no feelings whatsoever for any religion good or bad its all nonsense to me but I cant stand ignorance and biggotry and sadly these blogs are full of both and from the same body of posters.
People who express criticism of Israelli foreign policy are not "Jew haters".
A Jew hater is somebody who expresses his hatred for Judaism and Jews in general not somebody who expresses their disgust at the politics of zionism and its disregard for democracy rule of international law and common decency.

71

You dont even know what a terrorist is.
73

MisterN,

Scotland 23/06/2008 00:34:31
70

Oh NA NA NANANA grow up.
74

Tiang,

23/06/2008 01:09:23
N #72

Like I said earlier, creating a new ID does not make you any more a new poster. Your anti-Jew hatred is seen with your old identity I came across somewhere in Scotsman before. You know yourself and your ilks always like coming up with new ID so that it will be too easy and convenient to deny your anti-Jew stance. That is what you terrorist apologists are good at to cover up the guilt.
An agnostic or not, it's still the same like any old human beings capable of hate, not necessarily tie up with any religion.
You do not need to tell me those who express their disgust at the politics of Israeli foreign policy are not Jew hater. In your case, you are generally Jew hater due to your own personal problems and out of frustration, not just of any foreign policy bearing.

#73
What the heck......Blah blah blah blah grow up

75

MisterN,

Scotland 23/06/2008 01:53:02
74

So you have no examples of Jew hatred to show us then? just empty accusations instead of counter arguement on my comments why dont you stop yer crying and baseless finger pointing and come up with a point of view or an arguement worthy of debate or is that too much to expect?
76

Let's have the truth,

Queensland 23/06/2008 03:08:18
#39

"Whether Iran gets bombed by the US, Israel, or anyone else has always been Iran's choice".

What a stupid comment. Iran has signed the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty and their right is to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes whereas Israel, regardless of if they've signed it or any other treaty, is in possession of 200-300 nuclear bombs.

You, like Lynne and a few others here need to take a long look at yourselves.

...Should Iranians elect a better looking president to avoid getting bombed as that seems to be your main beef with them?

Remember, there are plenty of uglies in both the US and Israeli governments.

77

Alec in Chicago,

Chicago 23/06/2008 04:11:52
#67

They are, in fact, evil, lying, hate-mongering, un-American neocon Bush-supporters. (As is far far 'right-of-center' - e.g., #68)

They are members of the remaining 25% of 'Americans' that refuse to see the truth about the evil creatures that control our government, that have been turning the US into a fascist state.
78

Alec in Chicago,

Chicago 23/06/2008 04:21:09
#68

Blame America first? Hardly. I blame the un-American Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc., plus the Congress that enables them, the multi-nationals that own the government, the neocons in the populace, the rabid phony religious right-wing fringe loonies, the bewildered real Republicans that are too stupid to realize that their party has been hijacked by fanatics and fascists, and the (corporate-owned) media that refuse to expose their lies and misdoings.

Hate? You need to look to your own kind. I do not advocate war. I do not advocate bombing anyone.

'Blame America first' is growing very thin as an attack. Are you too stupid to see that everyone out side of other Bushies laughs at you when you make such accusations?

By the way, we are supposed to be a democratic republic, usually referred to as a democracy. (Why didn't you try to 'correct' Lynne - or McCain, for that matter?) What a clumsy attack. A failure, just like everything else the neocons have brought us. How truly pathetic.
79

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 23/06/2008 07:41:05
#71...Tiang..not to worry.
80

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 23/06/2008 07:45:00
#15...they also gave a Nobel prize to Arafat. A Terrorist who was in favor of suicide bombers...What is your point?
81

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 23/06/2008 07:51:11
Mr.N #31...scroll up and down and read them all for yourself...which I doubt you will do, because you are one of them.

I tend to believe you and James Donald have a lot in common. It's all in the words.
82

,

23/06/2008 07:57:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
83

bill2,

23/06/2008 08:29:22
All is revealed. Lynne is after the Nobel Prize; her unstinting racialism and support for terrorists should qualify her.
84

Let's have the truth,

Queensland 23/06/2008 09:31:17
A question for Lynne and her ilk:- Do you agree with the following?

Under international law, all peoples have a right to resist military occupation by any means available.
If they are terrorists then so were the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising during WWII.

If they are terrorists then so were the founders of Israel.

85

MisterN,

Scotland 23/06/2008 09:55:29
80

Israel put a couple of terrorists in charge of their country namely Golda Meir and Ben Gurion.
Both had blood on their hands.
Wake up you silly woman.
86

MisterN,

Scotland 23/06/2008 09:57:30
81

I am one of what Lynne? an undesirable? an Untermench?
do people like me belong in concentration camps perhaps?
87

MisterN,

Scotland 23/06/2008 10:49:10
68

"A representative government" well at least you got that right they represent big business interests and Israelli foreign policy all bought and paid for during election campaigns with "donations" more commonly known as bribes.
88

Tiang,

23/06/2008 13:30:44
N #75
“So you have no examples of Jew hatred to show us then?”

What do you mean by “us”? Its’ you I am directing my post to or have you confessed to IDs trolling? Be honest with yourself. I am sure many posters would like to know your other identity. What are hiding that you have to create a new ID? So that you can escape the truth of yourself, feeling very safe and “innocent” under new ID? Oh, this also helps to protect yourself from being recognized as an Anti-Jewish, isn't it? Nice Spin Job!

Examples? Look at yourself in the mirror. Carry on fooling yourself! Too ignorant of you to spout these few lines “empty accusation, baseless finger pointing, blah, blah, blah”. Someone such as yourself whom excessively and obsessively point accusing fingers or let say, aggressively condemn the Jews for all the world’s problems on many occasions rather than turning up here for rational debate is considered by me as a Jew hater. If you cannot accept it, that is your own problem.
So true of what Hemingway said about you coming here on purpose, mainly to incite hatred and making excuses by using Israeli foreign policy to blame solely on the Jews (although Arabs are together as blameworthy as well as the perpetrators) and whining your heart out of frustration, and you still pretend you don’t have a strong dislike for Jewish people and a Christianophobe.
89

mike - across the pond,

lhtt..... 23/06/2008 13:37:16
lets go over your "top 7" list

1. Because you can't help it.
yep all that "all men are equal" & "wanting to make the world a better place stuff" just terrible isnt it?

2. You don't like the look of Ahmadinejad.
looks have nothing to do with it... LISTEN pal... LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAYS... carefully... READ their constitution... CAREFULLY

3. You find the possibility of Iran having a greater influence in the middle east than the US demeaning.
demeaning? how about dangerous... course if you dont LISTEN to what he says, then your "demeaning" gets a LOT more traction...

4. Because you are a bunch of schoolyard bullies.
yeah, we want everybody to be free... if thats being a bully... guilty as charged... and because whe whole world turns its eyes to America when they get their stuff in a twist...

5. Because the Jewish lobby in the US will have a significant influence in the republican vote in the upcoming election.
you are a DOOFUS... the Jewish block is 2/3 DNC, not GOP... although like blacks leaning democrat I really dont know why, the DNC hasnt done SQUAT for them...

6. Because you've got bigger and more guns than anyone else and you like to point them at people.
nope... sometimes we HAVE to point them at people, but like... nah... wrong answer...

7. The gun culture on the US mainland is ripe for export.
export... like we did in 1939 & 1940?

if you think its such a WONDERFUL place... GO THERE... LIVE THERE...
90

mike - across the pond,

lhtttt 23/06/2008 13:46:02
resisting military occupation...

yep saddam hussein occupied the north and south with military forces for over 20 years... and stretched a rope for it... at the hands of the IRAQI government...

saddam hussein occupied Kuwait... and got whacked on the knuckles for it...

the US occupied Iraq - UNDER UN MANDATE - and BTW is no longer "occupied"... they have their own government... (remember all those "purple thumbs")

I guess "truth" is in the eye of the beholder... and your perception of "truth" is based on your self loathing belief structure.
91

Carolyn 1,

23/06/2008 14:05:11
67 MisterN, Scotland

In reference to the League of Democracies replacing the UN, it is interesting that so many posters think they DON'T live in a democracy.

That certainly makes the point which I have said over and over, that many civil liberties in the UK, free speech especially are rapidly declining due to the Islamification of the laws combined with the acceptance of sharia.
This hasn't happened in the US to the extent it has in the EU.

When the League of Democracies is formed, we'll take Ireland, thank you very much.
92

Carolyn 1,

23/06/2008 14:13:04
In reference to International law, International law has NO authority over the US constitution.

I believe in a central federal government but with limited powers giving each state of the United States its separate sovereignty, not unlike the emerging EU. Each state makes and abides by its own laws according to the will of the citizens.
The will of the citizens to control their own destiny would be diluted and eventually lost, as soon as they accept international law and globalization of a ruling authority.

International law should be applicable only in International arenas, such as waterways, the Internet, etc.
93

LD,

23/06/2008 14:33:09
#60 MisterN
Do your homework first instead of filling this blog with your usual trash of hate and changing topic to score points!
94

,

23/06/2008 15:13:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
95

Linus,

at arm's length 23/06/2008 15:27:14
#88 Tiang,
Stick to the story at hand. you seem to have a problem with certain peole that post here, stick to the subject so we know where you stand on it. I personally am against all forms of terrorism, regardless of who is guilty of causing it. I'm also strongly opposed to torture, regardless of who does the torturing. The US in this case is my target, for they of all countries should know better, and they are the worst perpetrators, for the simple fact tha