14 thoughts on “Conference of Presidents Creates Anti-Iran Front Group – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

    1. The article is here: “http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6825263.ece”. Sorry, not as a link. By the way, could someone help me finding a pattern here?

    2. The Times article does no such thing. It reports Kouchner’s (a card-carrying Friend Of Israel (TM) if there ever was one) and Israel’s complaints over the non-inclusion in an IAEA report of information the agency allegedly has. The money quote is at the end:

      Western intelligence agencies had given the IAEA material suggesting that Tehran secretly combined uranium processing, airborne high-explosive tests and efforts to revamp a missile cone in a way that would fit a nuclear warhead.

      The agency described the material as compelling and insisted that Iran clarify the matter rather than reject it as fabricated evidence. It is likely, however, that it did not meet the standards of proof required for inclusion in the report.

      The agency is not compelled (and would be beyond stupid if they thought they were) to publish every piece if unverified information – and disinformation – they are provided by member state’s intelligence agencies.

      1. You’re right, I was speeding (and half off-topic at that). Still, the London Times did not elaborate on your correct IAEA-should-not-do-rumours point. Nor on “evidence” versus “suggestion”. France and Israel even did mention and push their secret information. Secret intelligence made into PR? Israel, non-signer of the non-proliferation NPT, saying IAEA should take a better look into Iran? “Western intelligence agencies … suggesting” the same? The pattern is “Irax”.

        1. And yep: NY Times jumps in, relaying the US-ambassador to the IAEA’s talk (Intelligence into PR). Plus unquoted NYT copy: “Much of the country’s early activity was missed for nearly 18 years” (So one can fill the gaps as suitable). Which agency sleeps for 18 yrs on nuclear stuff in the Middle East? Richard has taken over, see above.

  1. I see some of the participating organizations are the AJC and the ZOA, Hillel, and some other fairly rightwing Zionist organizations with neocon connections. I would imagine this is precisely the kind of opposition to the Iranian regime that would actually help Mr. Ahmadinejad and further demonize his opposition by demonstrating that “Iran’s enemies are funded by Zionists.” And in this case they would be half right.

    1. this is precisely the kind of opposition to the Iranian regime that would actually help Mr. Ahmadinejad and further demonize his opposition

      Absolutely right. This type of standoff actually helps the radical rejectionists on both sides, Israeli & Iranian, who are spoiling for confrontation & a fight.

  2. These look like a good group of standards to which to hold Israel accountable – doing so requires little rewording. To which one can add, equality of civil rights for inhabitants of Israel and the Territories

  3. And so, one can hold the groups accountable for not expecting the same of Israel.

    I have to look up more info about Israel and the IAEC.

  4. I think the US should supply nuclear technology to Iran. This would have 2 benefits. First, it would enhance Iran-US relationships, and second, Iran would do the dirty work in enforcing UN resolutions, includind the right of return. Sanctions are the equivalent of military actions

  5. Correction: the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)

    “Therefore, Stand With Freedom, both the group and the event, are a bought and paid for creation of the Conference of Presidents which, in turn, is doing the bidding of the Israeli government in ratcheting up pressure on the Iranian regime. ”

    It also divides the attention of the Jewish community, and directs focus away from Palestine, the settlements, internal conflicts in Israel, conflicts between perceived values in the US and Israel, et cetera.

  6. I, myself, am not particularly thrilled with the idea of nuclear weapons in the hands of fanatic Shi’ites. Just as I’m not too thriled with the idea of nuclear weapons in the hands of fanatic Hindus, or fanatic Jews, or fanatic Bhuddists, or fanatic Christians either. But Israel’s war with Iran will result in an international crisis of catastrophic proportions.

    I’m assuming that Israel’s intentions will be to A) deal with Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons programme; B) deal with the Iran’s alleged weapons for Hamas programme; and C) deal with Ahmadinejad himself for his past anti-holocaust and anti-semitic rhetoric. All of the above worry me because of the potentially high number of civilian deaths and casualties and more importantly because of the way these deaths and casualties will come about. Judging by Israel’s assault on a defenceless population earlier this year when it comes to war “the most moral army in the world” is anything but. If we saw white phosphorous over Gaza, what on earth will we see over Tehran? It honestly scares the hell out of me – especially knowing that the Israeli war machine has an obvious taste for carnage and when it comes to Iran they have a very large bone to pick. They have a statement to make against anti-semitism and holocaust denial and the Hamas regime all in one campaign and Israel may never get another chance like this. And when it’s all over what then? With Iran dealt with, who will be Israel’s next enemy? Because Israel always needs an enemy. Zionism cannot exist without an enemy or a threat – real or imagined.

    War with Iran is a condition for peace with the Palestinians. How ironic. War for peace. Or should that be peace for war? Whichever, Israelis and Palestinians are never going to see peace. Because as I’ve already pointed Israel will have another enemy that she will go crying to the international community about. Crying that the threat is real and imminent and more important than negotiating peace with her neighbours.

  7. On another note (sort of), has anybody taken a look at the Global Peace Index? It’s quite interesting.

    According to the Index, the Democratic Republic of the Congo is more peaceful than Israel. Pakistanis are more peaceful than Israelis. The Lebanese and the Syrians are more peaceful than the Israelis. Saudi Arabians are more peaceful than Israelis. The Iranians are more peaceful than the Israelis. Zimbabwe is more peaceful than Israel. My God, even North Koreans are more peaceful than Israelis!

    Of the 144 nations listed in the Index, Israel is number 141, faring only slightly better than Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq.

    See here: http://www.visionofhumanity.org/gpi/results/rankings.php

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link