Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
4/1/2012 5:37:02 PM
Hi Lydia,

It's a bit better after the edit but there are still parts that are hard to understand.

This American so called geopolitical doctrine the "National Security Strategy" might exist in the US but on the same hand might very well exist in Russia and China. I would like to know the source of this information cos it's written as facts without sourcing it.

This article combined with your previous post simply indicates to me that Russia and China both are committed to Iran and in the case of Russia to Syria as well.

This article also states that not only Russia will consider an attack on Iran as if she was attacked but China warned she might defend Iran too.

I think I get the basic gist of this article even though much is still not clear. I can assure you of one thing only. Israel is not concerned with the "unipolar world" or any other name you might call it. She's concerned only with the safety and security of the Israeli people and the Israeli nation. All else is speculation and no more then that. A Nuclear Iran endangers Israel. This might not be of importance to others but it is to us. B Hussein and his regime is doing all it can to sabotage Israel's ability to defend herself and I have a feeling will no longer be privy to sensitive and secret information. At least as long as B Hussein is in the WH it can't be trusted in my opinion and proof of that are all the "leaks".

Lydia, if the author didn't source his claims it can't be considered facts but opinions only and as such you can take it or leave it. Change the name to Russia instead of the USA and everything in regard to what you called a "unipolar world" would fit her like a well worn shoe or a glove if you wish. We're all old enough to remember recent history of the last century and also to understand that certain things didn't change with the fall of the USSR.

You know it's become very popular to attack the US lately and the 2 articles you posted do just that (and Israel of course, but that's a given :) ). It seems that people tend to forget to look in their own back yards. The recent elections in Russia left many very unhappy Russians who think the elections were rigged. Till now people are protesting or trying to protest and being arrested or detained simply for showing up to protest (see below article). The fighting with neighboring countries over the past years etc. It seems so easy to criticize others but not take stock of ones own actions. I find it hard to understand for instance Russia's protection of Syria and Assad who is systematically killing his own people. The same goes with Iran and we all know Russia assisted Iran with its nuclear facilities.

Your security and safety might not be threatened by a nuclear Iran (at least not yet but with that lunatic regime it can change with a blink of an eye) but Israel is and most assuredly has the right to defend herself against this threat.

Shalom,

Peter

Russia shuts Red Square, detains dozens of activists

By REUTERS
LAST UPDATED: 04/01/2012 18:37

MOSCOW - Russian authorities closed Moscow's Red Square on Sunday and detained dozens of people trying to hold a silent anti-government protest there, prompting opposition charges that they were denying Russians their right to free assembly.

Several hundred people responded to calls on the Internet to gather in Red Square outside the Kremlin wearing white ribbons or clothing as a symbol of protest, but found the iron gates to the sprawling square closed.

Police detained four people heading for the square from a nearby subway station, and later picked people out of the crowd at the gates and pushed them into buses. A police spokesman said about 55 people had been detained near Red Square "for attempting to hold an unsanctioned demonstration."

Opposition leaders say the government violates Russians' constitutional right to free assembly by requiring permission from local authorities for street demonstrations. Police often disperse unsanctioned rallies and detain protesters.

"There are no freedoms, no rights, and Putin is always being shown on all the TV channels," said Inna Bachina, 48, director of a metal products wholesaler, standing outside the Red Square gates with her daughter. "I do not consider Putin my president."




Quote:
Hi Peter, I edited translation, I hope it will be more clearly.

Threat or thought out plan of a military strike on Iran

The nuclear issue of Iran is not the main reason that Western European countries and the U.S. is preparing to strike.

America has a geopolitical doctrine called "National Security Strategy."
This doctrine defines the goal for all U.S. agencies, nongovernmental organizations and, of course, for the armed forces.
This goal - a "unipolar world" led by the United States.

Achieving the "unipolar world" is described in details.

Installation of American dominance requires access to key regions of the world, strategic communications and global resources.

Iran has one of the key areas of the world.

In the event of an attack on Iran, other countries also participate.
China has warned of a willingness to go to war in the event of an attack on Iran.
The conflict could lead to World War III, it is possible that the war would be nuclear.
Iran will have the right to defend themselves, using all means at its disposal.
And the aggressor strikes against targets in a foreign country, not only possible but necessary.
The Iranians know that to stop the aggression can only be a great loss of people and the American public protests against the war.
Where no rockets fly so far, can be subversive action.
Effects of war on Russia and the Caspian Five consequences will be severe.
This is a huge refugee flows, strengthening radical elements, the reduction of economic cooperation.
Gen. Ivashov assesses the possibility of war between 50 and 50.
He believes that the Obama administration and U.S. military does not want war.
The military are already tired of the war. Obama is afraid that this adventure would prevent his election.

But there are powerful financial interests who want to make money on this war, there are Republicans and neocons who insist on this beat, there is a pro-Israeli circles in the U.S. who advocate an immediate hit.
And something can happen that will make a decision about the beginning of the aggression.
This can be either some kind of provocation, or, for example, a terrorist act, which accuse Iran, or right-wing supporters of the war could trigger a fast attack on Israel, or a fifth column in Iran could cause the closure of the Strait.
These provocation excuse to unleash the U.S. war against Iran.


Chairman - Leonid Ivashov, president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of International Journalism, MGIMO, Colonel-General.

He was born August 31, 1943 in Kyrgyzstan. He graduated from the Tashkent Higher Military Command School named after VI Lenin Military Academy named after MV Frunze. Since 1976, he served in the central office of the Ministry of Defense, served as Secretary of the Council of CIS Defense Ministers, was chief of the Main Directorate of International Military Cooperation of the Ministry of Defense. He was awarded orders and medals of the Soviet Union, Russia and foreign countries. Passion for life - Poetry.


Quote:
Hi Lydia,

Many times the source for an article gives an option for other languages and then the translation is an accurate one.

This translation aside from being trans literal also lacks the flow of the arguments in it. I found he whole read difficult and the usage of words that are incomprehensible to me like
Quote:
pripishut
.

So, in order to correctly understand and respond a much better translation would be appreciated.

Shalom,

Peter

Quote:
Hi again Peter!
Sorry for not very good translation.
I wrote speech in Russian and translated using http://translate.google.com
It was deep night, and I didn't edit translation.
If You are interesting, I'll try to do more accurate translation.
Or to state it more simple sentences.
What parts of speech are unclear there?
Frendly, Lydia


Quote:
Hi Lydia,

I read through the transcript of the video but the trans literal translation is not a very good one and the meaning is unclear in many parts.

I'd appreciate an accurate translation if you can find one.

Shalom,

Peter

Quote:
Hi Peter!

Threat or thought out plan of a military attack on Iran

The nuclear issue of Iran is not the main reason that the West and the U.S. is preparing to strike.
The American geopolitical doctrine called "national security strategy," defined by the target system for all U.S. agencies, non-governmental organizations, and of course for the armed forces. This target setting - unipolar world led by the United States.
In the "U.S. national security strategy" in the 21st century is described in detail an implementation of the unipolar world. It is written that the installation of American dominance requires monitoring (secure access) for key areas of the world, strategic communications and global resources.
Iran meets all these requirements.
In the event of an attack on Iran's leading powers will not go away.
About ready to go to war in the event of an attack on Iran has already warned in China.
Conflict can result in a third world war, and it is possible that it will be nuclear.
If there is a war waged against Iran, he will have the right to defend themselves using all means at its disposal.
And the aggressor strikes against targets on foreign soil are not only possible but mandatory.
The Iranians know that to stop the aggression can only be a great loss of people to the American public opposed the war.
Where no rockets fly so far, there may sabotage actions.
For Russia and the Caspian Five consequences will be severe.
This is a huge refugee flows, strengthening radical elements, reduction of economic cooperation.
Gen. Ivashov assesses the possibility of war 50 to 50.
He believes that the Obama administration and U.S. military
do not want war. The military is already tired of war, and Obama is afraid that this adventure will prevent his election.
But there are powerful financial circles, who want to earn on this war, there is a Republican neocons who insist on this beat, there is a pro-Israeli circles in the U.S. who advocate an immediate hit.
But this can happen that will make a decision on aggression. This is a provocation, or that pripishut Iran, for example, a terrorist act, the right-wing supporters of the outbreak of war could trigger rapid whether attacks on Israel, or whether there is a terrorist attack, or a fifth column in Iran could trigger such as closing the Strait and it would be a provocation and the United States an excuse to unleash the war.


Chairman - Leonid Ivashov, president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of International Journalism, MGIMO, Colonel-General.

He was born August 31, 1943 in Kyrgyzstan. He graduated from the Tashkent Higher Military Command School named after VI Lenin Military Academy named after MV Frunze. Since 1976, he served in the central office of the Ministry of Defense, served as Secretary of the Council of CIS Defense Ministers, was chief of the Main Directorate of International Military Cooperation of the Ministry of Defense. He was awarded orders and medals of the Soviet Union, Russia and foreign countries. Passion for life - Poetry.

Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
4/2/2012 5:38:29 AM
Hello Friends,

B Hussein's latest "hot mic" fiasco is being discussed world wide. B Hussein's loyal lapdogs Biden and Hillary are trying to save a bit of face by ridiculing the disparagers of B Hussein for asking outgoing Russian President Medvedev for "space" and promising "more flexibility" after the elections is by far the funniest and saddest story in town.

Sad, cos there will be many who'll buy into the BS trying to justify B Hussein's promise of flexibility. The useful idiots will lap it up and yet again won't see what's staring them in the face.

Funny, cos once again he's been caught with his pants down and showing his true colors to the WORLD. Rest assured Western world leaders will remember "space" (it won't remind them of outer space) and "flexibility" when dealing with the B Hussein administration. He isn't trusted by them now and will be trusted even less in the future.

The only winner during this round is Putin and I wonder if anyone was surprised when the Pravda newspaper endorsed B Hussein a few short days after the "space" and "flexibility" faux pas?

Aaron Klein discusses in the below article what might be covered in the promised "flexibility". It's a good history lesson and raises interesting and frightening possibilities.

Shalom,

Peter

Is THIS the ‘flexibility’ Obama promised Russia on U.S. nukes?: President caught on mic asking Soviets for ‘space’ until second term.

By Aaron Klein

TEL AVIVWhat specifically was President Obama referring to when he told Russian President Dmitri Medvedev he would have “more flexibility” to deal with controversial issues such as missile defense?

In remarks caught on mic and now broadcast around the world, Obama asked Mevdeved to tell Russian President Vladimir Putin to give him more “space,” indicating missile issues can be resolved during a second term in office.

Obama made the remarks at the bilateral Nuclear Security Summit meeting in Seoul.

Stated Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.”

Medvedev replied: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…”

Obama then stated: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

Last year, Obama committed to reducing stocks of U.S. weapons-grade plutonium and signed an agreement that will lower the country’s deployed nuclear arsenals.

Obama’s “science czar,” John Holdren, has long petitioned for these moves at a magazine whose personnel were used for the benefit of Soviet propaganda in an attempt to disarm America, according to a former top intelligence official from the USSR.

The magazine’s founders were accused of providing vital nuclear secrets that helped the Soviets develop an atomic bomb.

The magazine, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, has been urging the U.S. to surrender its nuclear arsenal to international control.

In April 2010, the U.S. and Russia signed a deal reducing stocks of weapons-grade plutonium, officials in both nations said at the time.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov signed a non-binding protocol to a 2000 agreement on eliminating excess weapons-grade plutonium from defense programs.

U.S. officials have said each country is to dispose of 34 metric tons of weapons-grade plutonium by burning it in reactors.

One week earlier Medvedev and Obama signed the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, committing them to reducing their deployed nuclear arsenals.

The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, with Holdren on the board of directors from 1984 until recently, has long petitioned for the U.S. to reduce its nuclear stockpiles. According to Pavel Sudoplatov, a former major-general in Soviet intelligence, this kind of work by the magazine editors was for the benefit of the Soviet Union.

Holdren is assistant to the president for science and technology, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and co-chairman of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists began publishing regularly in 1945, when it was founded by former physicists from the Manhattan Project, which developed the first atomic bomb.

Two of the magazine’s founding sponsors, Leo Szilard and Robert Oppenheimer, were accused of passing information from the Manhattan Project to the Soviets. Both were also key initiators of the Manhattan Project.

In 1994, Sudoplatov, a former major-general in Soviet intelligence, identified Szilard and Oppenheimer as key sources of crucial atomic information to the Soviet Union.

“The most vital information for developing the first Soviet atomic bomb came from scientists engaged in the Manhattan Project to build the American atomic bomb – Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi and Leo Szilard,” wrote Sudoplatov.

Sudoplatov wrote the Soviet Union “received reports on the progress of the Manhattan Project from Oppenheimer and his friends in oral form, through comments and asides, and from documents transferred through clandestine methods with their full knowledge that the information they were sharing would be passed on.”

Oppenheimer was accused in Senate hearings of bringing communists into the Manhattan Project. He brought his brother Frank and three former graduate students into the project, all of whom, according to Senate hearings, were well known to him to be “members of the Communist Party or closely associated with activities of the Communist Party.”

Oppenheimer admitted he knew by August 1943 that two of the scientists working under him were Communist Party members. Three of five scientists under Oppenheimer’s direct supervision were accused of leaking secret information about the atomic bomb to the Soviets.

On Oct. 25, 1945, Oppenheimer met with President Truman at the White House, urging him to surrender the U.S. nuclear monopoly to international control. Truman was outraged, reportedly telling Secretary of State Dean Acheson, “I don’t want to see that son-of-a-b*tch in this office ever again.”

Magazine used for ‘Soviet propaganda’

Oppenheimer and Szilard were stripped of their work in the Manhattan Project, but they continued to use the bulletin to petition for the U.S. to surrender its nuclear arsenal to international control.

“[Soviet politician and security chief Lavrentiy] Beria said we should think how to use Oppenheimer, Szilard and others around them in the peace campaign against nuclear armament. Disarmament and the inability to impose nuclear blackmail would deprive the United States of its advantage,” wrote Sudoplatov.

Sudoplatov said his spymasters knew the lobby efforts of the bulletin editors would be a “crucial factor in establishing the new world order after the war, and we took advantage of this.”

Another bulletin founding sponsor, Edward U. Condon, was mentioned by FBI director J. Edgar Hoover in a May 1947 letter as having contact with an alleged spy who had passed information to the Soviets from 1941 to 1944.

Holdren worked alongside communist sympathizers

When Holdren started work on the bulletin in 1984, communist and socialist sympathizers still occupied the magazine’s masthead.

The New Zeal blog notes the bulletin’s board of directors in 1984 included:

*Board chairman Aaron Adler, who also served on the board of the Chicago Center for U.S./USSR Relations and Exchanges, alongside Larry McGurty of the Communist Party USA.

Adler was also a member of what New Zeal labels a Communist Party front, the Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights. He was also involved in a committee to celebrate the 100th birthday of Communist Party member Paul Robeson.

*Bernard Weissbourd, a former Manhattan Project scientist who later served on the transition oversight committee for incoming Chicago Mayor Harold Washington, who was active in Communist Party fronts.

Weissbourds’ son, Robert M. Weissbourd, later served as chairman of the Obama for America Campaign Urban and Metropolitan Policy Committee and on the Obama Transition Housing and Urban Development Agency Review Team in 2008.

*Ruth Adams, bulletin editor, who served in the 1960s on the Advisory Committee of the Hyde Park Community Peace Center. Other center members included lifelong communist front activist Robert Havighurst, communist activist and radical Trotskyist Sydney Lens and Quentin Young, an avowed communist who has advised Obama on health care.

Holdren in Cold War

WND first reported Holdren visited the Soviet Union during the Cold War as vice chairman of a group whose founder was accused of providing vital nuclear information that helped the Soviets build an atom bomb.
The original leaders of the group, the Federation of American Scientists, also served on the board of the bulletin magazine.

Just after President Reagan’s March 1983 “Star Wars” speech in which he proposed a missile-defense shield to protect the U.S., a group of Soviet academicians sent a letter to the U.S. scientific community asking about the feasibility of such a shield.

The only group that responded directly to the Soviet scientists was the Federation of American Scientists, or FAS, leading to an invitation to visit from Evgeny Velikov, director of the Soviet Kurchatov Institute of Science.

Physicist David W. Hafemeister relates in his book, “Physics and Nuclear Arms Today,” how he was part of the FAS delegation to the USSR along with Holdren, who at the time was a professor at the University of California at Berkeley.

The FAS is non-profit organization formed in 1945 by scientists from the Manhattan Project. The FAS has long petitioned for nuclear disarmament.

Szilard was a principal founder of the FAS. Founders of the FAS also were board members of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists.

Along with Szilard and Oppenheimer, WND found other FAS founders that served on the bulletin board, including nuclear physicists Eugene Rubinowitch, Hans Bethe and V. F. Weisskopf

Surrender to planetary regime

Holdren, meanwhile, has been a longtime climate-change alarmist who has advocated ideas such as enforcing limits to world population growth.

Holdren’s name was in the e-mails hacked from the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University in the U.K., which show that some climate researchers declined to share their data with fellow scientists, conspired to rig data and sought to keep researchers with dissenting views from publishing in leading scientific journals.

FrontPageMag.com noted Holdren has endorsed “surrender of sovereignty” to “a comprehensive Planetary Regime” that would control all the world’s resources, direct global redistribution of wealth, oversee the “de-development” of the West, control a world army and taxation regime, and enforce world population limits.

Holdren collaborated with conspiracy theorist Paul Ehrlich, author of “The Population Bomb,” in which it was proclaimed: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines – hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death.”

WND previously reported Holdren also predicted 1 billion people will die in “carbon-dioxide-induced famines” in a coming new ice age by 2020.

Holdren based his prediction on a theory that human emissions of carbon dioxide would produce a climate catastrophe causing global cooling, with a consequent reduction in agricultural production resulting in widespread disaster.

But Holdren also argued “global warming” might cancel global cooling. In their 1970s textbook “Ecoscience: Population, Resources and Environment,” last revised in 1977, Holdren and co-authors Paul and Anne Ehrlich argued on page 687 that “a man-made warming trend might cancel out a natural cooling trend.”


Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
4/2/2012 6:37:51 AM
Hi All,

Here's a song that surely expresses not only the beliefs and views of all logical thinking Americans but their fierce desire to see the last of B Hussein in 2012.

Obama You're Fired.

Shalom,

Peter



Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
Lydia Fokina

1456
2042 Posts
2042
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 100 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
4/2/2012 6:47:33 AM
Hi Peter!

404 - File or directory not found.

The resource you are looking for might have been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable.


Quote:
Hi All,

Here's a song that surely expresses not only the beliefs and views of all logical thinking Americans but their fierce desire to see the last of B Hussein in 2012.

Obama You're Fired.

Shalom,

Peter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=KSLaxqJ9zKE


+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: The President That Hates His Country By Joan Swirsky
4/2/2012 7:00:27 AM
Hi Lydia,

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. The link is correct and I tried another link directly from the youtube channel and that too gave the error page. Very strange.

I removed the link but if you click on the video you can watch the video here or on the title and you'll be redirected to the youtube channel and can watch it there.

Shalom,

Peter

Quote:
Hi Peter!

404 - File or directory not found.

The resource you are looking for might have been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable.


Quote:
Hi All,

Here's a song that surely expresses not only the beliefs and views of all logical thinking Americans but their fierce desire to see the last of B Hussein in 2012.

Obama You're Fired.

Shalom,

Peter



Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0


facebook
Like us on Facebook!