Posted in war | 1 Comment »
From a Newsweek interview with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert:
What about Iran? You told me over a year ago that tolerating a nuclear weapon was not possible.
Yes, Israel will not tolerate a nuclear weapon in the hands of people who say openly, explicitly and publicly that they want to wipe Israel off the map. Why should we?
If you’re not prepared to live with it, is Israel capable [of striking Iran’s nuclear facilities]?
I don’t want to go into this issue every time I’m asked, ‘Do you have plans?’ The United States is the leader of the international effort to stop the Iranians from becoming nuclear. The European countries, the Russians, the Chinese, the Japanese—all the most powerful nations of the world are joined together in an effort to stop the nuclearization of Iran. I hope they will be successful.
But didn’t Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad just say that he has added 6,000 more centrifuges to his program . . . got them up and running?
We have to listen to him, but that doesn’t mean that we have to believe everything he says.
It’s widely believed in the U.S. that after the latest National Intelligence Estimate [on Iran, which concluded with ‘high confidence’ that Iran had shelved its nuclear weapons program in 2003], the U.S. will not act.
We have a different opinion about [the Iranian nuclear program] from the NIE, and we haven’t changed our attitude. The Israeli information is available for our friends to examine and to come to other conclusions.
You mean that you think [Iran’s nuclear program] is closer to being usable?
The main point of the NIE, the estimate, was that there is no evidence that the Iranians restarted their [covert] military program since it was closed in 2003. . . . Based on the information we have, the military program continues and has never been stopped. If this program continues, at some point they will be in possession of a nuclear weapon.
So let’s see. Amid all the prevarication and “keep all options on the table” bluster here, the key statement is: “Israel will not tolerate a nuclear weapon in the hands of people who say openly, explicitly and publicly that they want to wipe Israel off the map. Why should we?”
Pretty rich, coming from a power that’s estimated to be in possession of between 75 and 200 apocalypse weapons of its own. Pretty rich, coming from a state that pioneered the practice of collective punishment in the form of bulldozing the homes of suicide bombers, and even managed to kill a 23-year-old woman, Rachel Corrie, acting as a human shield. Pretty rich, from one of the most heavily militarized states in the world, and one which still practices the slavery of conscription. Pretty rich, coming from a country that imprisons some 1.4 million people in that cage known as the Gaza Strip. Pretty rich, coming from a state known for massive overkill retaliation against attacks by those it has oppressed for more than half a century, which has been reported to torture detainees, indiscriminately kill civilians in war zones, carry out assassinations, and which Amnesty International claims is guilty of war crimes.
I guess since Israel doesn’t say that it wants to do horrible things, it gets a pass. It just does goes off and does them, and somehow that’s okay. But let them mad dog Persians get a hold of an a-bomb and, boy, there’s gonna be hell to pay. I guess a nuclear-armed Israel is somehow more acceptable than a nuclear armed Iran would be, well, since the Israelis are so much more responsible in their wielding of the tools of death and oppression.
Of course, we’re not allowed to say this. Surely we all know by now that condemnation of the criminal State of Israel is exactly equivalent to condemnation of all Jewish people everywhere, and that we might as well stop hiding our swastika tattoos and just admit that we’re Nazis. Indeed, propaganda takes many forms.