War on Iran: Jewish Voice for Peace


Ask 41 U.S. senators to stand strong and support diplomacy over war

As I write this, the U.S. Senate is just eight votes shy of a veto-proof bill that could send the U.S. to war over Iran.

This AIPAC-backed bill would torpedo ongoing diplomatic efforts and open the way to military action and further draconian sanctions. The results could be disastrous for everyone.

The good news is that outrage is growing, and 21 senators have come out against pro-war bill S.1881. But there is a chance it could reach a veto-proof majority. Unless we act now, the 20 senators who have not signed yet could succumb to the march to war. Can you sign this petition to tell them to stand strong ?

Click here: http://www.JVP.org/Iran

This legislation is being pushed by Israel lobby groups who want a pretext for Israel to take military action against Iran. Remarkably, it would pre-commit the United States to military involvement should Israel attack.

If we get at least 15,000 to sign this petition, we’ll take out ads in a major political news outlet to show that American Jews and our allies oppose the bill, and support diplomacy over war.

Click here: http://www.JVP.org/Iran

An interim deal brokered by the U.N. Security Council has already begun implementation, with Iran taking steps to roll back its nuclear program in exchange for limited sanctions relief.

But S.1881 (the “Nuclear Weapon-Free Iran Act of 2013”) has the support of 59 of 60 co-sponsors needed for it to pass.

Click here: http://www.JVP.org/Iran and help stop the march to war.


War on Iran

January 20, 2014 – Geneva 2 Syria: A UN spokesperson announced that UN chief Ban Ki-moon has withdrawn his invitation for Iran.

3 hours ago: AIPAC is eight votes short of a veto-proof bill that would make war on Iran more likely – Take action now: http://t.co/3r4MHA5cve


About kruitvat

I am working for the Belgian human rights association 'Werkgroep Morkhoven' which revealed the Zandvoort childporn case (88.539 victims). The case was covered up by the authorities. During the past years I have been really shocked by the way the rich countries of the western empire want to rule the world. One of my blogs: «Latest News Syria» (WordPress)/ Je travaille pour le 'Werkgroep Morkhoven', un groupe d'action qui a révélé le réseau pornographique d'enfants 'Zandvoort' (88.539 victims). Cette affaire a été couverte par les autorités. Au cours des dernières années, j'ai été vraiment choqué par la façon dont l'Occident et les pays riches veulent gouverner le monde. Un de mes blogs: «Latest News Syria» (WordPress)/ Ik werk voor de Werkgroep Morkhoven die destijds de kinderpornozaak Zandvoort onthulde (88.539 slachtoffers). Deze zaak werd door de overheid op een misdadige manier toegedekt. Gedurende de voorbije jaren was ik werkelijke geschokt door de manier waarop het rijke westen de wereld wil overheersen. Bezoek onze blog «Latest News Syria» (WordPress) ------- Photo: victims of the NATO-bombings on the Chinese embassy in Yougoslavia
This entry was posted in Geen categorie and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to War on Iran: Jewish Voice for Peace

  1. kruitvat says:

    Geneva II confab on Syria highlights gaps between Damascus, opp.

    Jan 22, 2014

    The Geneva II conference on the Syria crisis has revealed major differences of opinion between the Syrian government and the foreign-backed opposition from the very outset.

    The much-anticipated talks kicked off on Wednesday in the Swiss city of Montreux to discuss a transition plan ahead of direct talks between the opposition and the government in Geneva on Friday.

    But deep differences soon emerged with the opposition and its foreign sponsors insisting that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must not have any role in the country’s new government.

    “We agree completely with Geneva I decisions that everyone has agreed upon. I invite partners to sign on Geneva I right now during their presence here and start a transition of Assad’s power to a transitional body that will build the structure of new Syria,” said Ahmad al-Jarba, head of the so-called Syrian National Coalition.

    He was referring to an earlier round of international talks on Syria held in Geneva in June 2012, where participants agreed on a transitional government with full executive powers with members from both the government and opposition.

    Jarba’s remarks were echoed in comments made by US Secretary of State John Kerry, who insisted that there was no room for Assad in the future government of Syria.

    “There is no way, no way possible in the imagination, that the man who has led the brutal response to his own people could regain the legitimacy to govern.”

    Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Muallem, however, dismissed the remarks, noting, “No one in the world has the right to confer or withdraw the legitimacy of a president, a constitution or a law, except for the Syrians themselves. This is their right.”

    Muallem expressed regret that some countries attending the international conference “have the blood of Syrian people on their hands.”

    The Syrian foreign minister blamed them for “exporting terrorism, as well as tools of murder” and “flooding media with lies” to cover the crimes of the mercenaries and militants they have been funding in Syria.

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov also called on all foreign players to “abide by basic principles of international law: respect for Syria’s sovereignty and not interfering in its internal affairs.”

    He rejected the use of force in Syria and reiterated Russia’s call for dialog among Syrian parties as the only solution to the crisis that has been plaguing the Arab nation over that past three years.


  2. kruitvat says:

    Lessons from America’s First War with Iran

    ‘The lessons of the first war with Iran should be carefully considered before the United States embarks hastily on a second.
    In hindsight, the central lesson of the war in the 1980s is that it is easy to start a conflict with Iran and very difficult to end it. The Islamic Republic of Iran is not easy to intimidate and is likely to retaliate asymmetrically. Another key lesson is to beware the advice of your allies, both Arabs and Israelis, who are prone to give irresponsible recommendations on how to deal with Tehran.’


  3. kruitvat says:

    AIPAC pushing for war with Iran?

    March 7, 2012

    It’s annual tradition…more than 13,000 people gathering in the nation’s capital for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s annual conference.

    “It gives people across the country a chance to revitalize their pro-Israel roots,” said attendee Howard Abrams.

    “It is very important that the United States will back up Israel and indeed the United States is committed to backing up Israel,” said another visitor.

    AIPAC is considered to be one of the most powerful lobbying groups in America, and they hold the conference each year showcasing American-Israeli unity. But just how much power the group has over U.S. foreign policy stirs controversy.

    Speaking at the conference, President Obama reiterated America’s dedication to fostering strong ties with America’s closest

    “I have said that when it comes to Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, I will take no option off the table, and I mean what I say. That includes all elements of American power,” said President Obama.

    Statements like that make the world wonder… is war with Iran just around the corner?

    “AIPAC and Israel are pushing us into a regional war that does have cataclysmic potential,” said Mark Bruzonsky of MiddleEast.org.

    “AIPAC supports war. Jewish Voice for Peace and many Jewish Americans are on the side of peace. We’re not on the side
    of unnecessary wars,” added Shelly Cohen Fudge, coordinator for Jewish Voice for Peace.

    Protesters outside the convention center say Israel and AIPAC are dragging America into war with Iran. They’re also protesting the lobbying group’s enormous impact on U.S. politics. AIPAC-affiliated groups pump exorbitant amounts of money into political campaigns.

    “Politicians know that if they attempt to speak up on this issue, they are going to be not just vilified, they’re going to be defeated,” said Bruzonsky.

    In a meeting in the White House today, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told President Obama that Israel and America stand together.

    “We are you and you are us. We’re together,” he said.

    While Netanyahu stressed Israel will always be master of its own fate, President Obama insisted, “the United States will always have Israel’s back when it comes to Israel’s security.”

    This after Israel has warned it will launch an attack against Iran without giving the U.S. notice.

    So the question remains: With Israel ramping up pro-war rhetoric, and America dedicated to supporting them, is another war in the Middle East all but inevitable?

    “AIPAC has a lot of power and a lot of that is due to the fact that Congress and the media just eats it all up,” said Fudge.


  4. kruitvat says:

    Kerry Says US Needs Its Own ‘Regime Change’

    Published on Thursday, April 3, 2003 by the Boston Globe
    by Glen Johnson

    PETERBOROUGH, N.H. – Senator John F. Kerry said yesterday that President Bush committed a ”breach of trust” in the eyes of many United Nations members by going to war with Iraq, creating a diplomatic chasm that will not be bridged as long as Bush remains in office.

    ”What we need now is not just a regime change in Saddam Hussein and Iraq, but we need a regime change in the United States,” Kerry said in a speech at the Peterborough Town Library.

    Despite pledging two weeks ago to cool his criticism of the administration once war began, Kerry unleashed a barrage of criticism as US troops fought within 25 miles of Baghdad.

    By echoing the ”regime change” line popular with hundreds of thousands of antiwar protesters who have demonstrated across the nation in recent weeks, the Massachusetts senator and Democratic presidential contender seemed to be reaching out to a newly invigorated constituency as rival Howard Dean, the former governor of Vermont and a vocal opponent of the war in Iraq, closes in on Kerry in opinion polls.

    Kerry said that he had spoken with foreign diplomats and several world leaders as recently as Monday while fund-raising in New York and that they told him they felt betrayed when Bush resorted to war in Iraq before they believed diplomacy had run its course.

    He said the leaders, whom he did not identify, believed that Bush wanted to ”end-run around the UN.”

    ”I don’t think they’re going to trust this president, no matter what,” Kerry said. ”I believe it deeply, that it will take a new president of the United States, declaring a new day for our relationship with the world, to clear the air and turn a new page on American history.”

    With a dig at Bush’s previous lack of foreign policy experience, Kerry said he would usher in a new US foreign policy if he stood before the United Nations as president.

    ”I believe we can have a golden age of American diplomacy,” he said, outlining his own foreign policy credentials in the speech. ”But it will take a new president who is prepared to lead, and who has, frankly, a little more experience than visiting the sum total of two countries” before taking office.

    The criticism appeared to contradict statements Kerry made on March 18, just a day before Bush authorized military action to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

    Kerry, who previously had been critical of Bush’s efforts to reach out to the international community, was reluctant that day to answer when a television crew asked him whether the administration had handled its diplomatic efforts poorly.

    ”You know, we’re beyond that now,” the senator said after addressing the International Association of Fire Fighters. ”We have to come together as a country to get this done and heal the wounds.”

    Kerry, a Navy veteran of Vietnam, said he strongly supported US troops. ”There will be plenty of time here to be critical about how we arrived here,” he said at that time. In response to questions after his speech yesterday, Kerry reiterated his support for the troops.

    He also joined the administration in blasting ”armchair generals” who are criticizing the war plan.

    ”War is war,” he said. ”It’s tough, and I think there’s a little too much armchair quarterbacking and Monday-morning reviewing going on. I think we need to trust in the process for a few days here. This is only [14] days old, and they’ve achieved quite a remarkable advance in that period of time.”

    When asked to square his criticism with his pledge of restraint two weeks earlier, Kerry first said that he had tempered his criticism of the administration’s diplomatic efforts.

    Then he said: ”It is possible that the word `regime change’ is too harsh. Perhaps it is.”

    Finally, he said his overall criticism of the administration was part of ”the healthy democracy of the United States of America” and no different from some of the war critiques published on the front page of major newspapers. ”Is that unpatriotic?” he asked.

    A top Republican strategist, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Kerry was ”free to express his beliefs, but if anyone should be aware of the sensitivities of how our leaders should be conducting themselves while we’re at war, I would think Senator Kerry would.”

    ”The president doesn’t have the luxury of a campaign timeline to address the crisis of terrorism and its manifestation in Saddam Hussein,” the strategist said.

    During his opening remarks and on several occasions as he answered questions from the audience of more than 100 people, Kerry said he was the most experienced candidate in either party in terms of foreign policy and national security background.

    ”We need a president of the United States who has a vision of the world that is very different from what these excessively ideological unilateralists want to thrust on us and the rest of the world,” said the 18-year veteran of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

    Taking aim at Attorney General John D. Ashcroft at one point, the senator added: ”One of the reasons why I am running for president of the United States is that I look forward with pleasure and zeal for the opportunity to appoint an attorney general of the United States who believes and reads and abides by the Constitution.”

    Kerry was equally critical of his rivals for the Democratic nomination.

    ”I believe that I have a better capacity than any other candidate running in the field to be able to stand up and address questions of national security and America’s role in the world with credibility and history, and to be able to move us to those areas where we win, which is on the domestic agenda,” he said.

    © Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s