MOSSAD/CIA ; There is no Iranian bomb program

The funniest thing was Powell's speech to the UN General Assembly in which he presented to the world all those satellite images (sorry, cartoons) purporting to be WMDs...Remember that?

 

Yep,just a whole pack of lies. killed his credibility forever.

 

We will continue to have wars in the ME so long as certain right wing elites make a huge profit out of it.

 

Somewhere Borat said that the extent of the operation would be limited to the bombing of suspected nuclear sites. We know this isn't true. Through proxies both the CIA & Mossad have operatives on the ground. Widely reported is that the Israelis are working with the MEK, a terrorist org which goes by a number of different names. I thought the extent of this relationship was to propagate a disinformation campaign. While that's certainly been part of it, we see here that's not all of it.

So Israel has provided this terrorist organization all the logistical support it requires to roam around Iran and murder nuclear scientists! Where is the evidence justifying these assassinations, what are cases against these individuals? Iran is such a major threat, powerless to stop it! How is this tiny state (Israel) able to do this with complete impunity, nary a peep from the UN or international community? Where's the superpower?

No less than appalling! Israel is using a proxy, the MEK to murder scientists and this terrorist org is lobbying "political heavyweights" in the U.S. in an attempt to get itself recognized as legitimate opposition to Iran's ruling clerics. Think of it, highly respected former political & military figures are paid off to speak on behave of a terrorist org and are even coached on what to say! Where is the "age of information" media? Yeah, AWOL yet again! When do we begin to consider whether our own government is the enemy? When do we realize this empire is corrupted to its very core?

 

A tiny number of special forces on the ground does not an invasion make. As I said, if Iran is attacked they will be bombed, not invaded.

Would you please first provide us with a real evidence that Israel is behind these assassinations. Personally I am not a big fan of these kinds of requests but frankly people making baseless accusations without even a shred of evidence (hearsay is no evidence, you know) while demanding some kind of iron-clad proof from others strike me as intellectually dishonest.

 

Borat wrote: "Would you please first provide us with real evidence that Israel is behind these assassinations. Personally I am not a big fan of these kinds of requests but frankly people making baseless accusations without even a shred of evidence..."

Seems like this would be a new understanding for you, that the empire and in this case, a client state is directly supporting acts of terror, murder! The people making the baseless accusations are, at the very least, two senior U.S. officials. Any idea why they'd lie? As for the murders, can you place motive elsewhere? I have a Jewish source, but it cites the same NBC report I've already posted. Any idea why this source would pick up and run such slanderous hearsay?

The Wall Street Journal has run a separate report. Clearly, this is widely accepted as fact within the Intelligence community.

This TIME article pertains to the fourth victim:

Any idea why all these news sources would be charging Israel if it weren't true? Any idea why an Israeli official would be relishing the death of an Iranian scientist? Below is a picture of the fourth man they murdered.



Yes, that small child is his son.

 

So no evidence, whatsoever, as expected. A few newspapers reporting (not charging) speculations of anonymous sources and predominant (not necessarily correct) views don't even begin to constitute proof. Personally I also think Israel was behind it, but you demanded "evidence" yet you have provided none.

That said the same articles do indicate that the guy was working on Iran's illegal clandestine nuclear weapons program which purpose was to wipe Israel off the map. He knew or should have known what he was getting into when he accepted the job. Cry me a river.

 

Reported for trolling.

 

What insult?

 

Here's some information for you; pretty much everything reported here is sourced from newspapers and the media. That's why it's called the 'Latest World News' forum. (The clue is in the name)

 

Absolutely snake, they being responsible media organizations, reported the opinions of Iranian government advsiors and the opinion of anonymous american sources who said 'they believe Israel has played a central role...' . The key word is 'believe'. Given that Israel is the default susupect their beliefs are quite undestandable. I was asking for solid facts though, not opinions. I got none.

You understand the concepts of fact and evidence, right? You know that a newspaper report expressing someone's opinion does not qualify as either, don't you?

PS media reports indicate that the dude was Iranian nuclear weapons scientist and that Iran threatens to wipe Israel off the map. As I said before, good riddance whoever did it, cry me a river.

 

And yet, because a newspaper reports that, in the opinion of the IAEA, they 'believe' Iran is building a nuclear weapon, you would jump on that as incontrovertible proof of guilt...you understand the concepts of facts and evidence, right?

 

Borat stated in separate posts: "A few newspapers reporting (not charging) speculations of anonymous sources and predominant (not necessarily correct) views don't even begin to constitute proof. ... Absolutely snake, they being responsible media organizations, reported the opinions of Iranian government advisors and the opinion of anonymous American sources who said 'they believe Israel has played a central role...' . The key word is 'believe'. Given that Israel is the default suspect their beliefs are quite understandable."

It doesn't appear you thought this through. You're convinced enough by the reported facts, then deny. That's a hard position for anyone to substantiate and you failed to do it. No facts? That it is widely deemed throughout the intelligence community that Israel is the culprit is indeed a fact! You then assume they possess no greater understanding of the matter than yourself. Then you say, to hell with the life of that young scientist, though you possess only a vague understanding of his role. You completely misrepresented the content of the sourced information. A few newspapers reporting? Pretty sloppy for someone demanding nothing short of a prosecutable case in a court of law to think different. It can then be implied only a few unnamed officials believe... which is false. Two senior U.S. officials "confirmed as accurate" that Israel is using a proxy, a terrorist org, to murder scientists! "Many intelligence officials and diplomats in Washington say they believe Israel has played a central role..." Both the Jewish source and TIME are definitive in their verbiage, Israel is the culprit! What is reported as fact is clear, which you've neither refuted nor proven vagary.

 

Who is demanding that? I am asking for a shred of evidence - a picture, a fingerprint, a name, a testimony. The Dubai assassination of a Hamas terrorist had all of the above and no one is disputing the evidence. I hate to break it to you but you have nothing - zilch, zero, zip. Needless to say the assassination has all the hallmarks of the Mossad but there is a huge difference between the intelligence community believing and knowing that Israel was behind it.

That said Iran made their intentions to wipe Israel off the map abundantly clear and Israel has every right to consider Iranian scientists working on nuclear weapons to achieve this goal enemy combatants and legitimate targets. You don't like it - who cares, really? If someone was threatening to wipe Lovell, Maine off the map your opinion would differ drastically from your cavalier indifference. The dude should have chosen a peaceful career, not illegal clandestine nuclear weapons program...then according to his wife he was a committed Israel-hater.

 

You've already demonstrated that you refuse to believe any ' evidence ' which doesn't suit your agenda. For example, you had a ton of it dropped on your claim that the occupation of Palestine was ' a legal occupation '- which of course the ton of evidence disproved. The result ? You still claim that it isn't against the law.



And here you are - again- bleating about ' evidence '

 

You provided zero evidence that the occupation is illegal, you were repeatedly quoting unrelated laws that according to the International Committee for the Red Cross (not me) don't regulate the legality of occupations and failed to provide any law stating that 'occupations are illegal' or that 'the Israeli occupation are illegal'. You failed to provide a single legally binding document demanding immediate end of the occupation, you ignored legally biding UNSC resolution 242 making it de-jure fully legal until a peace treaty is negotiated between the parties.

In this case there is zero evidence that Israel is behind the assassination. A few media reports based on anonymous sources stating that they believe (not know for a fact but just believe) Israel was behind it is no evidence by any stretch of imagination.

Ironically as snake indicated earlier in this thread the same people actually refuse to believe that Iran threatened Israel with annihilation and is working on a nuclear weapons program, despite a huge number of credible media reports based on credible (not anonymous) sources, supported by translations, photographs, intelligence information, investigator testimonies and reports.

 

All flap and crap. Articles 47 and 49 of the Geneva Conventions , in themselves, prohibit the settlement or annexation of territory and the transfer of populations. As I said, you flatly refuse to accept INCONTROVERTIBLE evidence whilst slyly demanding more of it. Conclusion ? Trolling and flamebait.
The occupation of Palestine is illegal under international law, though trolls may deny it.

 

As I said in that thread the best you could come up with was a claim that some aspect of the occupation might be questionable. The legality of any particular occupation is regulated by the UN Charter and the law known as jus ad bellum according to the ICRC (the Committee for the Red Cross), not by the Geneva Convention. Besides legally binding UNSC 242 resolution demands the end of the occupation in exchange for peace and recognition, not immediately and unconditionally as it would have if the occupation was illegal. And spare us your spin, try to stick to the letter of applicable law.

To paraphrase the definition of insanity - trying the same failed legal argument over an over again and expecting a different result

 

Jus ad bellum is archaic in modern law. That's already been demonstrated to you as well. Not only that but even mentioning it exposes your desperate ( yet futile ) effort to muddy the waters with regard to the illegal occupation of Palestine.

 

Again you clearly demonstrate that you believe what you want to believe. How do you know what is credible and what isn't? A newspaper reports a source as claiming that Iran has been, or is engaged in, building nuclear weapons, but that source itself (IAEA) has no incontrovertible proof or it would not be using language such as 'may be', 'possibly' or 'we believe'.
You then go on to say that because Iran has made aggressive noises in the past regarding Israel, then that therefore provides you with further evidence of its aggressive intent.

Sorry, but unless and until the IAEA states categorically that they know Iran is engaged in building a nuclear weapon, and they can demonstrate and substantiate their claim, then all you have is hearsay, allegations and suspicion, none of which are any more credible than what we heard leading up to the invasion of Iraq-and we know what happened next, don't we Borat?

http://www.salon.com/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/

 

Actually I agree with you and I never argued against this kind of reasoning. The IAEA declared based on available evidence (that they were charged with gathering in the first place) that they have serious concerns that Iran may be working on illegal nuclear weapons program and is trying to hide it from the IAEA.

As far as Iran 'noises' are concerned - they are not noises, they are direct threats to wipe Israel off the map. Please see my signature for more info, if Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov believes the threats were made, why don't you?

 

Why don't I believe Lavrov? He's a politician, that's why.

 

He is a pro-Iran politician, him therefore condemning Iran is quite credible. Do you think he is lying when he is publicly confirming that Iran did threaten Israel?

 

Politicians routinely lie, obfuscate, dissemble and do whatever they feel is necessary to keep their careers intact. They all have their individual agendas and I trust none of them-especially Russian politicians.

 

Borat wrote: "I am asking for a shred of evidence - a picture, a fingerprint, a name, a testimony. ... That said Iran made their intentions to wipe Israel off the map abundantly clear and Israel has every right to consider Iranian scientists working on nuclear weapons to achieve this goal enemy combatants and legitimate targets. ... there is zero evidence that Israel is behind the assassination. A few media reports based on anonymous sources stating that they believe (not know for a fact but just believe) Israel was behind it is no evidence by any stretch of imagination."

I do welcome my argument being scrutinized, but I agree with the others, you're not consistent with your demand for proof regarding any given issue. Since we're all drifting a bit, I'll note that in the prior thread you implied that the IAEA is an institution immune to political influence, which was easily refuted. Simply, it's naive to express such faith in their findings. Here you say you need only a shred of evidence, yet when you're not rejecting its existence, you're misrepresenting it! For the second time, you are lying when you say there are just a few reports citing unnamed sources who suspect Israel is behind the assassinations. Again, two senior U.S. officials CONFIRMED the accuracy of Israel's state sponsorship of the assassinations. You cheaply focus on the wording from the WSJ article. I cited that article as evidence of a broad consensus within the intelligence community.

Again, it is WIDELY KNOWN! It's important to realize that the whole purpose of a state utilizing a proxy is to isolate itself of direct involvement. Besides the confirmation from U.S. officials, you're also rejecting the investigation(s) of the high ranking... Iranian General was it? Reportedly, those investigations included statements from detained suspects linking MEK involvement. This is key because for years (since the late '90s) it has been widely reported that Mossad has worked closely with this terrorist org to attack Iranian targets. Indeed, there is the "sophistication" of the attacks, which reflects the support of an intelligence agency. Then of course there's a precedence, the nature of the MEK. They have a history of conducting attacks that kill civilians as well as government officials. Another assumption you make is that each of these scientists were deeply involved in Iran's nuclear weapons program, which is disputed by the NBC News report.

You ask for but a shred, yet you reject all that is established! As for Iranian intimidations, like this latest threat to thwart tanker traffic in the strait of Hormuz, they're hollow! Hollow threats do not warrant Israel's repeated and violent aggression upon Iran. I'm only a novice on such matters, but I would think Israel's violation of Iran's sovereignty is a blatant breach of international law.