After all, we’re friends now with Iran, so such a program is unnecessary. They’re all moderates now, such as Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, who recently said: “Death to America is the first option on our table,” and Iranian Chief of Staff Hassan Firouzabadi, who said: “Iran is prepared for the decisive war against the U.S. and the Zionist regime. Iran has been making plans, conducting maneuvers, and preparing its forces for this battle for years now.”
“U.S. pushing Israel to stop assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists,” by Dan Raviv for CBS News, March 1:
WASHINGTON — As Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flies to Washington – due to arrive on Sunday (March 2), to prepare for talks with President Barack Obama at the White House on Monday – it’s clear that there are several points of friction between Israel and the United States.
The two countries are allies, but their leaders often differ on the details of key issues: Israel’s peace talks with the Palestinians, America’s nuclear talks with Iran, how to approach political turmoil in Egypt, what might be done to limit Syria’s horrible civil war, and a broader issue of whether the Middle East sees President Obama as a powerful, influential leader.
Recently, as I sought to update a book I co-wrote about the history of Israel’s intelligence agencies, sources close to them revealed that they felt pressure from the Obama Administration – more than a hint – to stop carrying out assassinations inside Iran.
Although Israel has never acknowledged it, the country’s famed espionage agency – the Mossad – ran an assassination campaign for several years aimed at Iran’s top nuclear scientists. The purpose was to slow the progress made by Iran, which Israel feels certain is aimed at developing nuclear weapons; and to deter trained and educated Iranians from joining their country’s nuclear program.
At least five Iranian scientists were murdered, most of them by bombs planted on their cars as they drove to work in the morning. Remarkably, the Israeli assassins were never caught – obviously having long-established safe houses inside Iran – although several Iranians who may have helped the Mossad were arrested and executed.
In addition to strong signals from the Obama Administration that the U.S. did not want Israel to continue the assassinations, Mossad officials concluded that the campaign had gotten too dangerous. They did not want their best combatants – Israel’s term for its most talented and experienced spies – captured and hanged.
President Obama – much to the discomfort of Israeli officials – is pursuing negotiations with Iran. The United States is one of the P5+1 nations, continuing to talk with the Iranians about rolling back some of their nuclear potential….
Aardvark says
If any Mossad agents are reading this, please ignore Obama and keep up the good work! Maniacs like the Iranian government cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons!
veggiedog says
I am sure they will. Israel knows not to listen to the incompetent.
Michele Straitiff says
While the present American administration continues it’s own drone assassinations in Afghanistan? This is duplicitous and dictatorial.
veggiedog says
Thank you, double standard. One thing i do not get, why is the US involved at all in the killing of Muslims. With a President that loves all things Muslim i know i am missing something.
Beagle says
Risk nuclear Holocaust II or upset Obama?
Tough one.
Susan Best says
The main point of disagreement between Netanyahu and Obama is that Netanyahu has a brain and Obama has a wife.
Jihad Watch says
That’s the best comment I’ve seen in this matter! 🙂
Terry says
dido
Susan Best says
Thank you, JW.
revg says
Israel isn’t doing anything, those scientists just chose a dangerous profession in a dangerous part of the world, things happen. Stop trying to scapegoat Israel.
veggiedog says
Never happen. Israel will always be the villian.
Jay Boo says
Semantic dance
The leftist media will try to deny that President Obama and his administration are ‘SELLING OUT’ Israel.
They prefer to think of it as ‘BUYING IN’ to Iran.
Richard Sherman says
Obama reveres the sociopath Muhammad who personally decapitated 900 unarmed Jews in 627. Sociopaths revere sociopaths. Case closed.
Bill C. says
Bebe will quietly tell The One to kiss his a$$, and he will keep on keepn’ on, as he should. Obama’s fortunate that it’s just a few scientists. It could be a whole lot more substantial.
Savvy Kafir says
We should be doing all we can to help the Mossad make the world a very dangerous place for Iranian nuclear scientists.
I don’t buy the idea that Obama is a closeted Muslim — but he might as well be. Aside from greenlighting drone missile strikes (which I do appreciate!) and letting the SEALs take out Osama bin Laden, he gets pretty much everything wrong when it comes to dealing with the Religion of Peace.
JamesonRocks says
I hope Israel keeps up the good work!
Bezelel says
When the problem is state sponsored terrorism trying very hard to become a nuclear threat, anyone who can sabotage their effort is trying to save the world. You would think a little gratitude is in order. For the record,Thank you whoever you are!!!
1984 says
Sure Mr. President tear up your kill list, and end your drone program…you first.
anonsos says
So, what I take away from this article is that you are pissed that Obama is pushing Israel to stop murdering Iranian nuclear scientists.. Murder is wrong.. No matter who is doing the killing.. Love your enemy!.. Isn’t that what Jesus teaches? Or didn’t you know that!?
revg says
Murder is wrong, you are correct. However, since Iran has frequently made clear that it wishes to wipe the USA and Israel off of the map, and islam is at war with all non-believers, these deaths are not really murder, but casualties of war.
anonsos says
They NEVER said they want to wipe the USA and Israel off the map…. Why are you lying for?
And, two wrongs dont make a right… Murder is wrong!.. Always… There is never an justification for it…
veggiedog says
They most certainly have. Time to start reading more real news, not leftist whitewash.
anonsos says
Ok.. Show where they said it instead of lying… And, I still love you because you are made in the image of GOD! Even after your uncalled insult.. It just proves that type of person that you are…
Again, show where they said they want to wipe the USA and Israel off the map….
Stop lying and stop trying to justify murder…
revg says
Try a google search. Also learn the definition of murder. Are you conspicuously uniformed or just stupid?
anonsos says
You made a statement.. So back it up!.. But you cant.. Because you are a liar and advocate murder.. You are a horrible person.. I pity the people who have to put up with your hatefulness… You are a racist… You hate Iranians.. ANd you hate them having a right to protect themselves .. So, you make up lies.. Just like the MSM making up the lie about what the Iranian president said at the UN!.. You are a liar and a cheat!>. But, I still love you because you are made in the image of God.. Pity you dont have a religion where you could learn some morals and learn about the sanctity of human life..
Please leave me alone you horrible disgusting people…
revg says
So you do not know how to use google? I was right in my supposition that you were stupid.
http://www.blog.standforisrael.org/issues/terrorism/iran/iranian-calls-for-israels-destruction
You notice many quotes, and source info. Makes it easy that way.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/80/iran_s_ahmadinejad_calls_for_destruction_of_us_and_israel_says_america_fomented_turmoil_in_arab_world
There, I supported my assertions. Will you shut up now?
revg says
You further prove your idiocy with every statement. Nobody is forcing you to be on this site, or to read the comments, or to reply.
revg says
Old keyboard….meant to be conspicuously uninformed.
Savvy Kafir says
Former Iranian President I’m-A-Dinner-Jacket definitely stated that Israel should be “wiped off the map”.
Bob_Oscar says
Mr Netanyahu: Shoot first…..
As *they* say, It is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6…OR …it is better to ask for forgiveness than ASK FOR PERMISSION.
Shoot first!
thomas_h says
I noticed “revg” replied, or at least seemed to reply, to my response to “veggiedog” where I claim that turning the other cheek is not meant to be understood as a mode for a Christian state to deal with an enemy.
I admit I am not able to make sense of “revg” prose while metaphors like: “Christians ran out of cheeks to turn” and information, however correct, that “Large populations of Christians inhabited the middle east,” hardly contribute to the clarity of the message and its relevance to my pointing at the widely accepted misconception of the meaning of Jesus words.
Moreover, the abrasive, totally uncalled for, tone adopted by “revg”, and the chaotic form of his comment don’t make one terribly interested in trying to decipher it.
However, if “revg” would rewrite his message by sticking to material points and arranging them in simple sentences, always having in mind the coherence of the entire text I would be interested to find out what did I miss reading his original comment.
revg says
I was not abrasive or overly metaphoric. I suggest you learn what you are talking about.
thomas_h says
I must have missed that.
” I suggest you learn what you are talking about.”
And I suggest you should learn to read before you try to write, so you may have a chance to understand what I am “talking about”. (I said “chance” – nothing certain, so don’t complain if it won’t help your personal case)
revg says
My reading comprehension is not in question.
revg says
“turn the other cheek” is applicable to insults, not to danger to life or limb. nothing more needs be said. Your implications are groundless.
http://provocativechristian.wordpress.com/2009/01/23/provocative-bible-verses-turn-the-other-cheek/
Christ also had his men to be armed, remember?
“Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”
There is a difference between humility and dying.
thomas_h says
” Your implications are groundless.
what implications?
Please read again my original comment and refer me exactly to the words that, according to you, should imply that turning the other cheek means surrender to an enemy.
revg says
Dude, are you smoking something? You said:
“In fact, the Christianity of the Crusades, Lepanto, Vienna…up to the mid 20 century, proves that “break his neck”, rather than “turn the other cheek” was the standard attitude when managing the moslem invader…
It was because the Christians once understood that “turn the other cheek” was addressed (figuratively) to a Christian person to not to seek vengeance, but justice. It was not meant as an instruction for the Christian state how to conduct its international affairs.”
And you are very wrong. Christians did indeed endure insult, even submission and enslavement, before having enough. They tried to go along to get along, until it was killing them. It wasn’t until life and limb were imperiled that they learned to fight for their existence.
“Break the neck” was NOT the de facto response. If it were, they would have been chasing the muslims back to mecca and medina, not fighting them off in Europe.
thomas_h says
A poster “revg” replied, or at least seems to try to reply, to my response to “veggiedog” where I claim that turning the other cheek is not meant to be understood as a mode for a Christian state to deal with an enemy.
I admit I am not able to make sense of “revg” prose. The metaphors like: “Christians ran out of cheeks to turn” and information, however correct, that “Large populations of Christians inhabited the middle east,” hardly contribute to the clarity of the message, especially its relevance to my pointing at the widely accepted misconception of the meaning of Jesus words.
Moreover, the abrasive, totally uncalled for, tone adopted by “revg”, and the chaotic form of his comment doesn’t make one terribly interested in trying to decipher it.
However, if “revg” would rewrite his message by sticking to essential points, arranging them in simple sentences, always having in mind the coherence of the whole text, I would be interested in finding out what exactly did I miss in his original post.
thomas_h says
@revg:
I, wrote “I would be interested in finding out what exactly did I miss in his original post.”
Well, after reading your entry of March 4, 2014 at 11:02, which really is but a straw man, or red herring, or both I am not sure I want to dedicate more time finding out what you think you had to say.
I will not comment on your bizarre “psychological” interpretation of the causes behind the collapse of Byzantium, first in minor Asia then Europe, the defeat of the Crusaders Kingdom, the moslem conquest of Spain etc, all of it according to you, attributable to Christian misinterpretation of the “turn the other cheek” words of Jesus.
So once again, please refer me exactly to my words that, according to you, should imply that when Jesus said “turn the other cheek”, he meant it to be a guiding principle for a Christian state in dealing with its enemy.
If you can’t – say so or say nothing. But if you try again to answer by not answering I shall ignore you.
revg says
The only straw arguments are being exerted by you Thomas. Your incoherence is astounding. Please do ignore me. Go play with Mazos, you deserve each other.
voegelinian says
Notice the modus operandi of “WatchDawg” — he posts single retorts to various other commenters, then when they respond, he vanishes.
marclouis says
a well known method to disrupt discussion http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=troll
he’s not very good at it though.
revg says
There is nothing bizarre in any of my words, only in your own. It is you who claims strange interpretations, and erringly claim “break the neck” as some Christian screed toward muslims in the past.
No red herrings or straw men either. If you are unable to comprehend simple written script, perhaps “reading is fundamental” or “hooked on phonics” may be in order for you.
dumbledoresarmy says
Re deadly Iranian intentions toward the US and Israel, and what drives those intentions.
Something that I came across in 2009, kept a copy of, and have been reposting ever since.
It was a comment posted on a blog by one Caroline Overington, of the “Australian” newspaper, who had been excoriating an antisemitic article that had appeared in another paper.
The commenter was an Australian, from the city of Brisbane, who had witnessed an anti-Israel Muslim march in that city, in January, at the time when Israel was giving jihad fortress Gaza a richly-deserved drubbing.
Unfortunately, I can’t give a link: the Australian is not very good at archiving things, it seems. But here’s the comment in its entirety.
Jonathan Whybird
Mon 19 Jan 09 (05:24pm)
“Excellent article Carolyn. I note the earlier poster who said that he/she has sent the article in question to the Anti-Discrimination Commission. I think The Australian should do this itself and report on the outcome – it would be very very interesting.
“Marcus (the expert on everything) {= another commenter in the talkback – dda} I cannot agree with your view that most of the Palestinians [sic: – dda] are peaceful people.
“On Saturday [17th Jan 2009] in Brisbane there was another demonstration in favour of Palestine at which anybody who bothered to go (I live in the city and they marched in my street so I had a front row ground level seat as my fiance and I had come back from a run) would have heard Muslim Australians chanting “kill the jews”.
“**I even spoke to one protestor who confirmed he was Muslim and from Iran who said there would only be peace when Israel and the rest of the west was destroyed.** {my emphasis – dda}.
“Now this man was supported by many of his fellow protestors who screamed with him, but for three men in the crowd who shook their heads and at that point left the protest (and apologised to us for the comments of the others).
“** When I asked the man why he hated the west he said “because you reject the prophet”.** {my emphasis – dda}
“Please explain to me how this sort of behaviour should be tolerated? Also why is it that two weekends in a row have seen protests in their thousands against Israel – but the muslim community was silent over september 11, bali and London?”
To repeat:
“I even spoke to one protestor who confirmed he was Muslim and from Iran who said there would only be peace when Israel and the rest of the west was destroyed…
“When I asked the man why he hated the west he said “because you reject the prophet”.”
That’s all it takes.
*All* it takes, to qualify as a target of would-be annihilatory Jihad, is this: to say NO to mohammed the Mad, to refuse to recognise as ‘prophet’ a long-dead arab warlord, rapist and slave-trader, to refuse to submit to the Ummah or Mohammedan Mob, the empire of Islam.