Wednesday 17 April 2024

Trump NYC trial starts today. And words on Israel-Iran

 

Click above for the video
The discussion on the first case against Donald Trump to go to court, April 15, is very good.  Says one: “it’s the textbook definition of election interference”. 

Re Israel -- Iran war, discussion with Glenn Greenwald, not so good, as GG is a down and down Israel hater. And is taken in by the Osama bin Laden “letter”, which blames 9/11 et.seq. on America’s involvement in the middle east. That’s one item, sure, but OBL says, in Raymond Ibrahim’s “The Al Qaeda Reader”, that the reason for attacking the United States is that they are non-believers. That they are “infidels”. IOW, the new-cons were right when they said “we were attacked because of our freedoms”. Our freedom to not believe in Islam. Our freedom to be infidels. 

That’s why it’s so important to support Israel. Because they are indeed a beacon of western values and enlightenment. As Sam Harris has said, we are in a war with radical Islam, with Jihadism, even if we don’t know it yet. 

Megyn Kelly gets that, and pushes back at GG. Greenwald doesn’t get it. 

ADDED: GG gets all upset that Israel attacked and killed senior people in the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, because they did it by attacking, he says, an Iranian Embassy in Syria. This is just not done, he says. Because of Diplomatic Immunity. Which he claims has been sacrosanct. 

Two points: 
1. Iran and Israel don’t recognise each other. That’s because when Iran became the Islamic Republic of Iran in 1979, it immediately renounced recognition of Israel, claiming that it was all occupied land. Israel then de-recognised Iran. That means that there is no such thing as Diplomatic Immunity. By the way, I know this because I spent a dozen years or more in the Australian Foreign Service. It was one of the things we studied. 
2. The targets were senior officers of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Including the architect of the October 7 attacks. That made it a legitimate target, no matter the issue of Diplomatic Immunity. In any case, it was not even the Embassy, but a building next door, defined as part of a consulate. Again, not diplomatic if it’s occupied with enemy generals.