|
Monday Sep 07, 2009
Rosner's Domain: Finally realizing that "engaging" Iran isn't likely to workPosted by SHMUEL ROSNER
Comments: 58      Follow Rosner's Domain on Twitter!!! A friend at Israel's Foreign Ministry (I have at least two - don't try guessing which one) mentioned Jackson Diehl's article this morning. I think what he wanted to say is "but didn't we tell you this was going to happen?". I must say - they did. Here's Diehl: So it seems worth noting that as Obama heads into the homestretch of his first year he has yet to meet with any of the enumerated rogues -- a passing handshake with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez at an inter-American summit notwithstanding. Nor is he likely to have any such meetings in the foreseeable future. In fact, one of the emerging lessons of the Obama administration's foreign policy might be summed up as follows: The idea that presidential "direct diplomacy" with actors such as Chávez, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Il or Fidel Castro is feasible or likely to produce results is, well, naive. And the good news: "The administration does seem to be learning from all the rebuffs".Learning the following lessons: Clinton dismissed Kim as "an unruly child" several months ago. When his regime suddenly began seeking bilateral meetings last month, she invited him to return to the multilateral "six-party" negotiations organized by the Bush administration. She has repeatedly expressed doubts about whether fruitful negotiations with Iran are now possible. The rest of the administration is not far behind. Both at the State Department and the White House officials are focused not on arranging bilateral contacts between Tehran and Washington but on persuading European governments, China and Russia to support sanctions going well beyond those put in place by Bush. George J. Mitchell, the Middle East envoy, appears to have given up on including Syria in the Middle East negotiations he is preparing to launch.
1 | Daran, UK, Monday Sep 07, 2009
To those who resent approaches to Iran ( to short to discuss others), like, Messr Rosner and Dielh. Need to give us the alternative approach in clear language insted of hiding behind complaints of "weakness". Pray, tell us what would they do. Is it Mr Rosners or others contension that seeking a dialogue to resolve this dispute is not prefferable to military solutions ?(if indeed there are realistic military opitions, short of overthrowing the regime). Pres. Obama has offered the Iranians a way out, at the same time he has brung together a colition of leaders to warn of painful sanctions.
2 | Mike Feldman Canada, Monday Sep 07, 2009
This post makes it seem that not meeting with Amadenejad, Chavez and Kim Jong etc; is an evolution of Obama's stated foreign policy of face to face negotiation This would be true if the aforementioned wanted to meet with Obama, but he refused. The opposite is true. Amadinejad stated to-day that Iran will continue its nuclear program, and will only meet Western diplomats on terms acceptable to Iran. So, its quite naive to say that Obama choses to not meet someone who doesn't want to meet with him. The U.S. foreign policy is no better than reactionary and directionless. At best we're back to begging for more sanctions,with opposition from Russia and China.
3 | Mike Feldman Canada, Monday Sep 07, 2009
Further to #1, The simple truth is that Iran has no interest in peaceful coexistance in the region. It is the opposite of their goals. Iran is the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, and it controls Syria who controls Lebanon. and Hamas in Gaza. What is the motivation for Iran to negotiate something it does not want? Iran is emboldened by the weak leadership that opposes its goals and is growing in strength due to a lack of clear leadership from those powers who would corral them. There is only one thing they will understand, and it appears to be more and more likely to happen.
4 | Sally - U.S.A., Monday Sep 07, 2009
Unfortunately, Diehl doesn't "get it." Obama doesn't realize that "engaging" does not work because for Obama "engaging" is linguistic double talk for appeasement. The problem is that when one "engages" with terrorist (Chavez, Iran, etc...), the terrorist see that they have won & they raise the stakes. Obama appeases Chaves & will only allow Zelaya's reinstatement as president & Chaves raises the stakes. Obama reneges on the U.S. agreement with Israel about settlements (which Abbas signed & knew about) & appeases the arabs with reinventing history with his Cairo Speech & Abbas et al raises the
5 | Sally - U.S.A., Monday Sep 07, 2009
the stakes & does nothing. LBJ once said that he knew he could "win" in Vietnam if only they would "talk" to him. From reading the Washington Post, Jimmy Carter's article's The Elders' View Of the Middle East, the lingustic double talk is increasing. (How appropriate that Carter uses Elders just as the Russia secret police used Elders in the Protocol of the Elders of Zion.) I think that it is time that people stop using the term naive when referring to Obama. Obama is capitulating to terrorism - plain & simple & the terrorist are raising the stakes.
6 | Daran, UK, Monday Sep 07, 2009
Mike states that Iran has no interest in peaceful co existance but fails to answer why they do'nt attack today, without the "benefit" of nukes and with the "allies" he mentions? my answer is self preservation (either of their version of shiaism or nationalistic). I'm not sure what Irans "growing strength" is supposed to mean? Does he contend that Iran would be able to reach a capability of such strength that it could sucessfully oppose the coalition which is arrayed against it? Even if it tested nuclear weapons tommorow that would still not be true, I think. I hope I can respond to Zelaya slur
7 | Sally - U.S.A., Monday Sep 07, 2009
Obama is schedule to personally preside over the UN Security Council meeting September 24. (see Anne Bayefsky's Obama's UN Gambit: King of the Universe and the Polls) where of course Obama will stick it to Israel & let Iran off the hook.
8 | Daran, Monday Sep 07, 2009
I find it incredible that Sally could sugest that Obam's call for the democratically elected Zelaya to be returned to his constitutional and entirely lawful position, is appeasement of Chavez, also there were no agreements about settlements, read Daniel Kutzers article in washington post date 14 june (I think). These sentiments seem driven by considerations other than the facts it appears to me.
9 | Sally - U.S.A., Monday Sep 07, 2009
Daran, read Diehl's article before you comment again: "Chavez took advantage of the administration's extended hand... while attempting to foment a left-wing coup in Honduras." Zelaya may have been lawfully elected, but he acted unlawfully as president & was lawfully removed. If you know more than Honduras's supreme court (who removed Zelaya) about Honduran law, then write & inform them. See Olmet's article in the Washington Post (who signed the Annapolis Accords) & specifically said that there was a settlement agreement. Daran, the next time you open your mouth, please check all the facts.
10 | Avraham - Yerushalayim, Monday Sep 07, 2009
It was probably never going to work. But, the alternative, the Bush approach, was to simply do nothing at all. Therefore, a few months spent trying to do something was worth it.
11 | American, Monday Sep 07, 2009
I don't think anyone in Washington had any illusions. But, I think diplomatic channels will continue because the other alternative is too risky not to mention the wallet is empty. We could also end up with a far more dangerous scenario. We know about clean up costs. We are still paying for them now with our military. I don't think this administration had any doubts that offering an olive branch alone was going to change the facts. More back and forth posturing, better incentives, and a nuclear umbrella are most likely coming in the days ahead.
12 | TrailBlazer, Norway, Monday Sep 07, 2009
I would rather prefer that this Daran would stick to a favorite domain of his, which quite truly must be British double talk and baffling signals - of which former prime Blair was a master. After rendering a thorough analysis of how once powerful and respected Britain has sunk into a quagmire of racial and religious delusion - it will be time for his lecturing on second favorite - Iranian self-preservation. Following a deep breath - he might also tell us why the next British Monarch should not be an Iranian shiite or an Indian fakir.
13 | Tom, US, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Engaging Iran has worked much better than has engaging Israel. At least Iran is a signator of the IAEA NNPT and Israel isn't. So just as N Korea is a rogue state so also is Israel a rogue state and sanctions should be put in place regarding Israel until such time as Israel finally complies with international law.
14 | david cohen, sydney, australia, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Multilateralism is the key to unlock the world's problems, or so we are asked to believe. But when the UNGA is enfeebled by entrenched irredentist coalitions such as the OIC, the UNSC toothless in the face of Chinese and Russian obstructionism and states can always be expected to act in their own best interest first and foremeost, what is left? The world's rogues are emboldened and a nuclearised ME will be the outcome with Israel the target. Iran has no more interest in setting aside its WMD ambitions than does N Korea or even Syria for that matter. The 12th Imam is on his way...
15 | GOLDEN NUGGET, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
SALLY...in your #4 post you say "......the terrorists see that they have won" I see it as not so much that they have won but that Obama and the West are losing...and the truth is that the terrorists have
been succesful in fighting with the MOST POTENT and EFFECTIVE weapon namely "TERRORISM" actively passively and psycologically...Obama is viewed with contempt and as a "pushover". He in fact is a loser whose "skills" and "strategies" are limited to appeasement and grovelling...hardly the
stuff worthy leaders are made of...worse still Obama and the West CONTINUE to flounder....
16 | Middle East Guru - Heaven/USA, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
off course, don't you know that.
You are dealing with fanatic, pervert and single minded Mullas, controlling Ahmadine Najat and the people of Iran.
17 | Middle East Guru - Heaven/USA, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
off course, don't you know that.
You are dealing with fanatic, pervert and single minded Mullas, controlling Ahmadine Najat and the people of Iran.
18 | Terry - Eilat, Israel, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
This discussion is a few years late. Today's discussion should be about HOW to mount a military operation against Iran immediately - military strategy, if we should use the nuclear option against Iran, what do we do about any Iranian retaliation, will Syria & Hezbollah join in the fight, etc. etc.
And the real question: Will Netanyahu give the go ahead?
19 | A.B, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Oh, do let Obama fiddle while the world burns !
You over zeaous liberals seem hell bent on going down that road of global destruction with your asses in the sand and your heads sneering at conservatism.
What most democrats and liberals fail to realise is the extent their brand of government is willing to sacrifice all nationalism and sovereignity in their quest for global Peace. A soothsayer term for World government.
May the curse you so wish upon Mankind devour you and yours.
20 | jonah Viet-Nam, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
The only Korrect Way to "engage" HamanDjinnhad (for he is Iran now,having utterly enslaved its courageous but cowardly-w0rld-forsaken People) is with a club -nuklear or spiked- on his head to drive out the HamanDjinn back into hell.
21 | ALEXIO ZIMBABWE, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Can't you see the regroup Chavez in syria and iran . Obama should resign if he give a damn about the
mistakes he is making and about to make . You can not appease war mongers . Please Mr Obama
we were happy about elevation . Ok just remove sanctions on Zimbabwe may thats the only reason africa will remember your office its not a threat international community
22 | Sally - U.S.A., Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
That is a profound thought GOLDEN NUGGET. Here is a question for you, could it be that Obama is fundamentally on their side?
Terry, in my opinion, I think that Obama is doing everything possible to, so to speak, emasculate Israel. He will not give Israel the codes for overflight over Iraq nor the bunker buster bombs. He is going to build a Saudi nuclear reactor & he is presiding over the Security Council on 9/24 where it appears he is trying to force Israel into signing the non-proliferation treaty while simultaneously leaving off the agenda the specified non-proliferation of Iran & NKorea,
23 | Sally - U.S.A., Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
which had been on the agenda. A US president has never presided over a Security Council meeting. Anyway, the whole thing bothers me, especially after Jimmy Carter's antics with the UN when he was president. Netanyahu has a lot of obsticles to contend with & it is not does he have the will.
24 | GOLDEN NUGGET Australia, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Sally....you ask if Obama is fundamentally on "their" side. I say SPECIFICALLY Obama is on the side of Islam..in all its facets..and with all it entails. He has revealed himself as a "dyed in the wool" anti-
semite as in anti Jew anti Israel. He proudly boasts his muslim "heritage" as he struts the muslim world stage..albeit grovelling to and appeasing Israel's vilest enemies. He is more of a danger to Israel
than its neighbouring enemies. He is a CRAFTY manupilator who by stealth is engineering Israel's demise. CONCLUSION: yep..Sally..this man IS on "their" side...Israel stands ALONE ..
25 | molly-glasgow, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Israel's leaders are well aware of iran's agenda and will play it right that is something I truly believe.How else has your small nation survived all these years.God has raised up wise leaders whenever their was a great crisis regarding the Nation of Israel.
26 | Daran, UK, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Sally I stand corrected on Zelaya's current constitutional staus (however I still think the motive for his removal was his call for a refferendum, rather than charges, which he should answer). On Olmert, so the text of the agreement about settlement expansion willl be in the minutes of meetings with State. dept in the lead up to Annapolis? "there was something of an understanding realised but it never was a written argeement" - E Abrahams. I find the phase "something of an understanding" as a catch all . If you inform me of your intentions, I gain "something of an understanding," do I agree?
27 | Daran, UK, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Sally do you think France, Russia, Japan would sell a reactor to the Saudi's if the americans would not? It is the right of every nation to enguage in the peaceful use of nuclear tech. Thats why calls to strenghten NPT and IAEA are a good thing and should be supported.
28 | Mike Feldman, Canada, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Golden Nugget. I'm not sure I totally agree with your assessment of Obama. And you know I'm not an Obama fan. It's just that discussions about the "destruction" of Israel can mean different things to different people. To you and me, if Israel just became another country in the Middle East, dominated by Muslims and with a persecuted Jewish minority, that would be our Nabka. Israel would still be a country with people, but as far as we're concerned-destroyed. This is cultural destruction rather that physical destruction. Given that Emmanuel's brother has provided Obama with studies on the CONT
29 | Mike Feldman, Canada, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Golden Nugget CONT - on the value of human life at certain ages, and the cost benefit analysis of treatment of a 30 yearl old, compared to a 70 year old, it would not surprise me if the administration has concluded that the retention of Israel as a Jewish state is a negative compared to the "benefit" of assimilation. I'm not sure if this is true anti-semitism, or just ignorance and complete insensitivty to Jews, their history and their current feelings towards their adversaries. I'm not saying | know something that you may not,it just that I'm more inclined to go to ignorance than intent when discussing Obama.
30 | Don,USA, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Israel should not expect a lot of support from the US because the Islamic fox is in charge of the hen house.
31 | Yahya, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Iran will not be denied its quest for nuclear weapons. The Mullahs believe they are acting as Allah commands therefore what man wants (the West) is irrelevant. Islamic fascism is working toward a regional caliphate and Israel is smack dab in the middle of this Iranian (Allah) inspired quest. This will swing one of two ways. Israel and the West do nothing and Israel eventually succumbs to the ever-growing weight of Iran's Caliphate, or second Israel attacks Iran causing a regional conflagration with the eventual imploding of Islamic fascism. Netanyahu will choice the right path.
32 | Yahya, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Iran will not be denied its quest for nuclear weapons. The Mullahs believe they are acting as Allah commands therefore what man wants (the West) is irrelevant. Islamic fascism is working toward a regional caliphate and Israel is smack dab in the middle of this Iranian (Allah) inspired quest. This will swing one of two ways. Israel and the West do nothing and Israel eventually succumbs to the ever-growing weight of Iran's Caliphate, or second Israel attacks Iran causing a regional conflagration with the eventual imploding of Islamic fascism. Netanyahu will choice the right path.
33 | Sam USA, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
I stand by Israel and always will, Obama isn't on their side therefore he's not on mine. "A nation divided against it'self cannot stand", America is divided in many, many ways and the difference is as great as can possibly be. It's govt. doesn't have the trust it had before. Theres alot of dissension brewing now and the Islamic in chief doesn't seem to help by opening his mouth or trapsing over the globe apologizing for our behavior. Can't believe that a man who refused to pledge his alliegance to our flag could be president. Truely this is miracle so I predict judgment from our God.
34 | David W. Lincoln, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Between the tensions that entangle Iraqi-Syrian relations, and the stubbornness of the self-serving mullahs, I would not be at all surprised to see warfare. First between Iraq and Syria, and the removal of obstacles for Israel to go after Iran's nuclear program.
Because, as long as IED's are considered proof of the so called ethical supremacy of the Sons of Allah, they will never admit they are wrong. Which speaks to this phenomenon: Al Capone and John Dillinger had more credibility than what Ahmadinezhad has at this time.
35 | Chaim - Israel, Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Engaging Iran has no chance whatsoever to convince the Mad Mullahs not to build nuclear bombs. Severe sanctions may have had some success if they'd been applied a decade or so ago. Now it is far too late. Israel MUST take military action to destroy Iran's nukes and very soon.
36 | Sally - U.S.A., Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Daran, I sincerely appreciate your reply. As to the settlement agreement - the problem is that Bush will not say one way or the other & Sharon of course can't say & it does no good to split hairs over what the subordinates say. This is why I am bringing up Olmert's agreement with the US because he specially stated in his article in the Washington Post what the agreement was & that he would not have signed the annopolis accords without the agreement. The article came out I think around July; if you can't goole it & find it; then try realclearpolitics.com
37 | Sally - U.S.A., Tuesday Sep 08, 2009
Daran, in my opinion, no, I do not think France, Russia or Japan would sell a nuclear reactor to the Saudis because France & Japan are too responsible (especially with Japan in fear of North Korea having nuclear weapons) & Russia I don't think is that nuts. The IAEA doesn't work - the fact that North Korea developed weapons under their nose & now Iran. The NPT only works with people of good faith & North Korea & Iran are apparently contravening it. Israel was wise no to sign it & hopefully will divert the problem.
38 | Daran, UK, Wednesday Sep 09, 2009
Sally, sorry to labour the point, are'nt the French touting new reactor Iraq and UAE? I think the french would build more reactors in the region. Do nt your last points argue for a IAEA which "does work" as you put. I mean one in which all countries can have confidence?
39 | GOLDEN NUGGET Australia, Wednesday Sep 09, 2009
MIKE...your post is commendable as usual...as to things meaning different thimgs to different people I
say that there's no such thing as being "a little bit pregnant'.. As to Obama let me put it this way: Obama is pregnant by Islam and well on the way to giving birth to twin monster events which will do
"monstrous" harm and damage..(1) to Israel (2) to America. No amount of soft shoe shuffle by this
"ham" performer can disguise his hidden Islamic Agenda which he has thus far been able to conceal by hoodwinking Israel . Thankingfully Israel is WAKING UP and understands it STANDS ALONE.
40 | GOLDEN NUGGET Australia, Wednesday Sep 09, 2009
MIKE..as to the philosophical flavour of your post #29.Your last sentence generously gives Obama
the benefit of being "ignorant".I see him as anything but ignorant..in fact he is in no way "ignorant" of
his Muslim culture = Islam culture = Islam AGENDA..thats where his heart and soul is and that shapes
his modus operandi. As to questions such as the value or worth of Israel being physically or culturally alive albeit that both aspects are entwined..value or worth of human life bearing upon age..both are like contemplating "how long is a piece of string?" I say as long as you LIKE it to be.
41 | Sally - U.S.A., Wednesday Sep 09, 2009
Daran, did you read the Olmert article in the Washington Post? Oh, did you know that OPEC is one of the major buyers of the US's debt? Did you know that lately, we have been having a real hard time selling it? I guess we won't have as difficult a time as we have had. If someone is going to say that our morals are our strenghts, don't you think that "our words should have meaning?"
42 | Mike Feldman, Canada, Wednesday Sep 09, 2009
#38. Daran. It is impossible for an agency like the IAEA to have the confidence of all countries. When you look at the international scene, and which countries support which interests, which countries are beligerent to each other, which are merely competitors, who is allied and completely in agreement with each other, which are seeking to catch up with another to avoid a threat or become a threat etc: an agency cannot satisfy all these divergent interests. One countries truth is another country's lie. Also, I do not see IAEA as totally impartial.
43 | Daran, UK, Wednesday Sep 09, 2009
Sally, yes I did read the article, which is why I pointed to the minutes of meetings for a source for a text of this agreement but given both Bush's and Rice's comments post Annapolois I'm not sure what agreement Olmert thinks he achieved. Many western nations with large debt are finding it hard to sell bonds and gov paper. Do you mean Obama is "pandering " to OPEC to be able sell US debt. No more so than China on korea/tibet/taiwan, prehaps its naive to assume that other parties will not use what ever leverage, just as we do (UK&EU) with trade and aid. To futher their own aims.
44 | Mike Feldman, Canada, Wednesday Sep 09, 2009
Daran. I know your #43 was in response to Sally, but let me add my own view. Chavez recently agreed to sell refined petroleum to Iran. Essestially, he has pre-empted any santions which might harm the Iranian regime through gas shortages. He has also gained a client, and an allignment against the U.S. and its allies. Gordon Brown has been accused of aiding in the release of the Lockerbie bomber in aid of a beneficial oil deal with Libya. So whether we call it "pandering", or giving the other guy something they want, for something we want, the story goes the same way. The benefits of being Israel's ally are less defined. It remains yo be seen tf they will seriously suffer under Obama,
45 | jonah Viet-Nam, Thursday Sep 10, 2009
(0)BAALma is making no mistake.How could a puppet make mistakes? But he's thoroughly enjoying himself by making a liar out of Lincoln,his handlers having given him free rein to show his unexpurgated hatred of America.
46 | GOLDEN NUGGET Australia, Thursday Sep 10, 2009
MIKE...re your post #44..as to your comment ...'giving the other guy something they want for something we want"...lets see...the Arabs WANT the WHOLE of Jerusalem AND the WHOLE of
Israel...what would you imagine COULD the Jews "WANT" or "GET" for what the Arabs WANT??
...and would you call any SUCH process "pandering"??..due respect to Daran for butting in...
47 | Naeem UK, Thursday Sep 10, 2009
48 | Naeem UK, Thursday Sep 10, 2009
Its funny how the world wants Iran to stop nuclear profileration, even though it does it for energy purposes, yet The States, Isreal, and other 'non-rogue' states are allowed to continue with their nuclear programs. Interesting point to note, but Iran has never started a war in its history, can the same be said for the aforementioned states, and finally there is only one country to have ever used a nuclear weapon in history, the so called police state, so who should the world really be afraid of?
49 | Mike Feldman Canada, Friday Sep 11, 2009
Golden Nugget. Offer nothing, want everything-the Arab stategy.
Nareem, you nincompoop. Any idea how many U.S's soldiers lives were spared by the dropping of the A-bomb, to break the Japanese war mongers and get them to surrender. The Japanese leadership brought it upon their people, and the suicidal Iranian regime will do the same for theirs.
50 | GOLDEN NUGGET Australia, Friday Sep 11, 2009
$48 NAEEM...no kidding...so Iran is going nuclear for "energy purposes"...yep..quite right given that
nuclear weapons REQUIRE a HUGE AMOUNT OF ENERGY...to wit your crafty decietful assertion of
"energy purposes" ...nice try to whitewash and sanitise Iran..too bad it doesn't work..nope..it doesn't..."funny" how the world witnesses pimps for Iran pimping their perverse properganda as
witnessed in your post...
51 | Tom, US, Friday Sep 11, 2009
Iran remains in compliance with the NPT. The IAEA has cameras installed in every single one of Iran's enrichment facilities and no evidence exists anywhere that Iran has enriched ANY uranium beyond the level required of that necessary for a peaceful energy program. The only place in existence where Iran has a nuke is in the minds of psychopaths who are not in compliance with international law. So when is Israel going to sign the NPT and allow for inspectors to also patrol their nuclear facilities ?
52 | Mike Feldman, Canada, Saturday Sep 12, 2009
#51 Mot. I) Israel is not going to sign anything. 2) As usual you must know something AlBaredei doesn't. Or maybe he's an Egyptian psychopath. I wonder about the cameras you say the IAEA has in the Iranian enrichment facilities, when the IAEA can't get into the facilities to see the cameras. Maybe the cameras are in the men's room at Amedinejad's weekend getaway. Unless, and sometime's I forget, that as a master spy, you are privy to information that noone else knows. I will email the Ayatollah for confirmation, after lunch with Putin.
53 | Tom, US, Sunday Sep 13, 2009
#52 Psycho Loon Feldman - I read that in an article just this week that the IAEA has cameras installed at every single enrichment facility in Iran. But then again Feldman, I realize that you only get your information by connecting the dots in the Sunday funnies. You really ought to try reading articles every now and then Loon. Like I said, Iran is in complete compliance with the NPT. Unlike Israel which is a rogue state just like N Korea. Sanctions should be placed on Israel. A blockade should be put in place to prevent WMD's from reaching the psychopaths in the sandbox.
54 | Mike Feldman Canada, Sunday Sep 13, 2009
Tom ÜS"" I find it awfully strange that you're from the US, but your posts always show up in the middle of the night EST. Could it be that you're not in the US? If you just read the article last week, I'm sure a trained spy like you could remember the source and how to find it. Please share. Speaking of reading articles, I just read an article on sickos that can only get erections by getting excited posting dirty little fibs on the web. Something about a connecton to soiling themself. This in conjuntion with more grandiose lies like being a former covert agent often work together to satisfy insignicant, impotent little worms like you.
55 | GOLDEN NUGGET Australia, Sunday Sep 13, 2009
MIKE..MIKE.the retards are getting retardier..the nuts are getting nuttier..the looneys are getting
loonier..to wit we hear that palestinian childen are slaughtered "every day'.."millions" of bombs are
dropped on palestinians...all this deranged "engineering" by deranged minds (even more deranged given that all those squatters on Jewish land are dignified by being referred to as "palestinian"..no such fact..only fiction)..CONCLUSION..cut loose these time and energy consuming freaks...YOU CANT MAKE A SILK PURSE OUT OF A SOWS EAR..the arab/muslim world incl their ass kissers are
full of sows.
56 | Tom, US, Sunday Sep 13, 2009
As a trained looniw Feldman I am sure that if you didn't get all your info from Cappy Dick in connect the dots in the Sunday funnies that you also could locate the article. Maybe if you weren't so retarded and actually knew how to do a search on a computer it would be very easy for you to locate the article but we ALL know the rest of that story. So go back to your comic books and Sunday funnies Feldman and keep your head buried firmly up your ass and I am certain you will be just as retarded next month as you are this month. Same for your butt buddy, nugget.
57 | GOLDEN NUGGET Australia, Monday Sep 14, 2009
MIKE...like I said YOU CANT MAKE A SILK PURSE OUT OF A SOWS EAR...so also out of the SOW's
#56 brother PIG...nope you cant make a silk purse out of a PIG's ear...this kisser of arab/muslim asses
STILL has HIS head in his camel's ass...his retarded brain still in ETERNAL DARKNESS...note that he's ALSO A THIEF stealing my adjectives..thieving as in his classic arab/muslim culture... a CLASSICAL thieving PIMP....
58 | GOLDEN NUGGET Australia, Monday Sep 14, 2009
MIKE...like I said YOU CANT MAKE A SILK PURSE OUT OF A SOWS EAR...so also out of the SOW's
#56 brother PIG...nope you cant make a silk purse out of a PIG's ear...this kisser of arab/muslim asses
STILL has HIS head in his camel's ass...his retarded brain still in ETERNAL DARKNESS...note that he's ALSO A THIEF stealing my adjectives..thieving as in his classic arab/muslim culture... a CLASSICAL thieving PIMP....
|
 |
Search this blog
The Israel Factor, Sep. 2009: Obama is rapidly losing favor with panel of Israeli experts
Tags:
Blogroll |
Post your own comment
