Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team.
Iran Watch, part 6.
Tags: Iran Watch media Israel Nuclear Iran
Help me here. How do we get over this obsession with Muslims. WHy are they always painted as the bad boy. Muslim is the new Black. Racism is alive and kicking here and that is ashame. Worse still, some can't even see their racism. Who could that be.
This is what Marie Macguire said about Vanunu Nominated For
Nobel Peace Prize
at a press conference in East Jerusalem to hear Mairead Maguire, Mordechai Vanunu and Issam Makhoul. Below is the press release issued afterwards by the International Campaign to Free Vanunu. In a press conference held in East Jerusalem on December 19, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Mairead Corrigan Maguire (Ireland), announced that she is nominating Israeli nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu for the prize in 2005. Vanunu has been nominated for the prize every year since 1989. Maguire received the Nobel Prize in 1976, in recognition of her work for peace in Ireland. "Mordechai Vanunu has paid a heavy price in order to protect us all from nuclear weapons. We are all indebted to him for telling the truth to power and I have come to thank him on behalf of his human family," Maguire said. Explaining that she had arrived in Israel from a women's peace conference in Jordan, Maguire urged Israelis and Palestinians to work nonviolently for peace. The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate urged the Israeli government to free Vanunu from the restrictions that keep him hostage in Israel and to "let Mordechai come home for Christmas." Maguire added, that she would continue to nominate Vanunu for the award "until he gets it." . Anyone who opposes the Iranian project must also oppose the Israeli nuclear arsenal. Along with Mordechai Vanunu, I and other Israeli activists refuse to be silenced. We continue to demand, that our government reveal the truth about its WMDs, enable a full international inspection of all WMD sites and dismantle its arsenal. To this end, we are currently involved in organizing an international conference on a nuclear-free Mediterranean area, to be held in April 2005. This date marks the first anniversary of Vanunu's release from prison. This date will hopefully mark the beginning of an anti-nuclear movement in Israel. Mordechai Vanunu is not a traitor, he is an Israeli hero. The nuclear bomb does not protect Israel, it endangers Israel."
There is no freedom to criticize Islam, no fun, no laughter, no sense of humor, no freedom of expression, no freedom of thought, no freedom of sexual orientation, no freedom of worship, no freedom of speech, all under ISLAM
How come nobody noted anything concerning the fact that, as is clear from my post, Mr. Rasfsanjani, who specifically advocated using nuclear weapons against Israel in the past, has just been appointed to one of the highest positions in Iran. Does this not bother anybody, especially those who keep talking about Iran's "peaceful intentions"?
Mariella, the whole world is applauding you, how skillfully and brilliantly you trapped me! Now I am exposed. I am ruined! However, just for the record, I have nothing to be ashamed of in terms of being linked to Julia, her posts are 1,000 times more cogent, coherent, intelligent, and factual than yours.
It seems that others are becoming irritated by your numerous copy and paste jobs :
Note to the editors: You need to introduce a word limit and maybe also a post limit on posts. Someone like Alexander has effectively ruined this thread with his ridiculously long (and...
From FA, 16 March 14:05
So your truth is right and the other sides's is wrong. I am really believing this. Alexander is the only one capable of presenting factual info. If only you could see your self as others do. Sorry mate, you could try the Church or the Mosque if you are in need of human interaction. Good luck
Amazing. I thought this thread was about Iran's nuclear threat. Yet, the Israeli-bashing brigade tries to seize aevery opportunity to jump for Israel for any reason imaginable. And, yes, we have more biblical names armed against Israel. I thought this publication was at least minimally respectable, but now I think otherwise.
Mariella, you have to be, at least, internally consistent. In one of your previous posts you first said that Iran "has the right to peaceful nuclear technology". Judging by this, you seemed to imply that you believe that it is pursuing only nuclear technology for civilian uses. However, after this, you said something to the effect that Iran has the right to pursue nuclear technology in light of other's having nuclear weapons and threatening Iran. This seemed to imply that you believe that it is pursuing nuclear weapons, otherwise this sentence would make no sense. So, do you believe that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons or do you believe that is pursuing only peaceful nuclear technology? This shows how incoherent your thinking is, which is hardly a surprise. Make up your mind, girl.
If you disagree with what I said about Gandhi's position with respect to Nazis and Jews, then you have to agree with his position that the Jews had to surrender to the Nazis and be slaughtered in order to achieve a moral victory. Wonderful. This exposes you and your games perfectly.
According to JJ@
Mariella is nothing more than a jew hating troll. Her reference to Jews nailing or calling for other Jews to be nailed to the wood is Jew hating.
Mariella should read Josephus Flavius the historian of the Jewish revolt against the Romans and learn how the Romans were the ones to nail Jews to the wood.Julia and others are right, you are a lunatic.
Her propaganda is worthy of the evil Goebells.
I rest my case JJ.
As for long and voluminous posts, you are an unequaled queen of that, Mariella. People in glass houses, etc...
@"It is obvious that the plight of Israel is Alexander's central and only pre-occupation"
It is obvious that the plight of the palestinians is Mariella's central and only pre-occupation"
Hey it works! And there are a lot more. Self-awareness isn't one of your discernable qualities is it?
Did you check out my link to Geert Wilders on Islam? Very interesting and I wonder if you felt ashamed reading it?
Wow! Julia what you said is extremely offensive and not doubt if the same malicious tone was used about any other religion other than Islam it would be classed as inciting racial hatred. Julia you have no idea what the real Islam is about all you see is what the media allows you to see. Every sect/religion has good and bad people that attribute themselves to it and to paint everyone with the same brush is extremely ignorant.
Pro-Israel’ and ‘Israel Firsters’ debate not anti-Semitic
“… it is no secret that “pro-Israel” money (albeit, not all of it from Jews) comprises a substantial percentage of all donations to political parties in the United States. Talking about “Jewish” – or more accurately, “pro-Israel” – money in American politics is therefore not inherently anti-Semitic: It is a given, and the effort to silence such debate is the problem.”
The downside of unbridled support for Israel
Mairav Zonszein: Jan. 27th, 2012
‘Israel-firsters’ are not those who put Israel first, but rather those who put an Israeli right-wing agenda first, even at the expense of American interests.
In his op-ed “A case of leftist McCarthyism?” (Haaretz English Edition, January 13 ), James Kirchick declares that the tables have turned in the Israel debate in America, now that liberal critics of U.S. support for Israel’s rightist government are employing terms like “dual loyalists” and “Israel-firsters.” He argues that this is indicative of “just how deep the rhetoric of the far right has seeped into the discourse of the mainstream left,” and deems such language to be anti-Semitic because it has also appeared in white supremacist publications.
Kirchick’s charge of anti-Semitism is baseless and unconvincing. Just because white supremacists used a term doesn’t mean everyone who employs it is an anti-Semite. He also fails to mention that many of those employing the term “Israel-firster” are deeply concerned about Israel’s future and about regional stability, and are no different from members of the Israeli peace camp – not to mention that some of them are Jewish themselves.
His argument also blatantly ignores the highly divisive role Israel plays in U.S. politics. American Jewish organizations are constantly battling over the definition of “pro-Israel,” a term monopolized by powerful groups like AIPAC to mean “Israel right or wrong.”
“Israel-firster” is admittedly a deliberately crude response, but use of the term should be understood within the context of decades of American Jewish right-wing rhetoric that has largely silenced dissent on Israeli policies by discrediting those who dare to criticize Israel. Calling rightists “Israel firsters” is not nearly as belligerent and certainly not as preposterous as labeling J Street “anti-Israel” and Thomas L. Friedman an anti-Semite.
This polemic has permeated internal American bipartisan politics, where Israel has taken center stage as a wedge issue. “Pro-Israel” has become political currency in the presidential race, despite bearing divergent connotations. For Newt Gingrich, the term means denying the existence of a Palestinian nation (and thus ruling out a two-state solution ); for Mitt Romney, it means ensuring security at all costs (and thus discounting Israeli settlements as a problem ). For Barack Obama, it means what it has meant for previous American administrations: A secure Jewish nation-state based on the ’67 borders, alongside a viable Palestinian state.
Despite this being U.S. foreign policy for quite a while, GOP candidates and mainstream American Jewish groups – bolstered by what is arguably the most rigid right-wing government Israel has ever had – have attacked Obama regularly for what they deem to be his deficient “pro-Israel” record, simply because he has condemned settlement construction. Obama has capitulated under the pressure and reasserted his strong “pro-Israel” (read: Israel right or wrong ) stance, for fear of losing the political and economic support he needs to win another term. Indeed, it is no secret that “pro-Israel” money (albeit, not all of it from Jews ) comprises a substantial percentage of all donations to political parties in the United States. Talking about “Jewish” – or more accurately, “pro-Israel” – money in American politics is therefore not inherently anti-Semitic: It is a given, and the effort to silence such debate is the problem.
When progressive entities like the Center for American Progress and figures like M.J. Rosenberg use the term “Israel-firster,” they are attempting to deconstruct and challenge the notion that being “pro-Israel” means demanding unchecked support for Israeli policies, even when they directly conflict with the U.S. administration’s stated positions and its declared role as an arbiter in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Such people are trying to dismantle the equation between opposition to Israel’s current reckless agenda, and concern for Israel’s long-term interests and impact on American geopolitics. They are identifying those, whether Jewish or Christian, Democrat or Republican, who, as Rosenberg put it, “consistently – and without exception – thwart the efforts of U.S. presidents to achieve Middle East peace.” “Israel-firsters” are not those who put Israel first, but rather those who put an Israeli right-wing agenda first, even at the expense of American interests.
Thus, Kirchick has it backward when he argues that the language of the far right has seeped into the left. It is, rather, Israel’s far-right policies that increasingly clash with American liberal and democratic values. Long before Peter Beinart became famous for pointing to a conflict between Zionism and liberalism, academics and policymakers warned that unbridled American support for Israel (spearheaded by AIPAC’s bullying influence on Congress ) would backfire.
This concern first surfaced in 1982 during the first Lebanon War, when many Americans began to wonder whether Israeli values were in line with American ones. It is reappearing again now within the context of a possible attack on Iran, on top of the incessant Israeli settlement project in the West Bank – a relentless policy that not only undermines Israel’s claim to being a democratic state, but undercuts America’s ability to be an honest broker of a two-state solution; all of which makes it much harder for American progressives, Jews and non-Jews alike, to cheerlead for Israel – that is, to be “pro-Israel.”
Mairav Zonszein is an Israeli-American journalist living in Tel Aviv and a writer and editor at +972mag.com. An abridged version of her master’s thesis on the history of the “pro-Israel” paradigm in American Jewry was recently published in the Central European University Jewish Studies Journal.
Just found another one where Miss M unconsciously describes herself:
"Her propaganda is worthy of the evil Goebells."
Keep digging yourself into the bunker. Eva's waiting for you.
I have advised you before on this, but you chose to ignore what I said.
Go on, find me another one of your priceless quotes from Ghandi and Mandela. Keep digging!!!
etter to the Editor: Anti-Semitic label silences a key voice in Israel debate
Print | E-mail | Letter to the editor
BY DAFNA EISBRUCH
Published February 23, 2011
Ben Duchan’s letter to the editor (Anti-Muslim Sentiments in Israel is Exaggerated, 2/14/11) labels University alum Hamdan Azhar ( A Palestinian-Israeli approach, 02/03/2011) a “coward” who refuses to admit his “anti-Semitism." We openly reject such a label. This isn’t a J Street UMICH issue. This isn’t a Jewish issue. This is an issue of respect and civil discourse. As an organization that is pro-Israel and predominantly Jewish, we have the responsibility to raise our voices when such a charge is leveled without merit. Duchan clearly falls into the latter category.
More like this
•Letter to the Editor: Anti-Muslim sentiments in Israel are exaggerated
•Letter to the Editor: Study abroad programs in Israel are a safe option
•Letters to the Editor
•Professors offer varying opinions about Israeli-Palestinian conflict
This isn’t to say that we agree with the entirety of Azhar’s viewpoint. While J Street UMICH enthusiastically supports the Michigan Student Assembly resolution for a joint study abroad program in Israel and the West Bank, we aren’t in agreement with Azhar in his opposition to study abroad programs in Israel. We believe that providing a variety of avenues for students to engage with the region is important and appropriate for campus.
However, the issues raised by Azhar regarding the conditions under which Palestinians live in occupation and the discrimination they face in Israel aren’t only crucial to address and recognize, but factually not up for debate.
Duchan dismisses these critical issues by dismissing the messenger as “anti-Semitic." In doing so, he and others like him only solidify the opposing views on either side and make the work of building a broad coalition for peace all the more difficult.
Dismissing those who raise such criticisms, however, doesn’t serve Israel or the peace process. Moreover, when charges of anti-Semitism are leveled carelessly, the word is drained of its power and meaning. We must challenge anti-Semitism when it arises and where it exists instead of using the accusation as a tool with which to silence those with whom we disagree. We must respect those with real concerns if we’re ever going to reach a compromise on important and difficult issues.
This letter was written on behalf of J Street UMICH by LSA junior Dafna Eisbruch. J Street UMICH is a pro-Israel, pro-Palestinian, pro-Peace organization.
At a July 19, 2006 CUFI event in Washington D.C., Hagee told the audience, "The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God's plan for both Israel and the West ... a biblically prophesied end-time confrontation with Iran, which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation [...] and [the] Second Coming of Christ."
Amen to that. Never was a truer word spoken.
Just to remind, ladies and gentlemen, that the real issue here is Iran and its nuclear ambitions. Whatever is behind these ambitions - the Palestinian issue, the striving for regional hegemony or anything else - is not really relevant, in so far as it is an open and shut case that Iran is a grave danger to the world, including its own citizens. Therefore, the Palestinian issue is nothing more than a red herring constantly dangled before us to divert the attention from the gravity of the Iranian danger
This pseudo-response shows that you really have nothing substantive to say, Mariella. Which was known all along.
The reason why nobody comments on your contributions is because we the readers know the position you are going to take. There is not an ounce of originality in what you say.
Whetther I am a man or woman I do think it is patronising and sexist to call me a girl.
Turning to the question of Iran. Just in case you did not know,there is a difference between a nuclear civilian programme and a weaponised military programme. Under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) agreement Iran is entitled to develop civilian nuclear energy.
Numerous IAEI reports have provided no evidence whatsoever that Iran is developing a nuclear weapons programme. By the way in case you did not know, though you claim expertise in pretty much most matters, it takes several decades to develop nuclear weapons using Nuclear Enrichment.
I have already pointed this out to you several times before, but as per usual you are having none of it. May I also remind you that it was Israel who provided the original nuclear expertise in the 1970's.
Israel, India, and Pakistan: Engaging the Non-NPT States in the Nonproliferahttp://www.armscontrol.org/act/2003_12/MillerandScheinmantion Regime
No, absolutist dogmaticism is more within your jurisdiction, Terry, I am afraid. But I am afraid that even more human interaction will not help you at this point.
Mariella " Bit by bit I have drawn you out, trapping you at every point; when finally you admit that you are just like Julia"
And you're like a lot of racist cnuts that inhabit far left and right wing sites - same language, same cliches - a tired old world you inhabit. (Isn't that one of your lines?)
Iran and a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Middle East
By Anthony Posner
October 23, 2010
or "Who are the useful idiots?"
For those who hate Israel and support Islamists, the following is now PC dogma. I am concerned that some sections of British Jewry are being conned by it and others are just being intimidated. Of course, it is quite clever and unfortunately many Jews are too foolish or too cowardly to expose it.
Let's take a look at the "logic":
(1) The EDL attacks Islam and supports Israel.
(2) But remember,The EDL are Nazis!
(3) Therefore, Israel must be a Nazi state, since some Jewish members of The EDL support it and wave Israeli flags .
(But why oh why, can't they be good Jews and just vote Lib Dems? Btw Roberta Moore is even more dangerous than George Galloway!)
(4) Of course, anybody who supports Israel is automatically dubbed a Nazi (nothing new there!)
(5) Nobody can, therefore, support Israel, unless they are paid up Nazis (standard Palestinian solidarity rhetoric).
(6) British Jews, who are not Nazis, are petrified that they will somehow be linked, via editorials in The Guardian, to The EDL, particularly at the Ahava demo.
(Best to stay at home and oppose the banning of the burka in The JC , especially since Hoffman is waving the Israeli flag at Ahava.)
(7) And remember, The EDL is going to exterminate British Jewry since they are Nazis.
(and the stupid Jews in The EDL are colluding! The EDL are white, working class and they still have old gas ovens!)
(8) f you criticize Islam and The Islamists ("Islamophobia"), you are inevitably a Nazi, just like The EDL.
(Islamophobia= Nazism. Read what Jon Benjamin from the Board of Deputies writes.)
(9) Of course, British Jews can no longer criticize Islam and The Islamists, as they will be dubbed Nazis, just like The EDL.
( I presume that the real allies of British Jewry are actually The Islamists)
(10) Game, set and match to the anti-zionists and The Islamists. But why the hell was it so damn easy?
Julian Kossoff writes:
"But when I heard that there were Jews actively supporting the English Defence League (EDL), I thought: “pull the other one”. The EDL claims to stand up for Englishness against Islamic extremism, but in truth it is largely a hodgepodge of football hooligans, lumpen boot-boys and cast-offs from seedy neo-Nazi outfits, such as Combat 18."
Jon Benjamin, Board of Deputies chief executive, said: "The EDL's supposed 'support' for Israel is empty and duplicitous. It is built on a foundation of Islamophobia and hatred which we reject entirely.
"Sadly, we know only too well what hatred for hatred's sake can cause. The overwhelming majority will not be drawn in by this transparent attempt to manipulate a tense political conflict."
When electioneering in Birmingham, David Cameron said:
“The EDL are terrible people, we would always keep these groups under review and if we needed to ban them, we would ban them or any groups which incite hatred.”
Never understood the link myself. Do you.
For the record, I have never said and have never thought that Muslims are not allowed to express an opinion. This is absurd. Of course, they are. To Leroy - the easiest thing to do is to throw labels at people. To argue with them seriously is much more difficult.
Clearly you have a lot to say, judging by the lengths you have gone Alexander to find endless pieces of pro-Israeli propaganda.
Now there's a conundrum for you: WHO IS READING, WHO IS TAKING NOTE OF WHAT YOU SAY. Do they include the many or the few.
Gee!! I knew I could count on you to deliver up the goods!!
Gather your troops, knights of the Realm and all that , ready to do battle.
"J Street pro-Israel"? What a joke.
Iran Responds to Call for Talks
Latest ACA Resources
The IAEA Outlines the Path for Iran to Come Clean, But is Tehran Ready?
(March 7, 2012)
Iran Nuclear Diplomacy: Transcript & Resources
(February 15, 2012)
Nuclear Black Markets / A.Q. Khan Network
The Low Politics of Nonproliferation
N. Korea Judged to Have More Enrichment Sites
A Window of Opportunity with Iran
(March 9, 2012)
Building a Nuclear Order
Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili formally responded to a call for talks with six major powers Feb. 15, potentially paving the way for the first negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program in more than a year.
Sounds to me as if there are a lot of EDL members posting on this page. Look at the type of language they use.
You have proved my point once again, Mariella.
It is Israel's fears, not a nuclear Iran, that we must tame
Israelis must resist Netanyahu's rhetoric. An attack on Iran will bring certain disaster, to forestall one that might never come
guardian.co.uk, Monday 12 March 2012 19.31 GMT
Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a director of Iran's Natanz nuclear enrichment site, died when his car was blown up in January – one of a series of killings of nuclear personnel linked by Tehran to a secret war by Israel and the US. Photograph: KeystoneUSA-ZUMA / Rex Features
In his speeches, Binyamin Netanyahu likes to fire up his audiences with frequent references to the Holocaust, Jewish destiny and the fate of future generations. In light of this doomsday rhetoric, one wonders if Israel's prime minister can always distinguish between the real dangers confronting the country and shadows of past traumas. This question is crucial, because to confuse one with the other could sentence Israel to relive those echoes and shadows.
Who are you Alexander. The anti Muslim brigade is hard at work here. So what is your serious argument since you claim to know it all.
War on Iran has already begun. Act before it threatens all of us
Escalation of the covert US-Israeli campaign against Tehran risks a global storm. Opposition has to get more serious
طالع المقال بالعربية
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 7 December 2011 20.59 GMT
Iranians carry honorary coffins and pictures of a Revolutionary Guards commander killed in an explosion at the Alghadir missile base. Photograph: Reuters
They don't give up. After a decade of blood-drenched failure in Afghanistan and Iraq, violent destabilisation of Pakistan and Yemen, the devastation of Lebanon and slaughter in Libya, you might hope the US and its friends had had their fill of invasion and intervention in the Muslim world.
It seems not. For months the evidence has been growing that a US-Israeli stealth war against Iran has already begun, backed by Britain and France. Covert support for armed opposition groups has spread into a campaign of assassinations of Iranian scientists, cyber warfare, attacks on military and missile installations, and the killing of an Iranian general, among others
Did a quick scroll of postings and it seems that everyday you have posted more or less several times, every hours of the day, including copying whole sections of wikipedia. Sounds like you really are a busy man. Seriously the Church or Mosque can see you right.
Julia has become a laughing stock on this NS website. She has been caught out on numerous occasions plagiarsing other people's work as well as impersonating me. Instead of concentrating on demonising Palestinians, Iranians, the entire Muslim peoples, she should a look a little closer to home. I believe Israel has its own problems with the right wing fundamentalist Jews, as pointed out by Edhud Barak (who described them as homegrown terrorists) and the BBC.
The Zionist lobby are still living in the dark ages. I have pointed to Julia et al that the world has moved on and the old, tired discredited myths have no place in rational discourse. More importantly the days when the Zionist lobby could manipulate, control and dominate the news agenda on Israel are long gone.
The Zionist monopoly has gone: and the Zionist lobby are hopping mad. Try making a comment which is midly supportive of Iran or Palestinians, and see what kind of response you get. Don't take my word for it, look at the vitriol heaped on Mehdi.!!!!
SO the word according to Alexander is that I have nothing substantive to say.
You seem to be running out of platitudes.
WHere are your troops? Where is St John? Where are your Knights of the Realm?
Despite receiving billions of american taxpayers money, Israel refuses to tell US its Iran intentions, Israel has refused to reassure President Barack Obama that it would warn him in advance of any pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear capabilities, raising fears that it may be planning a go-it-alone attack as early as next summer.
Best to ignore Julia. Shs had momentary lapses in to self created bile.
excerpts from the book
The Power of Israel in the United States
by James Petras
Clarity Press, 2006, paperhttp://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Petras_James/Power_Israel_US.html
Terry, I still insist that the religious environment would be more suitable for you. Do yourself a favor.
Unlike you, Mariella, I do not just blindly resort to the authorities, but quote them and challenge you to react to their actual words, but you refuse to do so. This shows how you cannot be substantive. Your resort to medieval terminology will not help you.
'Devstation of Lebanon and slaughter in Libya". US and its friends are responsible for this, too? I think this was done by Syria and Hezbellah and Ghaddafi's forces, respectively, but the distortion of history is going on relentlessly.
Something about Tariq Ramadan, the darling of the left: ertrand Delanoë, Socialist mayor of Paris, declared Ramadan unfit to participate at the European Social Forum, as not even "a slight suspicion of anti-Semitism" would be tolerable. Talking to the Paris weekly Marianne, Fadela Amara, president of Ni Putes Ni Soumises (Neither Whores Nor Submissive, a French feminist movement), Aurélie Filippetti, municipal counsellor for The Greens in Paris, Patrick Klugman, leading member of the Conseil Représentatif des Institutions juives de France and Dominique Sopo, head of SOS-Racisme accuse Ramadan of having misused the alter-globalization movement's ingenuousness to advance his "radicalism and anti-Semitism." Similarly, an article in the online publication of Alliance for Workers' Liberty published 40 reasons why Ramadan was a reactionary, criticizing views on Islamic extremism, women's rights and anti-Semitism. Egyptian intellectual Tarek Heggy has also charged Ramadan with saying different things to different audiences.
The key question here on the nuclear Iran/ Israel conflict is this:
Which of the two countries poses the greatest threat to world peace, stability and security. Is it Israel which already has nuclear weapons or Iran which according to all the independent reports neither has or is trying to acquire nuclear weapons.
a Muslim voice to listen to: "http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/6193.htm
Although Rentoul gets left in charge of the Independent over the weekend, his understanding of the issues he gets involved in is limited and it isn't clear whether it is useful to get into a debate with him. Rentoul feels that he has to defend Blair at every opportunity but this leads Rentoul into deep waters, into arguments and issues that he hasn't mastered.
Blair's latest position on Iraq (at the Chilcot Inquiry) was that the invasion was to stop Iraq getting WMD in future, and the same applies to Iran. Rentoul must feel that he has to defend this position. Blair is in a position where others cannot answer back to him; Rentoul isn't. So Rentoul gets tangled up in the weaknesses of this line of thinking.
Mehdi Hasan is a contributing writer for the New Statesman and the co-author of Ed: The Milibands and the Making of a Labour Leader. He was the New Statesman's senior editor (politics) from 2009-12.