When does it end?

How far does a candidate have to go to prove his/her loyalty?


When does it end?
by hamidbak

Obama was asked two nights ago, in the debate in Ohio, about Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan’s endorsement of his campaign. He replied that he denounced the endorsement. He was then asked if he had rejected it. Obama replied that he doesn’t think there is a difference in the two. Tim Russert kept pushing it, “yeah you denounced it but do you reject it?”

Obama- Well, I don’t see why I have to reject it, I have already said that I denounce it…

Russert- Yes, but you must reject it.

Hillary- Hey, hey, heyyyyyy…I’ll reject it. I’ll reject anything and everything you want me just to look good and strong. What is it I’m rejecting?

Russert- What Farrakhan has said about the Jews.

Hillary- Ohhh, if it was bad then I sure as hell would reject it without thinking.

Russert- So, Senator Obama after finally being cornered into rejecting Louis Farrakhan, will you sending him a nasty letter and calling him an ass hole?

Obama- Ahhh, mmmm, well, I don’t know if that would be necessary nor appropriate for a US senator to do.

Russert- Oh, my God, you won’t call him a nasty ass poop head? The person who said all those things about the Jews? In fact I think he may have started couple of the furnaces in Auschwitz.

Obama- I….don’t….think Farrakhan actually set any….

Hillary- Oh yeah he did. Those people helped me so much in NY…I mean I have bagels for life.

Russert- Easy toots.

Russert- Ok Mr. Obama, will you at least crap in a bag, set it on fire, put it in Farrakhan’s door step, ring the bell, and run?

Obama- Oh my Lord, no I would not.

Hillary- I’ll do it, Lord knows I could use a good BM!

Ok, maybe it didn’t happen quite like this, but what the hell? When does it end? How far does a candidate have to go to prove his/her loyalty to any special group? And yes, Israel is much of a special group as any. The guy, Farrakhan, is goofy. He’s well on the other end of normalcy, especially when it comes to saying things. But why doesn’t denouncing him and his endorsement enough when it comes to the Jewish community?

There were no questions, nor has there been any questions, in any debate, EVER about oil companies, insurance companies, Israeli lobbyists, or in fact any specific special interest groups.

No candidate has ever had it as a part of his/her thought process to ask about Israel and its nuclear capabilities. No narrator has ever brought up the questions about Palestinian treatment in the hands of occupiers in their land for over 60 years. But delay saying “reject” for more than a few seconds when it comes to a political goof ball like Farrakhan’s support for your campaign and they’re all over you.

Ever since the first Bush, if not Ragan, we’ve seen American presidents wearing the head covering, Yamaka, when they visit Israel. Will the same president wear the Muslim counter part of Yamaka, when visiting any Muslim state?

Barak Obama wore the traditional Somalian outfit when he went to that country and he is Osama’s twin brother. If he would have gone to Israel and sported a Yamaka, he’d be a shoe in to the White House.

I understand, completely, denouncement of those who deny the Holocaust or don’t recognize the statehood of Israel. I cannot stand bigots, racists, and ignorant asses who use adjectives and words to describe a nationality or religion, but to chase a guy and make him say uncle, c’mon.

In the meanwhile, I would love the Iranian government to tell Israel, “you show yours, and I’ll show you mine”, when it comes to nuclear capabilities.


Recently by hamidbakCommentsDate
افسانه من
Aug 18, 2012
Worker lost
Mar 30, 2012
ریحان بنفش
Aug 11, 2010
more from hamidbak

Great article!

by IraniIrooni (not verified) on


that was a great article. I agree with everything you've mentioned. There are double-standards every where. What else do you expect when you've got AIPAC running the US government. And by the way, many ISRAELIS also denounce AIPAC. Very good article.


This so called "Grand Bargin

by grand bargain (not verified) on

This so called "Grand Bargin Strategy" which intermittently appears in the Op Ed pages of liberal papers like the New York Times will give the Mullahs longstanding guarantees that their dictatorial rule will not be challenged and their nuclear arsenal will not be threatened if they refrain from directly attacking the most important US allies in the region - principally Saudi Arabia & the Gulf States and secondly Israel.

Whether the Mullahs will agree to such an accomodation remains to be seen. But the fact that such an offer will be made (Obama has already proposed direct talks with the Islamic Republic's leadership) is an indictment of the depths to which the Democratic Party has fallen - ironically it is no longer the Republican Party that treats with dictators and damns the peoples of the third world as part of US realpolitik, it is the Democrats.


XerXes, the way you and

by Farhad Kashani (not verified) on

XerXes, the way you and other IRI apologists and Marxist Islamist Iranians put words together and say things, shows exactly whats wrong with our country ! And what wrong is people like you do not know what logic is ! You accuse everyone who disagrees with your ideology as “haters”…but you use words and phrases such as “Americans have to bend backwards to satisfy the Zionists…and “. “US is definitely a colony of Zionist, that's no doubt”.. I mean there is no sign of logic and reality in those claims ! The way we Iranians (Actually because of our strong historical literature heritage) twist and tweak logic and realities using words and phrases is unique to us in the world ! I do not disagree that there is a strong alliance between U.S and Israel, but the way we Iranians think and conclude about realities on the ground id discusting and backwards. First of all, not all U.S politicians are “pro-Zionist” whatever that word means ! how about Jimmy Carter, a former president, respected worldwide, even by Hamas ! He, rightfully so, has taken pro Palestinian people, anti Israeli government side . Bush himself is the first U.S president who called for a Palestinian state. 2- U.S has as strong alliances with major Arab countries just as it does with Israel. Do a research and tell me out of the top 5 recipients of U.S foreign aid, how many Arab countries do you see? Let me answer that for you: Egypt and Jordan. Two countries that fought with Israel and killed Israelis, and continue on till today directly and indirectly support Palestinian resistance groups. Egypt lets Hamas smuggle arms into Ghaza and other territories. Many of these fascist-like Muslim Brotherhood groups who support anti occupation forces in Israel, live off of U.S foreign aid, just like some of our Iranians in this country take advantage of this countries opportunities and go around and blindly bash (not criticize) it. 3- Aipac is a strong lobby group, no doubt about it, but it ain’t stronger than lets even say the Insurance Com. Lobby groups. Yes they have an influence, but that influence has been largely exaggerated by the left leaning media around the world and echoed by Islamic fascists in the Muslim world. And finally my friend, none of my respected leftists and IRI apologists hamvatans, has ever been able to explain to me why do they hate Israel so much? I mean what has it done to us? I have no doubt that Israel is an occupational force that needs to give up occupied Arab lands in 1967, but there is no way in hell you gonna tell me the reason you hate Israel is because of that. So please explain. Maybe you can give me a convincing answer. Regards.


immortal guard: What is the

by klm (not verified) on

immortal guard:

What is the Grand Bargain???Can you elaborate?


Grand Bargain

by Immortal Guard (not verified) on

The Zionists can attempt a grand bargain by letting go of their coercive power in and hold on the United States against a full peace and security package in the Middle East. But the problem is that they want a fully secure Israel living in peace in a Muslim area of the world and also keep their formidable power base in a predominantly Christian country that is the United States. The above suggestion is a feasible exchange that could end this mess particularly if well-meaning people are at the helm.

If the current situation continues with the Zionist entity losing ground particularly in the Middle East and also not being able to excercise its full power in the US then all developments point to more terrorism in US and Europe, more economic warfare (new cold war) in North America and more military warfare (warm war) in the Middle East with the conflict culminating in an all-out confrontation of the world of Islam with Israel and the world not seeing Israel's 100th birthday even if this happens at great expense of human life and enormous destruction!


98 building permits for Palestinians, 18500 permits for jews

by Observer (not verified) on

Pay attention please,
According to BBC last week,
Since the year 2000, Palestinians got 98 building permits on their own land (West bank)
while Israeli jews received 18500 building permits on the same Palestinian land, meaning West Bank.
How different is it from Aparthied?
Where is the justice?
Why are US politicians are in competition to kiss Israel's ass hte fastest?
Aren't these legitimate questions in the land of the free?


Israel is the cause of

by Rich (not verified) on

Israel is the cause of American aggressions. They look bad and now have made America look bad also. I want America to be independent of Israel. Why do we have to pay with money and blood for those who are really not beneficial to us in any way?


You got it wrong ....

by Asghar Kirtala (not verified) on

Mr writer,
You got it wrong. It was "billary" that pushed him to "reject" nation of Isalm's leader support. She and her husband are stooges of zionists. What do you expect?


The Holy Cow

by Baraclinton (not verified) on

Anybody who knows anything about poilitics in the U.S. knows that Israel is the untouchable Holy Cow of U.S. and international politics. You can criticize the British, the French, the Afghans, the Iraqis, the Germans, the Lebanese, the Italians, the Egyptians, the Dutch, the Spanish, the Mexicans, the Brazilians, the Chinese, the Swiss, the Greeks, the South Africans, the Moritanians, and even the Marcians. You can say absolutely anything you wish about them. No one cares. Israel, however, is off limits. It is a Holy Cow that we all must worship.

No matter what Israel says or does, no one has the right to say anything. If you do, you have insulted the Gods, and you know what happens if you insult the Gods: The Gods' wrath falls upon you and you are banished from the political Kingdom. Be Obama, Bush, Clinton, McCain, or the great founder of the land of the free George Washington himself.

Israel can kill children on a daily basis, (only 4 kids just today,) but remember it is the Gods punishing you for your sins. Worship the Gods and live happily everafter in the Kingdom. Blasphemy is not tolerated.

Worshiping Israel has been the religion of the Western world for the last 70 years and it will continue to be. Join the crowd! Or Tim Russert would have to play the Archangel of Interrogation and banish you to eternal hell on behalf of the mighty Gods!



by Anonymously (not verified) on

There you go boy, now that's civil and thoughtful. It takes an extremely bright person like you with intuition and a wonderful handle on English language to set us all right.
For fuck sake...what is wrong with you?


Hey muslimsworstnightmare

by Jamaleto (not verified) on

If we criticize a killing regime doesn't translate that we are moslems. Get a freaking brain dimwit. Actually this has nothing to do with religion and IR doesn't have a monopoly in criticizing Zionists. Get it in you and get educated a bit.


Let's be instrument of peace

by klm (not verified) on

Let's be instrument of peace an don't demonize either side. What can we do to help these two paranoid nations to trust each other? These two cousin are dysfunctional with major psychological complexes. I'm afraid both nations are going to self-destruct.


Now you are a hater

by Observer (not verified) on

You are a hater,
Because you hate moslems for being moslems.


So, what do we have here?

by muslimsworstnightmare (not verified) on

So, what do we have here? Another bunch of jew hating, Islamic Republic loving hypocrits? Go fuck yourselves....all of you.


Hate is a natural reaction to what Zionist movement has done.

by Observer (not verified) on

1. Why anybody who critizes Israel and its criminal actions is called a "hater"?

2. Why do people hate?
Do they get up one morning and start to hate?
For no reason?
Or is it because of what the object of hate has done? It is shamefull for a country like United States to take her marching order from a foreign country, meaning Israel. It is a fact. It is documented and even some of the enlightened, anti zionist jews agree.
1.5 billion moslems are demonized by Zionists and their supporters. It was discusting what I saw on TV during the Obama and Clinton's debate. Simply discusting. Both trying to kiss Israel's ass as hard as they could.
What a shame!


Instead of hatred promote

by Anonymousxyz (not verified) on

Instead of hatred promote peace:


Working for Peace without recreating War:



3 billion dollars of our taxes to kill Palestinian children

by Humanity (not verified) on

Here is the picture:
This is the contribution of Zionist jews to Middle East.



by ruzbeh (not verified) on

My thoughts exactly:)



by Anonymousxyz (not verified) on


The Israel lobby: How powerful is it really?
By Stephen Zunes

..."Perhaps the most twisted argument in their article is the authors' claim that the 2003 invasion of Iraq "was motivated in good part by a desire to make Israel more secure". This is ludicrous on several grounds. First of all, Israel is far less secure as a result of the rise of Islamist extremism, terrorist groups, and Iranian influence in post-invasion Iraq than it was during the final years of Saddam Hussein's rule, when Iraq was no longer a strategic threat to Israel or actively involved in anti-Israeli terrorism. Indeed, it had been more than a decade since Iraq had posed any significant threat to Israel, and some of Israel's biggest supporters on Capitol Hill were among the most outspoken voices against the US invasion of Iraq.
Within the Bush administration, although the neo-conservatives who championed the invasion of Iraq were supporters of Israel's rightist governments, they had for many years also been supporters of rightist governments in Latin America, Southeast Asia and elsewhere out of a belief that such alliances strengthened US hegemony. More fundamentally, the United States has had strong strategic interests in the Persian Gulf region predating the establishment of modern Israel. Indeed, oil companies and the arms industry exert far more economic and ideological influence over Washington's policy in the Persian Gulf than does the Israel lobby.

Mearsheimer and Walt also claim that the Israel lobby has urged Washington to put "very heavy" pressure on Syria. In reality, the Israeli government - fearing instability and a rise of Islamic fundamentalism should the Bashar Assad regime be toppled - has been encouraging the United States to back off from putting too much pressure on Syria. Furthermore, dozens of US House of Representatives members who voted in favor of the Syria Accountability Act in 2003 have opposed a number of resolutions supporting Israeli policies.

The authors' claim that the Israel lobby is a major factor in the formulation of overall US Middle East policy is plainly false. Indeed, US policy in the Middle East over the past several decades - orchestrating military interventions and coups, backing right-wing dictatorships, peddling neo-liberal economic policies through the International Monetary Fund and other international financial institutions, undermining the United Nations and international law, and imposing sanctions against nationalist governments - is remarkably similar to US policy toward Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia. If the United States can pursue such policies elsewhere in the world without pressure from the Israel lobby, why is its presence necessary to explain US policies in the Middle East?

If the agenda advocated by the Israel lobby were substantially at variance with US foreign policy elsewhere in the world, one could make a strong case that these lobbyists were influential. However, that is simply not the case. This is why some of the most outspoken opponents of US foreign policy in general and of US support for Israel in particular - such as Noam Chomsky, Phyllis Bennis, Mitchell Plitnick, Simona Sharoni, Joseph Massad, Steve Niva and Norman Finkelstein - have raised serious questions about the supposed power of the Israel lobby, noting that it is responsible, in the words of Professor Massad, for "the details and intensity but not the direction, content or impact of such policies".

When it comes to US policy toward Israel and Palestine, such groups as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and its related political action committees (PACs) have certainly influenced some members of Congress as well as some decision-makers in Republican and Democratic administrations. Moreover, mainstream and conservative Jewish organizations have mobilized considerable lobbying resources, financial contributions from the Jewish community, and citizen pressure on the news media and other forums of public discourse in support of the Israeli government. At times, they have even created a climate of intimidation against many who speak out for peace and human rights or who support the Palestinians' right of self-determination. But all this is very different from claiming that the Israel lobby is primarily responsible for US policy in the Middle East, even when it comes to Israel.

What motivates US support for the Israeli government?
The unfortunate reality is that the US government is perfectly capable of supporting right-wing allies in efforts to invade, repress, and colonize weaker neighbors without a well-organized ethnic minority somehow forcing Congress or the administration to do so. To claim otherwise is to assume that without the pro-Israel lobby, the United States would be supportive of international law and human rights in its foreign policy.

Given that US foreign policy has rarely been supportive of international law and human rights, except when it corresponds with short-term political interests, why should the Middle East be an exception? There was no Indonesian-American lobby responsible for the bipartisan support for Indonesia's quarter-century of brutal occupation in East Timor, nor is there a Moroccan-American lobby responsible for the bipartisan support for the ongoing Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara.

It is certainly true that the United States is, in the words of Mearsheimer and Walt, "out of step" with the vast majority of the international community on the question of Israel and Palestine. Yet the United States is also out of step with the vast majority of the international community regarding the treaty banning land mines, the International Criminal Court, the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, and the embargo against Cuba. Similarly, two decades ago the United States was also out of step with the vast majority of the international community in regard to the mining of Nicaraguan harbors and support for the Contra terrorists, as well as opposition to sanctions against the apartheid regime in South Africa and allying with Pretoria in supporting the UNITA (National Union for the Total Independence of Angola) rebels.

Mearsheimer's and Walt's observation that US support of Israel runs contrary to US strategic interests by stimulating anti-Americanism in the Arab/Islamic world is not an unprecedented dissenting position. During any US administration, there are elements within establishment circles that come to conclusions challenging the prevailing mindset. For example, Mearsheimer and Walt joined Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jacek Krugler, and other realists who recognized that the invasion of Iraq was contrary to US national-security interests, but the Bush administration and a sizable majority of Congress (including the leadership of both parties) believed otherwise.

Similarly, some leading realists of the 1960s, such as Hans Morgenthau, opposed the Vietnam War, but that didn't stop an overwhelming bipartisan majority in Washington from mistakenly believing, at least until the late 1960s, that the war was somehow in America's best interests. In other words, administrations of both parties have repeatedly proved themselves capable of acting contrary to long-term national interests without the Israel lobby forcing them to do so.

In certain narrowly defined, short-term ways, US support for the Israeli government does enhance US interests. In a region where radical nationalism and Islamist extremism could threaten US control of oil and other strategic interests, Israel has played a major role in preventing victories by radical movements, not just in Palestine but in Lebanon and Jordan as well. Israel has kept Syria, with its radical nationalist government once allied with the Soviet Union, in check, and the Israeli Air Force is predominant throughout the region.

Israel's frequent wars facilitate battlefield testing of US weapons, and Israel's arms industry has provided weapons and munitions for governments and opposition movements supported by the United States. Moreover, during the 1980s, Israel served as a conduit for US arms to governments and movements too unpopular in the United States to receive overt military assistance, including South Africa under the apartheid regime, Iran's Islamic Republic, Guatemala's rightist military juntas, and the Nicaraguan Contras. Israeli military advisers assisted the Contras, the Salvadoran junta, and other movements and governments backed by the United States.

The Israeli intelligence agency Mossad has cooperated with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and other US agencies in gathering intelligence and spearheading covert operations. Israel possesses missiles capable of striking targets thousands of kilometers from its borders and has collaborated with the US military-industrial complex in research and development for new jet fighters and anti-missile defense systems, a relationship that is growing every year.

As one Israeli analyst described it during the Iran-Contra scandal, where Israel played a crucial intermediary rule, "It's like Israel has become just another [US] federal agency, one that's convenient to use when you want something done quietly." Former US secretary of state Alexander Haig once described Israel as the largest and only unsinkable US aircraft carrier in the world.

One of the most fundamental principles in the theory of international relations is that the most stable military relationship between adversaries (besides disarmament) is strategic parity. Such a relationship provides each opponent with an effective deterrent against the other launching a preemptive attack. If the United States was concerned simply with Israel's security, Washington would maintain Israeli defenses only to a level approximately equal to any combination of Arab armed forces. Instead, leaders of both US political parties have called for ensuring qualitative Israeli military superiority.

When Israel was less dominant militarily, there was less consensus in Washington for backing Israel. The continued high level of US aid to Israel stems less out of concern for Israel's survival than from a desire for Israel to continue its political dominion over the Palestinians and its military dominance of the region.

The enormous amount of military aid received by Israel annually has been cited by Mearsheimer and Walt, among others, as indicative of the power of the Israel lobby. Yet the pattern of this aid merely reflects the importance of Israel to US interests.

Immediately after Israel's spectacular victory in the 1967 war, when it demonstrated its military superiority in the region, US aid skyrocketed by 450%. Part of this increase, according to the New York Times, apparently was related to Israel's willingness to provide the United States with examples of new Soviet weapons captured during the war. After the 1970-71 civil war in Jordan, when Israel exhibited its ability to deter Syrian intervention in support of the uprising against the pro-Western monarchy and thus curb revolutionary movements outside its borders, US aid expanded still further. When Israel further proved its strength in successfully countering a surprisingly strong Arab military assault in October 1973, US military aid burgeoned once again.

These aid increases paralleled the British decision to withdraw its forces from areas east of the Suez Canal. Along with the shah of Iran, who also received massive arms and logistical cooperation as a key component of the Nixon Doctrine, Israel emerged as an important allied force in the wake of the British withdrawal.

This pattern continued when aid shot up yet again in 1977, after the election of the first right-wing Likud government in Israel. Subsequent aid boosts coincided with the fall of the shah of Iran and the ratification of the Camp David Treaty with Egypt. US aid swelled still further soon after the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. In 1983 and 1984, when the United States and Israel signed memoranda of understanding on strategic cooperation and military planning and conducted their first joint naval and air military exercises, Israel was rewarded with an additional US$1.5 billion in economic aid and another half-billion dollars for the development of a new jet fighter. During and immediately after the Gulf War, US aid strengthened by $650 million. In the decade following - as concerns arose regarding the threat of terrorist groups, Islamic extremists, and so-called "rogue states" - US aid to Israel grew further still. A peace treaty with Jordan and a series of disengagement agreements with the Palestinians led to still additional arms transfers, despite the resulting enhanced security for Israel.

Rather than being a liability, as Mearsheimer and Walt claim, the 1991 Gulf War once again proved Israel to be a strategic asset: Israeli developments in air-to-ground warfare were integrated into allied bombing raids against Iraqi missile sites and other targets; Israeli-designed conformal fuel tanks for F-15 fighter-bombers greatly enhanced their range; Israeli-provided mine plows were utilized during the final assaults on Iraqi positions; Israeli mobile bridges were used by US marines; Israeli targeting systems and low-altitude warning devices were employed by US helicopters; and Israel developed key components for the widely used Tomahawk missiles. Israel is also the fifth-largest supplier of high-tech military hardware to the United States. Not surprisingly, US aid to Israel intensified still further in the 1990s, even as military support for Israel's key Arab adversaries plummeted because of the collapse of the Soviet Union...


who can kiss Israel's ass faster and longer, that's the question

by Observer (not verified) on

Here we are,
in the primaries to choose a candidate.
The question is which candidate can kiss Israel' ass faster and longer. What a shame. A country of 320 million people is controlled by a little country in the Middle East. This is the reality of American foregin policy.


boy, I should be

by Anonymousxyz (not verified) on

boy, I should be multi-tasking. Should read Right not write...


LOL, Godwien Mier,,,hahaha

by Anonymousxyz (not verified) on

LOL, Godwien Mier,,,hahaha Golda is write. My mistake.

I have been away for a couple of hours, and then when I come back ; And what do I see, tantrums and pouts, exploding for nothing as usual.

The jews are not going anywhere. Get used to it.

For all of the wailing and screaming over Israel’s brutality toward Palestinians, here’s a chart helpfully provided by Reuters Alertnet showing that infant mortality in the Palestinian Authority is lower than in any of the surrounding Arab countries: Humanitarian stats.


Also, this hate-inciting, toward either sides, and hate fest that you people promote on this site is not going to help the cause of either Palestinians or Israelis.


Who Gives A Fuck About US Elections!

by Pissed Off (not verified) on

First read the following and then ask Mahmoud Koskhol which candidate will be in the White House next. He seems to be in the know about everything.




by hamidbak on

I didn't choose the title. The titles often get changed when submitted to Iranian.com.

Is there anything anyone can say about Israel, unless absolutely positive, that someone like you doesn't put an "anti-semitic" label on it? You folks are going to wear this word down, you ought to think of some back up labels.

The 4th prime minister of Israel was Golda Meir. She was never known as "Goldwien". Now that should be considered anti-semitic. They're gonna come and take you away.....

She, like many figures in history were a bit of a dreamer. When Martin Luther King's dream of all humanity coexisting together comes true, so will Golda's.



by Anonymously (not verified) on

Are you always this exact and down to the point? Who are you referring to? What are you referring to?

Are you saying that Iran has nuclear arms and Israel doesn't? If that's your case, ask Vanunu who worked for the Israeli arms agency and upon disclosing it with pictures, was arrested in the '80's and spent over 20 years in prison.

IRI has gotten a lot of people fooled not some. Seems like you're one of them.


They have got them by the BALLS!

by farokh2000 on

I totally agree that no one will be elected to any high office in this country, especially to the Presidency unless AIPAC is totally comfortable that they would bend over for them.

They have got the entire political system and the poiliticians by their balls so tight that they won't even let them loose even once in a while to do their wives.

Yes, I am sure now all the AIPAC supporters will come out and label this site "Anti Semetic"., but who are they fooling and who the hell cares?

The Zionist regime will not rest untill they have forced an all out nuclear WWIII. Wasn't that what the current puppy George W. said it would take to have the whole World bow down to Israel?


XerXes: Israel is bankruped

by Molan (not verified) on

Israel has been bankrupt ideologically and I have no idea why the politicians in the US insist on being on their side. We all know that chances for Israel to make it for a long time is really slim.
Thanks for this article, it was sad to see the question to Barrack. I really like him though.


Zionists are coming out

by Spy_catcher (not verified) on

As you all can see, the Iranian.com will soon be bombarded with Zionists. They are all coming out of hiding.
We are not Americans, although we have not "much" against you Zionists, but we are not dumb not to know what you are up to. Don't be rats, this is a free speech forum for God's sake!

Iran will always win because Iran is always on the right side.


To AnonuymousXYZ; Who the F--K is Goldwien Mier?

by Kamyar Zahedi (not verified) on

Who the F--K is Goldwien Mier? The statement was not by the founders of the MGM it was by late Golda Meir the fourth PM of Israel, about whom you apparently don't know much. So, please take your pseudo pro-Israel crap to some where else, because people here recognize you for what you are. Your kind are a tired bunch that should refrain from polluting the media with idiotic statements.

Go home and take a bunch of sleeping pills so you can contribute to making this world a better place for all the rest of us.


It's amazing

by XerXes (not verified) on

It's amazing how in politics, Americans have to bend backwards to satisfy the Zionists. They know otherwise they will not get elected. That's the power of Colonizing Zionist Party. US is definitely a colony of Zionist, that's no doubt. Take the cloth of any American politician and it's written made in Zionist!
They are willing to bomb US to nothing as long as make their Zionist bosses happy.
Unfortunately the power of Zionists don't even allow anyone or any media to question their existance. You can be labeled as an enemy of the state if you raise your concerns about the Zionist power.
I think the Americans are stuck in a bad shit. I have no idea what would be the solution.