17 thoughts on “Bibi and Barak Recount in TV Documentary Taking Israel to Brink of War with Iran – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. I saw Dayan’s program, and comparing it to 60 Minutes does not do any justice to 60 Minutes. The program felt like watching an elections broadcast for Mr Olmert. She asked very easy question that their answers would portray him as worthy competitor to be Israeli PM, and not the convicted criminal, and failed politician that was kicked out of office due to his failures.

    just a small correction regarding the Dan Halutz remark:
    “Remember what Dan Halutz said when asked whether his conscience was rattled when he had to order a killing”
    He was asked how does it feel to drop a 250kg bomb on a terrorist’s house (actual question was much longer) – that was right after the assassination of Salah Shehade, the leader of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades who was responsible to the killing of hundreds of Israelis in suicide bombings, where his wife and some of his children were killed with him.
    Halutz response was only 3 words: מכה קטנה בכנף – meaning a small blow to the wing.

    1. Mary Hughes Thompson’s comment has shown that your “small correction” was actually in error, since my characterization of Halutz’s comment was accurate. He wasn’t asked what it felt like to kill a terrorist. He was asked what it felt like to kill 18 civilians (not just his wife and some of his children). This, btw is a war crime for which Halutz & Almog will eventually face prosecution (I predict).

      As for whether the Uvdah program was a Valentine to Olmert, maybe so. But Olmert didn’t acquit himself any better than Barak or Netanyahu. I agree with you that Olmert is a crook. But so are both Barak (likely) and Bibi (assuredly).

  2. Gotta love this happy-go-lucky Israeli designation of people as death-deserving-without-due-process “terrorists”. Were they as clear on the evil of terrorism when Begin and Shamir were practicing terrorism in 1945-1948? When Begin’s irregulars (terrorists?) perhaps aided by Jewish Agency’s irregulars (Hagana: terrorists? or army in waiting? or “freedom fighters”) performed the massacre at Deir Yassin?

    Please note the the ever-so-finicky-about-terrorists USA has nevertheless managed to celebrate the Hagana in a brass sidewalk plaque on the sidewalks of New York City.

    There’s nothin’ like the power of dominating the narrative, just nothing’.

    1. There’s nothin’ like the power of dominating the narrative, just nothing’.

      I could not agree with you more. This is the ultimate weapon used by them. I am both an Arab and Muslim and I can say that our MAIN faliure is in failing to understand that simple fact!

    2. Some people just deserve to die.
      Salah Shehade, for example, was responsible to the murder of hundreds of Israelis in suicide bombings in the early 2000’s.
      Sort of a local version of Osama Bin Laden.

      1. You’ve just made an especially gross violation of my comment rules which clearly state you may not justify the murder of anyone, which you have done. You will be banned. If you wish to have the ban removed you will read the comment rules & communicate to me that you’ve done so, that you understand them & that you will respect & follow them. Till then, you’re toast.

        Go celebrate murder somewhere else. And as for the murder of Shehadeh, you don’t know the history of that killing either. You’re a lame, misinformed person.

        I want to make clear that there are some commenters who violate the rules who I want to ban. There are some who do, but who I don’t want to ban. You are in the latter category. Nothing in your previous comments made me feel I would’ve needed to do this (until now). But I simply cannot allow any commenter here to justify murder.

      2. @Nimrod,

        So Salah Shehade is a mini-Bin Laden?

        Bin Laden isn’t even a mini-Bin Laden.

        The US and Israel always make their respective villains out to be worse than Hitler (only because said villains are contemporary).

        So back to the mini-Bin Laden line – what does that make Israel? Colonialism, apartheid, institutional racism, ethnic cleansing, murder and assassination, etc. etc.

        And that’s just what Israel does in it’s own borders and the Palestinians’.

  3. Obama cannot promise American military support if he’s been told, in as many words, that he cannot use British or Cypriot bases to support an act of war. (This would commit the UK to a war it had no part in starting, which means that Cameron cannot, in fact, say anything else because his “I’m not Tony Blair” legislation was all about not starting wars without the approval of Parliament.)

    Apart from being British Sovereign territory, crass American use of Cypriot bases might raise tension between Greece and Turkey and risk a war of an even more nightmarish kind. (One, where, gasp, huge amounts of German, Dutch and Swedish money might be lost! Though I expect that Downing Street places the well being of Cypriots well ahead of the well being of European bankers and officials.)

    However, it doesn’t all go Iran’s way, because there’s a growing consensus that Assad has got to go sooner rather than later, and that really does leave Iran without regional allies. Assad’s fall would also crystalize debate within Iran over how much people want the present regime to continue.

  4. Richard: You would be doing the world a great service if you were to provide an audio translation the Chanel 2 interviews.

  5. RE: “Not to mention that killing an individual scientist or five, as Israel has done, will not demonstrably weaken or deter Iran’s pursuit of nuclearization if that is its ultimate goal.” ~ R.S.

    MY COMMENT: In fact, drawing upon the absurd argument(s) we constantly hear from the warmongers here in America, the Iranians might consequently feel as though they owe it (have a duty) to the assassinated Iranian scientists and their families to develop nuclear arms (even if that was not actually the original goal, but might nonetheless be perceived by their enemies as having been their goal), so that their Iranian scientists will not be perceived as having “died in vain”, Allah forbid!. And they certainly wouldn’t want their “boys” to be seen as having “died in vain”! With absolutely “nothing to show for it”! That would be such a “waste”! That would make the Iranian government look so “weak”! Then no one would “respect” them, and what little deterrence Iran might have had against being attacked (or “regime-changed”) by the U.S. and/or Israel would be “completely lost”!
    We Americans would certainly never let something like that happen to the U.S.! We would never “cut and run”! We would never “back down”! We would always “see it through to the end”! We would always be able to say “mission accomplished”! We would never let our “boys” be said to have “died in vain”! We would always “stay the course”, of course! Whatever the cost! No matter the cost, whether in lives or treasure! ! !

    1. I assure you that the Iranians don’t think that we owe it to our assisinated scientists to develop weapons. We started a peaceful research into the positive uses of nuclear technology some 40 years ago under the Shah and now it’d be logical to enjoy the fruits of our hard labour and sacrifices, monetary and politically.

      The ancient and cultivé Iranian psyche has one founding principle: you are entitled to defend what is rightly yours. Examples can be seen in the battle of Karbala where the 3rd Shiite/Iranian saint and his 72 disciples ultimately decided to fight a battle against an army of tens of thousands strong mainly composed of Arab Sunnis. They did, they lost the battle but won the war which has kept their memory and the cause they gave their lives for alive for us Iranians. During the per-Islamic era, our ancient prophet Zoroaster was martyred in similar circumstances. A modern example is the 8-year-long imposed war on Iran where Saddam’s Iraq was armed to the teeth by the so called world powers and the Arab League. The war has sent us back years in terms of infrastructure but our cause is alive because we defended our rights, a just cause which is the underlying principle of Shiite Islam: justice.

      The current regime will reform ultimately and a more West-friendly administration will take charge but neither will give up on our right to nuclear research. As we know there is an undiscovered world of possibilities beyond weapons of mass murder in nuclear research just like any other science. My question is: if this were a race, why should your opponent let you reach the next stop first? There are competitors in this race that enjoy ‘referee’ favouritism but as in my examples above we’ll carry on at our own pace towards prosperity and development.

      As for the general consensus inside Iran regarding the nuclear research programme, if a referendum were to be held today 99% would cast a yes vote for nuclear research. A similar number would regard the shouting and barking by Israeli politicians as a nuisance in need of a proper sort-out, knowing a dog that barks doesn’t bite.

  6. RE: “Lest the pro-Israel right worry that Obama may make Bibi pay the price for his political lap-dance with Mitt Romney–not a chance. Obama has proven time and again that he has neither the stomach, nor the political guile to navigate the shoals of the Israeli-Arab conflict and its attendant complexities. Obama will not brook the Israel lobby.” ~ R.S.

    MY COMMENT: During this upcoming four years, the Israeli-Arab conflict will be Obama’s “Chinatown”. Expect to see a heavily camouflaged policy of “benign neglect”.


    Evelyn Mulwray: “Tell me, Mr. Gittes: Does this often happen to you?”
    Jake Gittes: “Actually, this hasn’t happened to me for a long time.”
    Evelyn Mulwray: “When was the last time?”
    Jake Gittes: “Why?”
    Evelyn Mulwray: “It’s an innocent question.”
    Jake Gittes: “In Chinatown.”
    Evelyn Mulwray: “What were you doing there?”
    Jake Gittes: “Working for the District Attorney.”
    Evelyn Mulwray: “Doing what?”
    Jake Gittes: “As little as possible.”
    Evelyn Mulwray: “The District Attorney gives his men advice like that?”
    Jake Gittes: “They do in Chinatown.”

    SOURCE – SOURCE – http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071315/quotes

    P.S. “FREE DON” SIEGELMAN PETITION – http://www.change.org/petitions/president-obama-please-restore-justice-and-pardon-my-dad

    1. P.P.S. ALSO SEE: “Obama and the Israel lobby: Quo vadis?”, By Stephen M. Walt, Foreign Policy, 11/09/12

      [EXCERPTS] . . . So now that Obama’s got a second term, will he blithely ignore AIPAC et al and pursue an even-handed approach to the Middle East peace process?
      Don’t bet on it. For starters, the election didn’t show that the traditional “status quo lobby” was substantially weaker. Why? Because Obama caved to these groups a long time ago, and there was hardly any daylight between him and Romney on this issue. . .
      . . . But the election is over, and the second term beckons. Won’t Obama be tempted to secure a legacy as a peacemaker (remember that Nobel Prize?), and go back to his original vision of “two states for two peoples?” I don’t think so. Conditions in the region aren’t propitious: Israel continues to drift rightward, Netanyahu is overwhelmingly likely to be reelected, and the tumult of the Arab spring is bound to make everyone more cautious (and with good reason). The Palestinian Authority is less and less popular, and even if he wanted to, Mahmoud Abbas could never persuade his followers to accept the one-sided Bantustan arrangement that is Netanyahu’s idea of a “Palestinian state.” Obama doesn’t have to run for re-election again but Congressional Dems do, and they’ll put the same pressure on him in 2014 that they did in 2010 if he tries to force Netanyahu to abandon his vision of “greater Israel.” The bottom line: No U.S. pressure on Israel, and thus no chance for a deal.
      If you’re Barack Obama, in short, this just doesn’t look like a smart place to invest a lot of time, effort, and political capital. Plus, my hunch is that he’s going to try to secure his legacy by “nation-building” here at home, not by pursuing the elusive grail of Middle East peace. For that matter, if he decides to spend any political capital in that part of the world, it will be on Iran, not Israel-Palestine. Meanwhile, Congress will reflexively vote the aid package and sign whatever goofy letters and resolutions that AIPAC dreams up. Politicians and policy wonks will continue to pay homage to the “special relationship,” lest they come under fire from the lobby and its various watchdogs and smear artists. . .

      ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/11/09/obama_and_the_israel_lobby_quo_vadis

  7. I can’t watch this as I keep getting a message in Hebrew supposedly telling me the video is only available in Israel or that it’s unavailable in my country (UK). Could you provide an alternative link? or a direct download link please Richard?

Leave a Reply

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

Share via
Copy link