Israels Nuclear Bomb and Irans Non Bomb

by pat c Tue Aug 28, 2012 21:25

Yes! The Mossad muppets are using real muppets to prepare for their war on Iran.

Military Muppet: TV character urges Israelis to prepare for strike on Iran
http://rt.com/news/israel-iran-military-nuclear-744/
Published: 28 August, 2012, 20:05

A photo shows the cover of a new, emergency pamphlet being distributed nationwide by Israeli Army's Home Front Command August 27, 2012 (Reuters/Israeli Defence Force)

TAGS: Conflict, Military, Nuclear, Politics, Iran, Netanyahu, Israel, War
A new emergency pamphlet in Israel instructs residents to prepare for the worst if Tel Aviv conducts a military strike on Iran. But the face on the brochure isn’t the country’s President or Prime Minister – it’s a Muppet.

The cover of the 15-page leaflet pictures a smiling Moishe Oofnik, the Israeli Muppet version of Oscar the Grouch. He’s the resident pessimist on Rechov Sumsum, Israel’s co-production of the long-running American children’s program ‘Sesame Street.’

Muppets on the popular show are known for teaching children numbers and the alphabet, but Moishe Oofnik has taken on a different job with this pamphlet – instructing Israelis how to react if their nation’s government launches a war against Iran.

The booklet, issued by the Israeli military, says that once air raid sirens sound, residents of the Jewish state would have between 30 seconds and three minutes to find cover before rockets hit their area. The brochure, which is being distributed across the country, also teaches Israelis how to prepare a safe room or shelter for emergency situations.

The furry Muppet puts a happy face on the warnings, though the issue is anything but lighthearted: Israeli ministers have estimated that up to 500 civilians could die in the conflict that would follow a strike on Iran.

The pamphlet comes in the wake of recent remarks by Israeli officials suggesting that Tel Aviv may soon launch a unilateral attack on Tehran’s nuclear program. Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak reportedly favor a strike on Iran. Public statements and anonymous quotes to Israeli media in the past week have raised speculation that Israel may soon attack Iran.

The bellicose rhetoric comes over Israeli and Western allegations that Iran’s nuclear program is a cover for the development of atomic weapons, while Tehran claims the facilities are for civilian purposes.

Less than two weeks ago, Netanyahu announced that negotiations with Iran had “failed,” and claimed that Israel will attack Iran in the near future, with or without US consent.

The Israeli Defense Minister also supports military action against Iran: "Barak is advocating for action and the defense establishment is investing billions to prepare for an Israeli military operation," an Israeli official told Ynet News.

But the ambition to set back Iran’s nuclear program could come at a high cost to Israel’s citizens, causing many Israelis to protest a potential attack. The country’s president also recently spoke out against a unilateral strike against Iran.

"It's clear to us that we can't do it alone. We can only delay [Iran's progress]. Thus it's clear to us that we need to go together with America," Shimon Peres told Israel’s Channel Two television.

Iran has promised to retaliate against in Israeli attack in what could lead to a wider regional war among several different forces. Tel Aviv fears that Tehran could induce its Hezbollah guerrilla allies in Lebanon and Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip to launch rocket strikes against Israel if Iran were attacked.

As the Israeli government prepares for the worst, it is urging residents to have a “family talk” about preparing for a national emergency. But it’s not just pamphlets that indicate that an attack may be imminent – Israel increased the distribution of gas masks and other protective gear to the public several weeks ago.

"There are always innovations the public needs to know about, it doesn't mean anything is going to happen today, tomorrow or the next day," an Israeli military source told Reuters.

by pat c Wed Aug 29, 2012 12:53

Wow! The US see Wow as a WMD!

Blizzard cuts off Iranian access to World of Warcraft
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19399375

Millions still regularly play venerable online game World of Warcraft

Related Stories

US probes power plant 'backdoor'
EA Star Wars game players slump
Millions hit in Blizzard attack

US trade sanctions have led game maker Blizzard to cut off access to World of Warcraft (Wow) in Iran.

Blizzard posted a statement to its player-forum site after hundreds of Iranian players said they had lost access to the game.

Access was lost recently, it said, because it had "tightened up its procedures" to comply with sanctions.

This also meant, said Blizzard, that it could not give refunds to players or transfer their accounts.

Broader block

The problem for Iranians came to light late last week as hundreds of players in the country posted messages to Blizzard's European Battle.net forums complaining they could no longer access the game.

Many of those posting messages said they could not connect directly to World of Warcraft but could get access when they used a proxy server outside Iran.

The outpouring of complaints led Blizzard to post a statement explaining what had happened.

The statement said US economic sanctions and trade restrictions meant it could not do business with people living in certain nations. One of which was Iran.

"This week, Blizzard tightened up its procedures to ensure compliance with these laws, and players connecting from the affected nations are restricted from access to Blizzard games and services," read the statement.

Unfortunately, said Blizzard, the same sanctions meant it could not give refunds to players in Iran or help them move their account elsewhere.

"We apologise for any inconvenience this causes and will happily lift these restrictions as soon as US law allows," it added..

by Contrarian Fri Aug 31, 2012 13:10

...cos the Iranians would actually WELCOME an attack by Israel.

So says Amir Ali Hajizadeh and he would know being commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps aerospace force. The charming Mr. Hajizadeh is reported in the Tehran Times as saying 'Iran “welcomes” such threats of military attack because it will give a “pretext” to put an end to the life of this regime “for ever and get the humanity rid of this cancerous tumor”.' Lest you fear that the Tehran Times is some shadowy CIA front, it proclaims itself to be "a loud voice of the Islamic Revolution and the loudspeaker of the oppressed people of the world"having been founded by Ayatollah Seyyed Mohammad Beheshti who realised that "After the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran in 1979, there was a need for an international media outlet to export the ideas of the revolution"

So, if Hajizadeh isn't worried, and presumably the regime he represents isn't worried, why all the worry here? I mean, as a committed anti-Zionist, which he certainly appears to be, he couldn't be lying and his words must undoubtedly be true.

Cos it's only nasty ol zionists who engage in lies and propaganda, right?

by pat c Fri Aug 31, 2012 21:10

Full text at link.

The highest ranking officer in the United States military has announced that he is against American participation in any Israeli-led attack on Iran, even as pressure to destroy the Islamic Republic’s rumored nuclear program remain unrelieved.

Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters in London on Thursday that an Israeli attack would “clearly delay but probably not destroy Iran’s nuclear program,” adding that he was against US cooperation in a unilateral assault.

“I don't want to be complicit if they [Israel] choose to do it,” Dempsey told reporters.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been adamant that the nation’s nuclear facilities exist solely for peaceful purposes and that the country is not in the market for procuring nuclear warheads, a sentiment echoed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who earlier this week told heads of state, "Our motto is nuclear energy for all and nuclear weapons for none."
.

by Contrarian Fri Aug 31, 2012 22:03

Incredible! So Iran wants Israel to strike their nuclear facilities while the United States doesn't want them to do so! (if we are to believe their respective military top brass.)

I guess that puts the USA on the side of peace and Iran on the side of war, eh?

by pat c Fri Aug 31, 2012 22:50

Full text at link.

Iran has dismissed as “politically motivated” a recent IAEA report accusing it of ramping up uranium enrichment. The director of the University of Tehran's Institute for North American and European Studies told RT the report’s timing is no surprise.

Iranian lawmakers were quick to reject the highly critical International Atomic Energy Agency report – released Thursday – which was published just as Tehran was hosting representatives from some 120 nations for the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit. Iranian lawmaker Kazem Jalali said the report was intended to “overshadow the meeting in Tehran."

“It seems that this report is a scenario for psychological warfare, because Iran was able to show its authority and international position at the NAM summit,” Jalali, a member of Iranian Parliament's national security and foreign affairs committee, added.

With Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei insisting before the NAM summit on Thursday that acquiring nuclear weapons was a “big and unforgivable sin,” Professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi, who heads the University of Tehran's Institute for North American and European Studies, said the report is just another Western ploy to undermine Iran internationally as the drive to isolate the Islamic Republic economically and politically falters.

RT: So, Tehran believes the report is just another element of psychological warfare waged against Iran. What do you make of the timing?

Seyed Mohammad Marandi: The timing [of the IAEA report] is highly suspicious because the non-aligned movement conference in Tehran has been highly successful. Instead of Iran being isolated, the United States has become isolated, since it opposed senior figures going to Tehran and many major world leaders have come to the country.

In addition, the president of Egypt came to Iran, which is a political earthquake. So the Iranians are saying that this report came at a sensitive time to distract attention away from this Iranian success. And also, the report is misleading in many ways.

by feudal castrato Sat Sep 01, 2012 00:06

Contrarian

This is all just defensive sabre rattling.

However clearly you favour sabre rattling and sanctions when it's some big nuclear armed bully like US or Israel rattling it's sabre and imposing damaging women and child hurting sanctions on non nuclear armed Iran and threatening to steal their lunch money.

But as soon as they rattle their own sabre back its all squeals and indignation from zionists and imperialists. What utter double standards!.

The fact is the Iranian statement amounts to "Go on, Attack us and you'll regret it"

From that it is clear who is the aggressor and who is the victim. Israel / US are the aggressors here. Iran will not start a fight. However Iran is a proud nation and will go down fighting if attacked.

The US only care about Israel not messing up the election. Thats why they are giving this coded warning to Israel. Once the election is over, they'll probably be happy to join in. They are certainly happy to continue the crippling sanctions, leading to ordinary sick people in Iran having no access to important medicines etc.

Recently after the earthquakes, the US cynically offered aid to Iran, all the while continuing to ramp up their sanctions, which included vital medical supplies. That's the kind of cruel cynicism we are dealing with.

by Contrarian Sat Sep 01, 2012 01:36

...Iran will not start a fight. It doesn't need to. It gets its terrorist proxies Hamas and Hezbollocks to do that. May I presume your concern for "women and child hurting" does not extend to the rockets supplied by Iran for targeting of Israeli civilians. They hurt women and children too.

BTW sanctions are perfectly allowable under international law. Oh and don't you think that if Iran is capable of nuclear technology, it might just be able to produce its own "vital medical supplies" Which are not even covered by the sanctions anyway.

Nor do I see what was cynical about the offer of aid. It was a genuine offer, Iran said it didn't need it. Had it been accepted by the Ayatollocracy, it wouild have been delivered. And somehow you think this makes America bad?

by feudal castrato Sat Sep 01, 2012 02:01

Because it's evident from your own comment what a zioracist hypocrite you really are contrarian.

Let your own comment stand as the best indictment of your rather disgusting views.

by Contrarian Sat Sep 01, 2012 02:15

...that your descent into personal abuse indicates that you have run out of arguments.

Or are you simply retreating to the tired old ground of the circular argument logical fallacy, viz, Your views indicate you are a zionist; zionists are disgusting hypocrites and racists, that "proves" you are wrong, therefore I do not have to bother my hole to address your arguments and I may ignore the valid points you make. Neat. But unconvincing and intellectually hollow.

by feudal castrato Sat Sep 01, 2012 02:35

"..your descent into personal abuse indicates that you have run out of arguments. "

No. Just that I can't hope to offer an argument that places your position in a worse light than your own comments on this site

by Felix Quigley - 4international Sat Sep 01, 2012 14:42

"not giving up, just acknowledging your superior zionist ability to hang yourself"

you write above

In order to go forward you must advance your meaning og the adjective "zionist" and the only possible way is in historical terms. can you?

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sat Sep 01, 2012 15:30

I presume you will be happy enough with the Oxford reference English definition.

Zionism: n. a movement for the establishment of a Jewish nation in Palestine, an area claimed as the biblical territory of the Jews. The Zionist movement was established as a political organisation in 1897 under the leadership of the writer Theodor Hertzl, and later led by Chaim Weizman. Under Weizmann the movement's aims were achieved with the foundation of the state of Israel in 1948, but Zionism remains an important factor in the politics of Israel and the Middle east. The movement is now concerned with the development and protection of Israel as a Jewish state and the encouragement of immigration. Zionist n. & adj.

Working off that, and given that Hertzl was a Hungarian, and Weizmann a Russian chemist whose formula for synthetic acetone to plasticise cordite was traded to the imperial British in return for the Balfour Declaration, and that the Palestinians have been systematically ethnic cleansed out of their homeland to enable this European enterprise to monopolise the oil of the region, and that it is all posited on the folkloric claims of one semitic tribe of ancient Palestine against all others(by Europeans working in parallel with the same academic uber-nationalist theoreticians who birthed Nazism from their speculative mirages)...how can you support such anachronistic idiocy in the 21st century...particularly in light of the consequences of such atavistic pseudo-scientific genetic theories for European Jewery in the last century?

And given that that 'development' now includes increasingly belligerent nuclear hostility to its neighbours(and beyond), and continues to encroach and expand with no defined limits or sign of compromise...is it not time to pragmatically review the disaster so far??

Before she goes mushroom shaped?

by Felix Quigley - 4 Sat Sep 01, 2012 16:44

Working off that, and given that Hertzl was a Hungarian, and Weizmann a Russian chemist

They were Jews!

whose formula for synthetic acetone to plasticise cordite was traded to the imperial British in return for the Balfour Declaration,

Source for this dubious and slanderous claim?

and that the Palestinians have been systematically ethnic cleansed out of their homeland

Lie!

to enable this European enterprise to monopolise the oil of the region

It was NOT a European enterprise it was a Jewish enterprise

and that it is all posited on the folkloric claims of one semitic tribe of ancient Palestine against all others(by Europeans working in parallel with the same academic uber-nationalist theoreticians who birthed Nazism from their speculative mirages)...

No it was the Arab Palestinians who were the Nazis...see info on Hajj Amin el Husseini

how can you support such anachronistic idiocy in the 21st century...particularly in light of the consequences of such atavistic pseudo-scientific genetic theories for European Jewery in the last century?

Incomprehensible gibberish!

And given that that 'development' now includes increasingly belligerent nuclear hostility to its neighbours(and beyond), and continues to encroach and expand with no defined limits or sign of compromise...is it not time to pragmatically review the disaster so far??

"Expand"? Prove this in maps from san Remo treaty 1922!

by opus diablos - the regressive hypocrite party Sat Sep 01, 2012 18:41

..do calm yourself...and get a sense of proportion.

Yes, i am indeed concerned about '..an Israeli attack..'. And about nuclear weaponry and stockpiles generally. I have, as they say, public 'form' on the issue.

But, unlike yourself, I don't think any particular tribe or sect has a monopoly of either wisdom or viciousness. I deplore the idiocy of these implements of mass instantaneous incineration indiscriminately.

I am attempting to apply a little human rationality to the issue.
My 'dubious and slanderous claim' is from Chambers Biographical Dictionary 6th edition(1997); hardly a tabloid sensationalist source of antisemitic propaganda..unless your paranoia has gone metastatic altogether.
It is also well documented in the standard histories of the period and the issue...it is not considered exceptional news among the historically semi-literate. It is also well documented, by Jewish writers among others, that the wealthy upper echelons of the Zionist movement treated with the Nazis to ransom their 'chosen of the chosen', and betrayed the great mass of impoverished Jewery in a most cynical manner. Just as Britain and the US conspired to exclude the great unwashed tide of refugees and funnel them into their colonial project in Palestine after the war.
Your idealisation of your elevated cause is betraying you. A not uncommon outcome when balance and rationality are abandoned.

Yes there were Arabs who swung towards Nazism, as there were conservatives across Europe and the US who made common cause in their fears of any semblance of social democracy( a set of ideas once held by many Zionists themselves). But to smear all Arabs is ridiculous and hysterical. Just as it would be to do the same to the Irish because they had sympathisers here too...much of both were driven by recognition of the perfidious nature of Albion's imperial designs.

For the 'incomprehensible gibberish' I will refer you to the Jewish historian Shlomo Sand's 'The Invention of the Jewish People'(Verso, 2009).
Its originally written in Hebrew if you prefer that version...but you'll have to source that yourself if you don't trust the translation.

I'm afraid your ideological baggage is retarding your historical homework.

You asked for a definition. I hoped you might appreciate my effort to be of service in clarifying the issue. Or don't you accept the Oxford lexical credentials either?

Your intemperate reaction hardly serves either Israel or the Jewish people. never mind those of who wish to see these infernal(literally)instruments dismantled and decommissioned and attempted assembly of them outlawed.

Iran, by the way, is signatory to non-proliferation treaties. Guess who isn't. Look it up for yourself, you'd hardly believe me.