YouTube Comment: "This is called 'Iran Facts' but leaves one of the most important one out. And that is the US and the UK staged a coup in Iran because it was going to nationalise the oil and then a more hard line leader came in after the revolution. This is also a propaganda video by AIPAC, the warmongering Israeli lobby that gets the US to go to war on their behalf."

>> ^criticalthud:

ummm, from a propaganda standpoint, there are some corollaries for sure.
But, let's look at some geopolitics.
(1) In a world of diminishing resources, Iran is sitting on some of the largest oil reserves.
(2) Israel, on the other hand, is sitting on a piece of worthless desert called the holy land and depends on foreign oil imports and American Aid. That American aid is also highly dependent on the US continuing to essentially control the oil trade. Oil is traded in dollars, and it is that massive circulation that helps keep the American dollar afloat (each dollar is HIGHLY leveraged (ie: debt)).
(3) So who wants what? Religious crazies aside, from a geo-political standpoint Israel has very little to offer Iran, but control or influence over Iran's oil reserves has quite a bit to offer Israel.
Now...why would Iran want to have a nuclear energy program when it has vast oil reserves?
-- just like Venezuela, who is limiting the amount they produce, if they can use less of their oil now, in a world of diminishing energy resources, it means that in the future they wield more and more geo-political power. And energy is wealth. The more they control their own resources, the more they can control price points of resources, which is a large part of how the world powers have become world powers.


(1) True, but nevertheless it is only ~11% of the world's proven oil reserves:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves

(2) Going from point 1, Iran hardly holds a control on the monopoly of oil. Furthermore all developed countries have an interest in ensuring steady supply to oil. If for example Iran were to close the Strait of Hormuz, they would attract opprobrium from far more than just Israel and the US.

Oil trade in US dollars is surely a big part of the contributor to the strong US dollar, but the currency is used as a global trade and reserve currencies for its pre-eminence as a global economy not as a result of oil.

Also, even if the US dollar value were to collapse (which is hardly something likely in the next decade), I would bet that aid to Israel would be one of the last things to go because of the religious ties, the power of AIPAC in the US as a lobbying group and the history between the two countries.

(3) I think there's little denying that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, and I agree that geopolitics and influence in the region is surely a reason they are seeking it. But considered simply from the standpoint of Iran's autocratic leaders that it's simply a deterrence to outside intervention from the US.

Right now it seems implausible especially under Obama that the US itself would launch an attack on Iran, but when GWB invaded Iraq and the US economy was in much better shape that was hardly a fantasy. Iran's leaders have a genuine reason to fear this and while in the short term they risk a pre-emptive attack from Israel, in the long term they benefit immeasurably from the kind of deterrence that NK now has. Keep in mind that Iran's nuclear program is hardly the machinations of right wing ideologues like Ahmadinejad. Mousavi, the de facto leader of the green movement supports nuclear development and was instrumental in the inception of the program as previous prime minister.

So I really think it's that and not a long term play for energy independence. Oil is going to be with us for many decades to come and if this wiki is correct, Iran has a 100 years of supply available. With the economy the way it is and our current dependence on dirty fuels, we're hardly going to jump on the green train any time soon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves

What an asshole. What group identity exists that wasn't made up at one time? Saying palestinians are just arabs is like saying frenchmen should only be classified as europeans.

I wonder how much money and support AIPAC has given him. Foriegn nations should not steer US politics!

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Since 2001 there have been 34 deaths from Palestinian rocket attacks plus injuries and damage. Why artificially limit the rocket fatalities only to ones linked to Hamas? Who knows how many splinter groups of Palestinian militants are involved? It is ridiculous to suggest that Isreal could only blockade 'Hamas' and not all the others.
The peace process has to start with the Muslim world. The Palestinians and all Arab states & religious leaders must acknowledge Isreal as a legitimate state with the right to exist. They must condemn all violence and imprison or execute any of their people who commit acts of terror. They must stop praising the actions of violent militants. They must stop supporting terror groups with arms and material. They must stop teaching their children to hate others. Until these things happen then the Muslim world has no reasonable grounds on which to expect Isreal to ease up on their efforts to provide security to their citizens by any means necessary.


i think you took that out of the the AIPAC brochure verbatim.
yeah..palestine should just sit down,shut the fuck up and ignore the 8 ft dildo rammed up their ass and anyone who doesn't?..kill em.
HAMAS is a violent terrorist group.and?your point is?
they are also the democratically elected leadership,who just happen to not be too american friendly.
and if we are going to be sticklers on definitions..america is ALSO a terrorist nation,by definition.
your solution ignores 100 years of history,human rights violations and violent atrocities perpetrated by isreal.

how about we go back to kindergarten since we are using such banal and un-imaginative choices...
play nice with the other kids and SHARE, otherwise we are taking all your toys away.

Turkey is turning into a Islamic figurehead state? What's the basis of that comment or your proof? Turkey's Constitutional court bans and bars any financing of parties that are anti-secular and it's military is constantly warning against any move towards anti-secularism.

AIPAC's influence in US politics is very large. The problem is in the US house and senate. The same situation has occurred consistently, when the Mossad used EU passports to carry out an assassination, there was alot of noise made but all that happened was the UK kicked the Isreali ambassador. Which is the equivalent of slapping someone's hand.

Not to mention the large contingent of the US voting public that believes that the US must always assure the existence and survival of the state of Israel.

Overall Obama's hands are in effect tied. To simply level all the criticism on him is unfair the problem is far deeper ingrained in US politics. Look at the right wings response to this event, they believe Israel had full right to do what it did.

Egypt at the same time is bought out by the large US aid provided to assure the tyrant Hosni Mubaraks existence. Who at anytime can claim that he is barring the Muslim Brotherhood power, though with El Bardei in the picture and now officially endorsed by the opposition this situation has momentum for real change. Though obviously the US will not allow democracy to take place and push for free elections in Egypt.

What cannot be stressed though is that Israel just managed to push away the only Islamic ally it had in Turkey.

This looked like it was about to become a large political controversy, but it's sort of been swept under the rug. Allegedly, Harman was caught by an NSA wiretap telling Israeli spies who were also AIPAC officials that she would lobby the Justice Dept. to drop the case in exchange for AIPAC lobbying Nancy Pelosi to appoint Harman chair of the House Intelligence Committee once the Democrats won the House in 2006.

"Is TV news one-sidedly in support of Israel?"

Yes. Obviously.

If they criticize Israel at all they are immediately attacked by AIPAC.

Israel has far too much control over the American government and media.

They manipulated the USA into a war with Iraq that we did not need, and now they are trying to manipulate us into a war with Iran.

I think both positions are simply incompatible with the reality on the ground, this is a political situation and needs to be treated as such, so say we allow Wilders his screening, what kind of repercussions does that incur and what kind of view does that create? If this is allowed to be screened then why not a screening of Fahrenheit 9/11, The Truth about AIPAC, Palestine and Israel, An Inconvenient Truth or even something good like Taxi to the Dark Side? Have you ever heard of that? Of course not, and am sure the same people who support this screening would not support the ones I mentioned.

This is not about screening the film. Wilders was refused entry to the UK because of his views on islam. If britain refuses Michael Moore entry to the UK over Farenheit 9/11 because it "offended republicans" then we might be on equal grounds here. The House of Lords invited him to show it, I do not know their exact motivation, and I do not know if screenings of this kind are common in the House, (perhaps someone of British background could shed some light on this?) but I can see your argument if it was about giving Wilders a big platform, but again, he was expelled from the COUNTRY, not just the House of Lords or the screening.


Also worth noting is the REASONING for his expulsion: Basically the British government caved from threats from fascist terrorist loonies, and refused a law-abiding EU citizen entry because of his views.

The fact is the commentators fall into two parts here, those who are stringently atheist like Chilaxe and BicycleRepairMan and people like Pprt who just hate anything Islamic given their cheer leading of Israel's war on Palestine.

I think both positions are simply incompatible with the reality on the ground, this is a political situation and needs to be treated as such, so say we allow Wilders his screening, what kind of repercussions does that incur and what kind of view does that create? If this is allowed to be screened then why not a screening of Fahrenheit 9/11, The Truth about AIPAC, Palestine and Israel, An Inconvenient Truth or even something good like Taxi to the Dark Side? Have you ever heard of that? Of course not, and am sure the same people who support this screening would not support the ones I mentioned.

Wilders knew the British Parliament would reject it, that's why he went to the UK in the first place given the lukewarm reception the film itself generated in his homeland of Netherlands. He is glad it got rejected because now he can claim uncle and call the UK a appeasing society that suppresses freedom of speech. They rejected it because its politically stupid with no real pay off in votes or public opinion.

The Palestinians would not accept living in Israel now, because this has gone for too and too much blood has been spilled. The only solution is a two state solution, but the momentum towards that is never there because many factions in Israel's government believe that all of Israel is theirs and thus have used policies designed to keep the peace process in formaldehyde.

The Muslims and Jews have occupied the lands in peace for ages, it is only when we factor in political interests that declare the land for one or the other religious denomination do the problems arise.

I fervently believe that civilians in both Palestine and Israel wish for nothing more but peace, and could live with each other in peace. Economic interdependence has seen Israel rely on Palestinian labour countless times and conflict between both as only seen both lose out on economic progress, Israel doing far better because of the massive injects of funds it receives mainly from the US.

However we have political movements like Likud and Zionism and extremist thought in Hamas and other entities that make this a virtual impossibility. The reason for the existence of both is varied, in Israel there is the Manifest Destiny belief, in Palestine there is the oppression and deaths of family members that fermented armed struggle that can only end in the destruction of Israel.

Obama came into the Presidency saying that one of the key factors is that Arab states must recognize Israel, how do you force other nations to suddenly normalized relations with a hostile nation? Its like the UK telling the US to normalize relations with Cuba.

I believe everyone is complicit in the events that we see played out, neither Hamas nor the Israeli leadership will suffer from the deaths in Gaza. But the Palestinians see Hamas as the only entity that is actively fighting IDFs aggression, the whole world condemned the attacks, did anyone do anything other then declarations and condemnations? No. Alot of Palestinian civilians got killed.

And no Israel is not a perfect state as you claim, read on HRW and its own news organizations, Israel's Knesset parties nearly threw out an Arab Israeli calling him a representative of terrorists and a immigrant.

Like all Arab democratic states (of which there are few but they claim to be democratic in spirit! LOLZ) it also abuses the democracy it declares to possess, the IDF and the government as a whole have always the security issue to clamp down on progressive movements and protests. Just like every other corrupt Arab state out there who declare the Israeli actions as horrible but beat the shit out of its own citizens for protesting the same.
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/01/21/gaza-crisis-regimes-react-routine-repression

Arabs in my region suspect Obama will change things but he won't, he is a Zionist representative as much as Bush. Bush left office by calling Israel. Obama entered office by calling Israel. The US is the key factor in changing all this however the entire nation in the US is under heavy influence via AIPAC, WINEP, MEMRI and numerous other organizations that paint a very one sided picture of the conflict.

The resolution of this conflict is a corner stone of ending terrorism and extremist action against the US from the Arab world.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
There's no spin. It's an accurate and fair assessment of the situation. There are more players in the game than just Israel and the Palestinians.

Oh blah blah blah, there is no point reading the rest of it.

You say the Arab world is supporting Palestinian efforts but don't acknowledge the large military and political help the Israelis receive from the US. Who they circumvent by attacking Palestinian areas anytime their big brother isn't looking. Note how vicious attacks got post 9/11 (under guise of fighting global terrorism not local oppression) and before transition of power in the US.

The Israels making concessions is a facade, the Road map to peace which I mentioned in my previous comments clearly was a progress to peace that Kadima's Sharon perused. The Palestinians at the time agreed to it, what happens next? Israel unilaterally imposes 'reservations' on the peace process and dismantles the no expansionary Israeli settlement clause in the articles. One of the key arguments Palestinians have with Israel.

Israeli demands and their concessions are out of balance, a 1% adjustment in Palestinian lands to Israelis remove all economic and political areas out of Palestinian lands. This is all while more lands in the West bank are criss crosses and ceded back into Israel with walls, towers and troops moving in to defend these new settlements from people whose homes just got bulldozed.

Israel doesn't want peace, all it wants is to keep the peace process in formaldehyde. The seeming appearance of perusing peace while it builds walls, sniper towers, blockades, and walls the Palestinians in further and further. That's why Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world do not really take their declarations of seeking peace seriously because it's always the same bullshit.

But you know I can see why you would think otherwise, Israel has AIPAC, WINEP, MEMRITV and a thousand other media apologists to fight the media perspective on how this conflict is read out in the rest of the world. I quote:

"Simultaneously, the Israeli media has been towing the government line to such a degree that no criticism of the war has been voiced on any of the three local television stations. Indeed, the situation has become so absurd that reporters and anchors are currently less critical of the war than the military spokespeople. In the absence of any critical analysis, it is not so surprising that 78% of Israelis, or about 98% of all Jewish Israelis, support the war."
http://www.counterpunch.org/gordon01162009.html

"The Immigrant Absorption Ministry announced on Sunday it was setting up an "army of bloggers," to be made up of Israelis who speak a second language, to represent Israel in "anti-Zionist blogs" in English, French, Spanish and German."
http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1056648.html

""We used to hold signs at protests reading 'The occupation will corrupt'," she told me. "Now, we can see that it has [come to pass]. As a society, we have lost our ability to see clearly; we have let fear blind us. Once, calling someone a racist was the harshest accusation you could make. Later, you began to hear people say 'I know I'm a racist, but...'; nowadays [during Cast Lead], we heard 'I know I'm talking like a Nazi, but at least the Nazis knew how to deal with their enemies'."" Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know, I know. But I don't like those analysis which refers to 1967 as the year when Israel "lost its soul"--whatever that means. It never had a soul to be begin with.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/21/gaza-protest

But most disturbing of all was the graffiti they daubed on the walls of the ground floor. Some was in Hebrew, but much was naively written in English: "Arabs need 2 die", "Die you all", "Make war not peace", "1 is down, 999,999 to go", and scrawled on an image of a gravestone the words: "Arabs 1948-2009".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/20/gaza-israel-samouni-family

"Estimates for the proportion of civilian deaths among the 1,360 Palestinians killed range from more than half to two-thirds. Politicians, diplomats and journalists are by and large shying away from the obvious, namely that Israel has been deliberately targeting Palestinian civilians and the very infrastructure of normal life, in order to – in the best colonial style – teach the natives a lesson."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/20/gaza-israelandthepalestinians

Tags for this video have been changed from 'AIPAC, Israel, Iran, Lobby, Congress, People, Power, Jazeera, Blitzer' to 'AIPAC, Israel, Iran, Lobby, Congress, People, Power, Jazeera, Blitzer, avi lewis' - edited by doogle

I'm being uncharacteristically optimistic here - given that the last AIPAC conference was in June, his stance may have changed. It's entirely possible the stance may NOT have changed, but we'll know in a few days.

America has traditionally been an ally of Israel since the founding of the Israeli state, and I don't find it at all surprising that Obama would call for keeping Jerusalem as the undivided capitol of Israel (to do anything else would be to invite Israel to use all those weapons we gave them against us, honestly).

This war over worthless real estate needs to stop, but I don't know how anyone can convince either side to give up what amounts to one of their holiest sites short of a fascist abolition of all religious states. That solution would be as bad as or worse than the problem, so we'll have to see what happens.

If you want to know the source of the one-sidedness, look no farther than AIPAC.

Unfortunately for Americans, we need 100 Senators and 435 Congressmen, with the independence and American patriotic incite of Dennis Kucinich. Instead we have a Congress full of genuflecting hacks and idiots who bow to AIPAC and Israel instead of concern for an objective and fair USA.