Israel Military Forum

Welcome to the Israel Military Forum. You are currently viewing our Israel Forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, Image Forum and access our other features. By joining our Israel Military Forum you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so
Join Our Israel Community Today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go Back   Israel Military Forum > Social > Debate Social & Political Issues
Register FAQ Pictures Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Debate Social & Political Issues Debate Social and political discussion about Israel/Palestinians, the Middle east or world politics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1021  
Old 03-29-2012, 01:16 AM
Knaur's Avatar
Knaur Knaur is offline
Dragon
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Punjab
Posts: 9,109
Knaur is on a distinguished road
Default

I had posted a thread on this. Again, I fail to see how an Executive branch like the State Deptt. can fail to enforce the decision of the Legisture as Congress has already passed a law stating that Jews born in Jerusalem are free to list their place of birth as Israel. This arrogance of the State Deptt. is IMHO unbecoming of the world's most powerful Republic.
__________________
In strategy it is important to see distant things as if they were close and to take a distanced view of close things - Miyamoto Musahi
Reply With Quote
  #1022  
Old 03-29-2012, 01:35 AM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation The Obama administration's actions speak louder than his words

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knaur View Post
I had posted a thread on this. Again, I fail to see how an Executive branch like the State Deptt. can fail to enforce the decision of the Legisture as Congress has already passed a law stating that Jews born in Jerusalem are free to list their place of birth as Israel. This arrogance of the State Deptt. is IMHO unbecoming of the world's most powerful Republic.
Obama despite his cheap words shows through such actions of the Obama State Dept. what his true view of Israel is in truth and fact!!!
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1023  
Old 03-30-2012, 03:18 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Israel to use its air bases near Iran border, U.S. "not happy about it"

Report:
Azerbaijan allows Israel to use its air bases near Iran border, U.S. "not happy about it"

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/news...le.php?id=3718


http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/03/az...-about-it.html


If this story is true, and it may not be, it would not be surprising. It would be in line with everything else Obama has said and done to demonstrate his opposition to Israel doing much of anything to defend itself against the global jihad. "'Azerbaijan allows Israel to use its air bases near Iran border,'" from Israel Hayom, March 29 (thanks to Pamela Geller):
Foreign Policy quotes U.S. diplomats as saying “We’re now watching what Israel is doing in Azerbaijan. And we’re not happy about it” • A series of quiet political and military understandings have won Israel access to these air bases, senior U.S. sources explain.

Senior American diplomats and military intelligence officers have told Foreign Policy magazine that the United States now believes that Israel has been granted access to air bases in Azerbaijan, which shares a border with Iran. “The Israelis have bought an airfield,” a senior official told Foreign Policy in early February, “and the airfield is called Azerbaijan.”...

Israel’s ties with Azerbaijan, a Muslim country that became independent with the disintegration of the Soviet Union, have grown as its once-strong strategic relationship with another Iranian neighbor, Turkey, has deteriorated. For Israeli intelligence, there is also a possible added benefit from Azerbaijan: its significant cross-border contacts and trade with Iran’s large ethnic Azeri community.

Speaking to Foreign Policy, one of the U.S. sources said, “We’re watching what Iran does closely. But we’re now watching what Israel is doing in Azerbaijan. And we’re not happy about it.”

The Azeri military - based on a report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Military Balance 2011 and brought forth by Foreign Policy - has four abandoned, Soviet-era airfields that could be made available to the Israelis, as well as four air bases for its own planes....

Former CENTCOM Commander Gen. Joe Hoar explained Israel’s calculations regarding a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities to Foreign Policy by saying, “They save themselves 800 miles of fuel. That doesn’t guarantee that Israel will attack Iran, but it certainly makes it more doable.”

Israel’s motivation for using Azeri air bases could be about more than simply saving fuel in a possible attack on Iran, it could be because, according to the report, one senior U.S. military intelligence officer described Israel’s mid-air refueling capabilities as “pretty minimal,” adding, “They’re just not very good at it.”...

One former CIA analyst told Foreign Policy that the U.S. had its doubts that Israel would launch an attack from Azerbaijan, describing it as “just too chancy, politically.” The source didn’t rule out the option that Israel could use Azeri airfields for “follow-on or recovery operations,” but added, “Of course, if they do that, it widens the conflict, and complicates it. It’s extremely dangerous.”

Two weeks ago security services in Azerbaijan arrested 22 people they say were hired by Iran to carry out terrorist attacks against the U.S. and Israeli embassies as well as Western-linked groups and companies....
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1024  
Old 03-30-2012, 05:54 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Prominent Obama supporters endorse the invasion of Israel

The Radical Left Unites With Iran in March on Jerusalem
Prominent Obama supporters endorse the invasion of Israel
by Mark Tapson





In the wake of the innocuous-sounding “Arab Spring” that has brought openly Jew-hating Islamists to power in the Middle East, Israel’s enemies everywhere smell blood. Twice last year her borders were breached by mobs seeking violent confrontation, which they achieved as the Israelis defended against the invasion. Recently a global program designed to demonize the tiny democracy, called Israeli Apartheid Week, revved up further anti-Israel sentiment. And now on March 30, an Iranian-backed protest march will attempt to storm Israel’s borders again in an effort to take Jerusalem – or at the very least to draw fire, enabling the marchers and the complicit media to denounce Israel’s “brutality” against “peaceful” protesters.

The Global March to Jerusalem (GMJ) is a well-organized, well-funded movement consisting of Israel-hating activists from around the world seeking to deny Jewish historical connections to Jerusalem and to claim the city for the Palestinians instead. In a clear case of psychological projection, the organizers’ strategy begins with falsely accusing Israel of racism and war crimes:
The march will confirm that the policies and practices of the racist Zionist state of Israel against Jerusalem and its people are a crime not only against Palestinians but against all humanity.
The march is ostensibly peaceful, but in reality the marchers plan to launch their offensive from the Arab countries surrounding Israel and to infiltrate its borders, forcing the Israelis to respond with (justifiable) force – their ultimate goal being to overwhelm the Jewish state and Jerusalem itself by sheer numbers:
We aim to make this march a turning point in the nature of the confrontation, with the occupation having to face millions of protesters and demonstrators demanding Freedom for Palestine and its capitol Jerusalem.
At the heart of the GMJ lies Iran, whose regime expresses, on an almost weekly basis, its desire to wipe Israel from the face of the earth. It is financially backing various groups participating in the march, and Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei verbally lent his imprimatur to the movement recently.

The protest has also been endorsed, unsurprisingly, by prominent radical leftists in the West including anti-apartheid activist Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former British MP George Galloway, radical professors Noam Chomsky and Cornel West, Code Pink activist Medea Benjamin, and the notoriously controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright. A closer look at the anti-Israel track record of this star-studded lineup gives one a clear picture of just how great is the animus that the movement bears toward Israel.

Asserting that “Israel is like Hitler and apartheid,” Archbishop Tutu has been a decidedly anti-Israel voice for many years. Pro-Palestinian activist Galloway is an admirer of Saddam Hussein, Castro, Chavez, Mao, and Stalin. He insists that it is “necessary” for the “two great forces” of Islamists and progressives to unite against “Zionist occupation” and “savage capitalist globalization.”

As for GMJ’s prominent American supporters, influential academic Chomsky openly detests Israel; in 2005 Rachel Neuwirth called him
a one-man cottage industry of hundreds of anti-Israel books, articles, recorded interviews and lectures… Over a thirty-five year span Chomsky has repeated every distortion and libel directed against Israel that’s ever appeared in Arab, Western, and left-wing Israeli publications, to which he adds some conspiracy theories of his own devising.
Racist professor Cornel West is a close friend not only of Obama, the most anti-Israel President in history, but also of noted anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan; West is also an avowed admirer of Rev. Wright (see below). Medea Benjamin and her group Code Pink, who express support for every conceivable extant enemy of the United States from Cuba to North Korea to the Taliban to Hamas, blames the Middle East conflict largely on our “biased policy toward Israel”; meanwhile she praises the savage Hamas for its commitment to “mutual respect and adherence to international law.” That would be the same Hamas whose very charter promises the eradication of Israel.

Black liberation theologist Jeremiah Wright, President Obama’s spiritual mentor for nearly twenty years, has expressed his anti-white racism, anti-Americanism, and anti-Semitism on too many occasions to enumerate. He has likened Israel to “a dirty word,” and accused it of waging genocide against the Palestinians (if so, it’s the most incompetent genocide in history, since the Palestinian population is one of the fastest-growing in the world). He and unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, another former Obama associate, jointly addressed a crowd of pro-Palestinian protesters in Chicago in 2009. Like Ayers, Wright is so radioactive that even Obama finally distanced himself from the firebrand. Asked if he had spoken to Obama since he had taken office, Wright replied, “Them Jews aren’t going to let him talk to me.” The White House maintains its silence in response to Wright’s endorsement of the march on Israel.

Other notable American supporters of the march on Jerusalem are boosters of Obama as well. Writing for the Washington Free Beacon, Adam Kredo points out that progressives Clayborne Carson and Marcy Winograd donated to Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008, as did United Nations official Richard Falk. Carson is a Stanford University professor who cites radical historian Howard Zinn as inspiration for his own political activism and scholarship, and Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) schoolteacher Winograd is a Green Party activist who organized OccupyLAUSD to protest school budget cuts. In his position as UN Human Rights Council’s special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, Falk outraged many with his article “Slouching Towards a Palestinian Holocaust,” in which he described Nazi horrors and then drew a parallel with Israel: “Is it an irresponsible overstatement to associate the treatment of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity? I think not.”

The GMJ’s principal backer in the U.S. is the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a radical anti-Israel organization that justifies Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians and actively obstructs Israeli security and anti-terrorism operations. ISM co-founder Huwaida Arraf has acknowledged that her organization works with such paragons of peace as Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

With supporters like these, it’s clear that the Global March to Jerusalem is not a peace movement but a large-scale publicity stunt designed to provoke Israel into a violent response, which the participants hope will play right into their relentless strategy to isolate and delegitimize the hated Israel.

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1025  
Old 03-31-2012, 04:27 PM
Sarge538's Avatar
Sarge538 Sarge538 is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Arkansas - Central
Posts: 19
Sarge538 is on a distinguished road
Default

As an American who loves Israel I cannot begin to explain how I feel toward our current administration. Especially it's treatment of our beloved ally Israel. I am so sorry my fellow Americans have gotten to the point to where Obama could be elected to anything, much less POTUS. May God continue to bless Israel in all ways.
Larry
Reply With Quote
  #1026  
Old 04-01-2012, 07:08 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation AFDI/SIOA Calls for Congressional Inquiry on Obama's Sabotage of Israel's Defense Aga

AFDI/SIOA Calls for Congressional Inquiry on Obama's Sabotage of Israel's Defense Against Iran


AFDI/SIOA Calls for Congressional Inquiry on Obama's Sabotage of Israel's Defense Against Iran

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/03/af...inst-iran.html
NEW YORK, March 30, 2012 / Christian Newswire/ -- A prominent national human rights organization is calling for Congress to open an inquiry into allegations that Barack Obama has leaked information to the press in order to pressure Israel into not defending itself against Iran's nuclear program.

he American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) and its Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) program deplored reports that Obama was moving to prevent Israel from acting in its own defense. ABC News reported Thursday: "Two reports today about Iran's nuclear program and the possibility of an Israeli military strike have analysts in Israel accusing the Obama administration leaking information to pressure Israel not to bomb Iran and for Iran to reach a compromise in upcoming nuclear talks."

AFDI/SIOA Executive Director Pamela Geller said in a statement: "Obama's policies compromise American security. Iran is clearly a threat to America. They have been at war with us since 1979. Israel was willing to do the heavy lifting because our reckless and feckless president was too weak, too compromised. But to betray an ally like this? This leak is part of an ongoing campaign to thwart Israeli defense strategy against the Iranian genocidal threat."

AFDI/SIOA Associate Director Robert Spencer: "We call on patriotic members of Congress who respect Israel as America's most reliable ally in the Middle East to launch an immediate full-scale investigation into Obama's efforts to undermine Israel's security, and the larger implications of those efforts for our own national security."
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1027  
Old 04-01-2012, 07:28 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation What's on That Ship, and Where Is It Going?

What's on That Ship, and Where Is It Going?
Why did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton waive requirements that would have stopped arms shipment to the Muslim Brotherhood-controlled government of Egypt?
By Shoshana Bryen




Once more, it is a tough choice between standing with Amnesty International or with the Obama administration. Once more, Amnesty International wins. Ouch.

U.S. arms transfers to third parties are regulated by the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), which provides export licenses only in cases that "will strengthen U.S. national security, promote foreign policy goals, or foster world peace. The Arms Export Control Act is administered by the Department of State."

Egypt is a major recipient of U.S. military aid and equipment, and to this point the Secretary of State has always certified that arms to Egypt meet the test. In addition, the administration is required to aver that Egypt is meeting its obligations under the peace treaty with Israel, and to this point, it has done so. However, since the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian government has been extremely heavy-handed in its management of internal security -- with American weapons in its arsenal -- and overtly anti-Israel.

Enter Amnesty International.

Amnesty reported that from December 2011 to February 2012, the Egyptian military and security forces have killed more than 100 mainly peaceful protesters. During that time, the U.S. shipped "349 tons of military and dual use equipment valued at $35 million to the Egyptian Ministry of Defense." According to Amnesty, some U.S.-made tear gas canisters used against protesters in Suez had an August 2011 manufacture date, suggesting that they were part of a recent U.S. shipment of tear gas delivered to Egypt last fall.

That would make it hard to certify that military aid to Egypt "promote[s U.S.] foreign policy goals, or foster[s] world peace."

In addition, since the indictment in December of American civil society workers and the prevention of several from leaving the country, Congress, led by Sen. Patrick Leahy, has added new conditions.

Secretary of State Clinton is now required to certify that the Egyptian government is supporting a transition to civilian government, including free and fair elections, and policies to protect freedom of expression, association, religion, and due process of law. "The Egyptian military should be defending fundamental freedoms and the rule of law ... and our policy should not equivocate on these key reforms," said Sen. Leahy, adding that Secretary Clinton's decision to waive Congress's conditions on national security grounds sent the wrong signal.

But she waived them, and now, says Amnesty, a Dutch-flagged ship, the MV Schippersgracht, has sailed from the U.S. Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point (CA) "carrying a class of dangerous goods that covers cartridges for weapons, fuses and other ammunition" headed to Egypt's Port Said. It wants Mrs. Clinton to clarify the final recipient of the cargo and give assurances that "this and other U.S. military cargoes are not going to any country where the recipients are likely to use the weapons to commit or facilitate serious violations of human rights"1­.

That might be difficult.

The Egyptian Embassy denies that the ship is destined for Egypt, suggesting that it will be passing through the Suez Canal on its way to Asia2 and that American shipments to Egypt don't travel on Dutch ships. That is a point, but one in fact that may increase rather than decrease Amnesty International's -- and Sen. Leahy's -- discomfort with the ship.

Over the years, Israel has -- often with U.S. assistance -- followed and boarded merchant ships illegally carrying weapons to its adversaries. Less than a year ago, the Iranian military ships Alvand and Kharg transferred an estimated 50 tons of weapons to The Victoria, which Israel intercepted and offloaded. The Karine A, the Santorini, the Francop, the Hansa India, the Monchegorsk, and scores of smaller ships have been intercepted.

In January, the Russian freighter Chariot delivered tons of military equipment to Syria amid the government's murderous rampage against its own citizens. Investigative journalist Claudia Rosett followed its trail from there to an explosives depot in Turkey, to a Ukrainian port, through the Suez Canal and the Arabian Peninsula, and to the Iranian port of Assaluyeh. The ship's brokerage company acknowledged the arms for Syria ("to fight the rebels") but said the cargo to Iran was "Ukrainian generators." Really?

Egypt is not Syria or Iran; the U.S. is not Iran or Russia. But the Obama administration is clearly acting to thwart Congress's intentions on Egypt and has declined to respond to a request about the end user of materiel on a ship leaving a U.S. military installation. It is hard not to be suspicious of its intentions. Other countries have gone to great lengths to disguise military shipments to countries at war with their own people or at war with Israel -- Egypt is very close to the former and, by its own assertion, thinks of itself as the latter.

What arms we deliver, how we deliver them, and the ways they will be used by the recipient are more than fair questions for the Obama administration to answer -- and Amnesty International should be commended for asking.

Shoshana Bryen is senior director of The Jewish Policy Center. She was previously senior director for security policy at JINSA and author of JINSA Reports from 1995-2011.

1Amnesty wishes to be clear that it has no problem with weapons that might be used against Israel -- only with those that might be used against Egyptians, noting in its official statement that "we take no position on the use of U.S. military aid to fund Egyptian arms purchases that are primarily for national defense purposes and do not demonstrate a serious risk of being used to violate human rights. We oppose the funding, sale, or transfer of arms internationally where there is a substantial risk that the specific arms in question will be used to commit or facilitate serious human rights violations." Killing Israelis may be construed as "not a human rights violation."

2Why a ship that started in northern California would travel east to Asia is unclear: Pacific Ocean, Panama Canal, Atlantic Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, Suez Canal and Red Sea, Arabian Sea, Indian Ocean, and Pacific Ocean vs. Pacific Ocean west.

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 04-01-2012 at 07:30 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #1028  
Old 04-03-2012, 11:15 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Obama Leaks Israel’s Attack Plan?

Obama Leaks Israel’s Attack Plan?
U.S. accused of “targeted assassination" of Israeli operations against the Islamic Republic
by P. David Hornik




Last week Mark Perry—a writer with a long anti-Israeli pedigree—published a much-talked-about article in Foreign Policy. It claimed Azerbaijan had granted Israel use of some airbases for an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities—thereby helping Israel solve problems of refueling its planes and making an attack much more feasible.

Azerbaijan is a small, mostly Shiite Muslim country on Iran’s northern border. It has long been concerned about Iran’s treatment of the ethnic Azeri population living there. Azerbaijan is also one of the few Muslim countries having close economic and strategic ties with Israel.

Perry claimed his inside information came from U.S. sources, particularly “four senior diplomats and military intelligence officers.” He quoted one intelligence officer as saying: “We’re watching what Iran does closely. But we’re now watching what Israel is doing in Azerbaijan. And we’re not happy about it.”

In a much-talked-about reaction to Perry’s article, John Bolton claimed the Obama administration had intentionally leaked the story “as part of [its] campaign against an Israeli attack,” weakening Israel’s hand by revealing “very sensitive, very important information.”

Bolton said that, while he didn’t have hard proof of it, “Clearly, this is an administration-orchestrated leak. This is not a rogue CIA guy saying I think I’ll leak this out.”

He added: “It’s just unprecedented to reveal this kind of information about one of your own allies.”

One major Israeli military analyst, Ron Ben-Yishai, reacted similarly to Bolton and went even further, writing that the Obama administration was carrying out a “targeted assassination of potential Israeli operations in Iran” with media leaks that had “caused Israel substantive diplomatic damage, and possibly even military and operational damage.”

Along with the Foreign Policy article, Ben-Yishai emphasized a report by the Congressional Research Service, also published last week, claiming an Israeli attack would only set Iran’s nuclear program back by about six months. “Any Iranian intelligence analyst” reading these two open sources, Ben-Yishai averred, “will find invaluable information there.”

And having served as a reporter in Washington for seven years, Ben-Yishai said he
kn[e]w very well that with a few exceptions, the U.S. administration knows how to prevent leaks to the media if it so wishes…. What we are seeing here is not a trickle of information, but rather, a powerful current, a true flood that leaves no doubt as to the existence of an orchestrated media campaign with clear aims.
The administration, for its part, denied leaking the information on Azerbaijan and said it would “gladly prosecute” those behind it if it knew who they were. An official told Israel’s Ynet that Washington and Jerusalem were cooperating more closely than ever on Iran and making “tremendous efforts.”

That denial may not seem significant in itself, as the administration would hardly confirm that it was responsible for the leak, while declining to comment would be the same as an admission.

More notable, though, is that by early this week some Israeli analysts no less weighty than Ben-Yishai had taken a different tack on the Foreign Policy article.

Ehud Yaari, one of Israel’s most senior commentators on Middle Eastern affairs, scoffed in The Times of Israel that Perry’s report “simply does not make any sense” and was another of his “cloak-and-dagger patchwork stories aimed at undermining the state he intensely detests.”

Yaari asked how Azerbaijan could possibly provide Israel with airbases for striking Iran when
Iranian missiles can quite easily knock out those airbases as well as the huge Azeri BP oil terminal near Baku, which is the lifeline of the country’s economy. Tehran leaders are on record stating that they will retaliate forcefully against any state that will provide bases for an attack against it.
In another article The Times of Israel cited two Israeli security experts who similarly dismissed Perry’s claims. One, Shlomo Brom, said they were “utterly baseless. Azerbaijan is a small country that borders on Iran. It just doesn’t make sense they would help Israel attack them. It would be suicidal.”

To sum up: Perry indeed has an intense animus against Israel—having warned, for instance, against the emergence of “Jewish Hezbollah”—and it is also true that small countries like Azerbaijan generally do not want to infuriate a much more powerful, ruthless neighbor.

But even if the Foreign Policy article is basically Perry’s concoction and the administration is not behind it, it remains the case that the media has been awash with delegitimations of any Israeli action against Iran. In addition to the congressional report, the New York Times reported last month on a classified Pentagon simulation game forecasting that an Israeli attack would spark a regional conflagration and could cost hundreds of U.S. casualties; the Times has also run a series of stories claiming U.S. intelligence and even the Israeli Mossad still are unsure Iran wants to build a bomb at all.

When you combine all this with open statements by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and by Obama himself about the supposed ineffectiveness and bad consequences of an Israeli attack, the impression of an orchestrated campaign remains. That means Israel still may have to choose between putting its fate in the Obama administration’s hands or going into action very much by itself.

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1029  
Old 04-04-2012, 01:39 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Thumbs down Study Finds Vast Majority of American Jews Still Plan to Vote for Obama In November

Despite all of the above:
Study Finds Vast Majority of American Jews Still Plan to Vote for Obama In November

April 4, 2012
by Billy Hallowell
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/stud...a-in-november/


There’s no question that President Barack Obama has fielded some tough questions regarding his support — and perceived lack thereof — for the Israeli state and the Jewish people.

But, despite allegations that he has lost favor among American Jews, a new poll from the Public Religion Research Institute seems to indicate that Obama is poised to, once again, capture the majority of this cohort come November.

In September, we reported that the president was beginning to ramp up his outreach to Jewish donors and supporters. With strategist Dick Morris, among others, warning about an Obama-Jewish implosion, this tactic made perfect political sense. In the months that followed, the president reiterated — at least rhetorically — his support for Israel, even going on to claim that he’s “done more for the security of the state of Israel than any previous administration.”

Some conservative Jews, though, have maintained that the man who was able to secure 78 percent of the Jewish vote in 2008 is a “train wreck” and a “con man.” There was even a film, produced by the Emergency Committee for Israel, attacking Obama’s record on Israel. And earlier this month, we reported that some major 2008 donors have been giving monies to Republican contender Mitt Romney (not a good sign for the president by any measure).

But despite the challenges, it hasn’t been all bad for Obama when it comes to relating to Jewish Americans. After all, The Jewish Forward added him to their list of the year’s most influential…Jews (our reporting on this can be found here). New York Magazine even wondered back in September if he’s the first Jewish president. Now, a PRRI poll is claiming that the president is poised, despite criticism, to capture the majority of Jewish voters this November.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/stud...a-in-november/
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1030  
Old 04-04-2012, 02:41 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation DNC staffer gaffe reveals how mainstream anti-Semitism has become in the party.

‘Jewbags’ and the Democrats’ Anti-Israel Liaison
DNC staffer gaffe reveals how mainstream anti-Semitism has become in the party.
by Daniel Greenfield




There’s a thin line between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. That’s true of Muslims and the left, but it’s also true specifically of the Jewish left, whose hatred for Israel manifests itself in a general contempt for Jewish religion, culture and tradition.

Take the “Jewbags” case of Danielle Gilbert, a staffer for Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz who had been appointed the DNC’s Jewish outreach liaison. In a social media mishap, Gilbert posed along with her friends in a photo that she captioned “JEWBAGS” and that a friend of hers captioned as “Jew cash money team.” This is the sort of incident that the hip crowd that thinks “Heeb” is a great name for a magazine and “Jewcan Sam” is hilarious will laugh off. But it’s hardly the most offensive thing about Gilbert from a Jewish perspective. It’s just a symptom of the problem.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has long been associated with J-Street, the anti-Israel group which has repeatedly worked to undermine Israel’s fight against terrorism. When a delegation from J-Street arrived at Schultz’s office last year, they were received by Danielle Gilbert who posed with them for a photo. That wasn’t the limit of Gilbert’s involvement with J-Street.

Danielle Gilbert’s twitter feed suggests that she attended the J-Street conference and she retweeted a call from the anti-Israel group to freeze “settlements.” Gilbert’s own anti-Israel background isn’t casual. She attended the London School of Economics and Political Science and while there was part of the Association for the Study of Ethnicity and Nationalism.

Gilbert had volunteered at Givat Haviva, a leftist group dedicated to pro-terrorist activism. Givat Haviva had a presence at the J-Street conference and has its roots in Kibbutz Artzi, which was far enough to the left that it identified closely with the Soviet Union and its leader eulogized Soviet mass murdering dictator, Joseph Stalin. The roots of Givat Haviva lie with Artzi’s Arab Department whose goal was a one-state solution.

Ilan Pappe founded and ran the Academic Institute for Peace in Givat Haviva. Pappe is a former member of Hadash, the Arab-Israeli Communist party, who supports the destruction of Israel via a One State Solution. An article on the Givat Haviva website features a photo of Danielle Gilbert with one of her friends, who writes about his own support for the One State Solution.

Through Givat Haviva, Gilbert conducted interviews with the residents of the Muslim Bartaa village which straddles the Green Line and has become a cause celebre for the anti-Israel left. Since then she has been a Jeremiah Fellow at Jews United for Justice, another left-wing group, which also participated in the J-Street conference, and whose board members intersect with a number of anti-Israel groups.

In 2008, Gilbert wrote, “We cannot see Mumbai’s events as anything less than the gruesome epitome of systematic terror. However, such a tragedy rightly makes us question our unequal treatment of minority cultures within larger communities,” shifting easily to calling the brutal murder of the Holtzberg family and countless Indians by Muslims a “tragedy” that serves to call attention to Muslim suffering.

For Jews there is far more to be offended by in that than in Gilbert’s use of a Jewish slur. There is also far more to be offended by in the fact that the DNC chose to elevate a woman aligned with J-Street and that she then elevated someone like Danielle Gilbert to conduct outreach to the people they no doubt fondly think of as the “Jewbags.”

If you want to understand why Obama thought he could treat Jews with such contempt, you have to remember that he thought Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was a normative figure and Schultz thought that Gilbert was a normative figure. In that echo chamber, a radical group like J-Street seems mainstream and Gilbert’s behavior seems equally mainstream.

Gilbert’s politics and contempt for the Jewish people make her completely unsuitable to act as any kind of liaison to the Jewish community. And yet Danielle Gilbert is not extraordinary. There are plenty of Jewish boys and girls in D.C. with the same privileged background, the same formal trips to Israel giving way uglier detours, foreign policy fellowships and eventually a place in a left-wing think tank or as congressional staffers. These are the people who show up to listen to J Street panels, break bread with members of the Muslim Brotherhood and denounce Israel. They are as banal as they are despicable.

In the last four years the Democratic Party has hardly bothered hiding its contempt for ordinary Americans. The same is true for the Jewish left which is hardly masking its contempt for the Jewish people anymore. This is not a new phenomenon, it dates back to the late 19th century, and the venom with which the Jewish left assailed the Jewish people eventually ended in the Gulags. Those who survived earned the privilege of participating in the Soviet Union’s campaign to smear Israel.

The post-Jewish left mirrors the Post-American left in its radical and destructive identity. Its promotion of a counter-Jewish identity based on ridiculing Jewishness and hostility to Israel is once again splitting the Jewish community into two camps. By elevating Schultz, Gilbert and J-Street, the left is asserting its power to define a destructive form of Jewish identity. The backlash to them is a reminder that the left does not have the power that it thinks it does.

Jewish Anti-Semitism is a very real phenomenon, but it’s not self-hatred, no more so than Bill Ayers’ desire to destroy America is self-hatred. The essence of the left is the rejection of the past in a perpetual war for a better future. The very nature of Jewish identity is built on a continuity of tradition and the nature of the left is to fly its progressive colors by showing contempt for tradition. There can be no balance between the two because to choose the one is to reject the other.

The more the Democratic Party moves in tune with the left, the more it mirrors the bigotry of European leftist parties toward Jews and Israel. This is an inescapable process and the further left the party goes, the more anti-Semitic it will become.

To join the left is to fragment your existing identity, whether it is Jewish or Christian, American or Australian, and adopt a new form of identity. The further the extreme, the greater the fragmentation becomes. Push harder and you go from Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to Peter Beinart to Gilad Atzmon. It’s a slippery slope greased with lies and self-deceptions that ends at the bottom of a charnel pit, a gulag, a death camp or a terrorist training camp.

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1031  
Old 04-05-2012, 07:02 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Obama administration trying to sabotage Israeli plans on attacking Iran?

Obama administration trying to sabotage Israeli plans on attacking Iran?


__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1032  
Old 04-05-2012, 07:46 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Obama’s Knife in Israel’s Back





In his March 28th article, “Israel’s Secret Staging Ground,” in Foreign Policy, Mark Perry revealed previously secret information about Israel’s dealings with Azerbaijan; and many are now of the opinion that his article was in reality Obama’s knife in Israel’s back. According to Perry, four unnamed senior diplomats and military intelligence officers leaked information indicating that Israel has purchased air force bases in Azerbaijan for use in preparation for an attack on Iran.

The likelihood that it is mere coincidence that four senior diplomatic and military intelligence sources separately leaked the same information at the same time is very small. So John Bolton holds Obama responsible. Bolton suggests that because Obama’s private efforts to prevent an Israeli attack on Iran have failed, he decided to ratchet up the pressure on Israel by revealing sensitive, secret information that, once available to Iran, will make an Israeli offensive less likely to succeed, and thus be a deterrent to such an offensive.[1] This is surely not the sort of thing that a head of state does to an ally; but it might be the sort of thing that an unconscionably Machiavellian President running for re-election might do if he perceives that an Israeli strike on Iran might be a political liability for him.

The Azerbaijani Defense Ministry denies any collusion with Israel, and, indeed, Azerbaijan is a rather unlikely ally for the Jewish state; but Wikileaks gives a solid basis for such collusion, the motivation for which may be Azerbaijan’s perception of Iran as an existential enemy.

Some Israeli analysts deride the very idea that Israel could be in league with Azerbaijan for a variety of strategic and tactical, military, logistical and political reasons, including the fact that an Iranian revenge attack on Azerbaijan’s oil production facilities could easily destroy the country’s entire economy.

But these commentators all miss the point. It does not matter whether or not the information is correct. Those who leaked it presumably thought that it was. It does not matter that the President says that he did not knife Israel in the back and has “no interest” in leaks of this kind, or that “…the US is crawling with thousands of intelligence and former intelligence officials.” The buck stops at Obama’s desk. He is the Commander-in-Chief of those thousands. Yet his response is dismissive, nonchalant, and insouciant: hardly the appropriate attitude when an ally’s secret defensive plans have been compromised, with potentially existential consequences.

In the context of a broader perspective this incident takes on rather dire dimensions, as it is the latest in a long line of anti-Israel statements and actions originating with Obama or with those working close to him.

This past February Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta told Iran that he thinks Israel will strike as early as April. So Israel’s ally tells Israel’s enemy when Israel will strike. Surely, for Iran, this is “news you can use.” Was this just a gaff, or was it an intentional leak meant to undermine Israel’s military options? Panetta answers to Obama, but Obama seems to be insouciant, saying nothing.

Another problem regarding Obama’s silence is the recent flap about a State Department official’s refusal to acknowledge that Jerusalem is the official capital of Israel. This official is not to blame. She was merely conforming to the directives of her employer, the U.S. Department of State, which, despite Congress’ Jerusalem embassy act of 1995, and the recent Supreme Court decision recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, continues to ignore U.S. law. The State Department answers to the President, and the President is silent, insouciant, on this issue.

But he did have something to say about the status of Jerusalem on the White House website. Not too long ago Obama himself ordered the removal of all references to “Jerusalem, Israel” from the White House website, replacing them with “Jerusalem.” What could be Obama’s motive for divesting Israel of its capital, and Jerusalem of its Jewish state? Connecting some recent dots will offer an answer to that question.

To a mostly Jewish AIPAC audience on June 4, 2008, front-running Presidential candidate Obama announced that “Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided.” But only a few days later, after being assailed by Arab-American and Palestinian spokespersons, he told a mostly Arab audience that “…it’s going to be up to the parties to negotiate.” [2] To which audience did he lie?

But as the world had already learned a few months earlier, he was willing to divide not only Jerusalem, but all of Israel. In January, 2008, Obama said he supported the division of Israel into two parts by a Palestinian state.[3] This stunning comment came as Obama, struggling to articulate his stance on key Mideast issues, asserted that “The Palestinians have a legitimate concern that a state have a contiguous coherent mass that would allow the state to function effectively.” Was Obama not aware that a land corridor between Gaza and the West Bank would effectively cut Israel in half, making it incoherent and non-contiguous, divided into northern and southern portions? Was this merely the gaff of an inexperienced, flustered and geographically challenged presidential candidate trying to accommodate Arab-American voters, or was Obama stating a priority that presaged a series of later presidential anti-Israel words and deeds?

Looking back a bit further into Obama’s not-too-distant past, one may be able to find the likely answer to these questions.

During his presidential campaign (2007-08) he revealed to the press the names of those to whom he would look for guidance on Middle East issues, his “brain trust” as it were: Zbigniew Brzezinski, Anthony Lake, Susan Rice, Bettylu Saltzman, Robert Malley,[4] and Samantha Power, among others – a dream team for the anti-Israel crowd at home and abroad. Given his choice of advisors, it was not difficult to predict that he would be no friend of Israel.

And speaking of advisors, let’s recall Obama’s mentor and spiritual guide, the Reverend Dr. Jeremiah Wright who glad-handed and honored the notorious anti-Israel and anti-Jewish and anti-homosexual Louis Farrakhan, and who is still active in anti-Israel activities with his most recent participation in the planning of the “Global March on Jerusalem” (GMJ). Did Obama sit in Wright’s fire-and-brimstone anti-Israel church and never inhale?

It is also important to recall Obama’s comfort and conviviality with Arab and Arab-American anti-Israel leaders[5], some of whom saw him as a friend of “Palestine” whom they could trust to take strong pro-Palestinian positions once in the White House. Such leaders included the likes of Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi and Ali Abunimah. Obama’s attendance at a vociferously anti-Israel celebration with these and other Palestinian-American leaders back in 2003 was apparently something of a political embarrassment to Obama during his election campaign, so much so that The Los Angeles Times withheld the video of his participation.

It was at this event that Obama is said to have told Ali Abunimah not to press him about Palestinian issues, explaining that he would be able to do more for the Palestinians once he is elected a U.S. Senator. Obama later denied saying that, but Abunimah never publicly retracted the statement and alluded to it several times in public appearances where he expressed his disappointment in Obama’s positive statements about Israel.

Obama’s comment to Abunimah was an eerie precursor to his recent “hot mike” gaff with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. Just as he did not want his voting constituency to know what he planned to do for the Palestinians once elected to the U.S. Senate, so too does he not want the American public to know what sort of flexibility toward Russia he looks forward to, regarding missile defenses, once elected to his second term as President. Obviously in both cases the nature of this post-election flexibility is something that, if known, would reduce his chances of being elected.

Given the above, it may be premature to suggest that Obama wants Iran to win, but clearly he wants Israel to lose.

Notes:
[1] See http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0%2c7340%2cL-4209836%2c00.html for a comprehensive summary of the damage that this leak may cause for Israel. For the most detailed, in-depth and objective summary and analysis of the issue of why an Israeli attack on Iran may create problems for the USA and constitute a liability for the President see http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/R42443.pdf .

[2] The video of that speech is no longer available on line but see excerpts at http://obamalies.net/obama-flip-flops-on-jeruselem.html ; and for the flip-flop when speaking to Arab audiences see: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/06/obama-backtracks-on-jerusalem.html and http://hotair.com/archives/2008/06/05/another-obama-flip-flop-jerusalem/.

[3] Originally published with video in Israel Insider, Jan. 29, 2008. The article and video are no longer on line, but available at http://focusonjerusalem.com/newsroom90.html .

[4] But see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Malley for a summary of his defenders on the issue of his attitude toward Israel.

[5] For details of Obama’s connections to radical Islam, CAIR and Farrakhan see http://www.danielpipes.org/5983/obama-would-fail-security-clearance; http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2008/10/more-on-the-links-between-obama-and ; http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/29709_Terrorist_Fundraisers_for_Obama; and http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/3602 (for his wife’s connections too).

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 04-05-2012 at 07:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #1033  
Old 04-09-2012, 05:27 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation More Obama Leaks to Sabotage Israel?

More Obama Leaks to Sabotage Israel?
Administration realizes the moment of truth on Iran is quickly approaching
by P. David Hornik




On Sunday the Washington Post published an article that seems to further validate those who believe the Obama administration is running a campaign of leaks aimed at stopping Israel from attacking Iran.

Called “U.S. intelligence gains in Iran seen as boost to confidence,” the article cites “officials” saying that “expanded intelligence collection has reinforced the view within the White House that it will have early warning of any move by Iran to assemble a nuclear bomb….”

Authors Joby Warrick and Greg Miller mention a “covert campaign by the CIA and other agencies to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program” and quote a “senior U.S. official” who claims “there is confidence that we would see activity indicating that a decision [to build a nuclear bomb] had been made.”

The article does include some qualifications, mentioning officials who “conceded that aspects of Iran’s nuclear decision-making remain opaque” as well as “the chastening experience of Iraq.” But its main thrust is that “Israeli officials [who] have pushed for a more aggressive response” are jumping the gun, with “White House officials contend[ing] that…it would take Iran at least a year to [build a nuclear weapon] if it were to launch a crash program now.”

Here it should be noted that this sanguinity clashes with statements just a month ago by IAEA chief Yukiya Amano, who warned that Iran had tripled its production of higher-enriched uranium since November and was again denying the IAEA access to Parchin—a site where Iran had done tests that the IAEA considered “strong indicators” of developing a bomb.

Meanwhile, also on Sunday, the New York Times ran a piece suggesting that Washington is somewhat closer to Israeli perceptions. Regarding the new round of negotiations the P5 + 1 countries are supposed to launch with Iran on Friday, David E. Sanger and Steven Erlanger cite “American and European diplomats” who say the “Obama administration and its European allies plan to…demand…the immediate closing and ultimate dismantling of Iran’s deep-underground Fordo enrichment facility,” which Israel has emphasized as a particularly troubling development.

According to Sanger and Erlanger, Obama and the Europeans are also “calling for a halt in the production of uranium fuel that is considered just a few steps from bomb grade, and the shipment of existing stockpiles of that fuel out of the country….”

That seems to dovetail with Obama’s reported message to Iran that the upcoming talks are a last opportunity for a peaceful solution.
The Western allies are even, the Times says, looking to leverage Israel’s warnings—“gambling that crushing sanctions and the threat of Israeli military action” will bolster Iranians who prefer a negotiated settlement.

The article also cites officials who are worried that “Iran may have worked on warhead designs and nuclear triggers” and that “the Russians and the Chinese are trying to water down the sanctions”—and offers a further spicy tidbit:
European allies, especially the French and the British, say they are concerned that Mr. Obama will want to keep the negotiations going, however unproductive they might be, through the November presidential election to avoid the possibility of a military strike if the talks fail.

Israel and some European leaders fear that would play into what they perceive as Iran’s strategy to use the talks to buy time while its centrifuges keep spinning.
The two leading U.S. papers, then, giving contrasting views. The Post portrays an administration that is essentially complacent; the Times depicts an administration that is leaning more toward an Israeli-like sense of urgency—though some still have serious doubts about that.

Tehran, for its part, reacted quickly to the Times article by “saying it will neither close…Fordo…nor give up higher uranium enrichment,” denouncing such demands as “irrational.”

The upshot is that a moment of truth is approaching. If Obama indeed lets Iran string the talks along and lets Russia and China (members of the P5 + 1 along with the U.S., Britain, France, and Germany) shield it from any decisive consequences, those who take a dim view of his seriousness on the issue will be vindicated once and for all. Israel will, then, face a harrowing situation of watching Iran inch closer and closer to nukes while “peace talks” drag on.

The only other possibility is that the talks will break down more or less quickly without results. But while Obama will probably then react by tightening the sanctions, that can still be a way of coasting through to November if the sanctions—as is close to certain—still don’t get Iran to stop its program. In that case Israel would, however, be freer to act.

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1034  
Old 04-12-2012, 01:54 AM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Hillary Clinton Sides with Palestinians Over Republicans

Hillary Clinton Sides with Palestinians Over Republicans




Hillary Clinton sides with Palestinians over Republicans, Sara Sorcher of National Journal reports:
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is allowing U.S. funds to flow to the West Bank and Gaza despite a hold by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., a rare display of executive-branch authority sure to anger the key lawmaker concerned about protecting her congressional oversight role.

A State Department official saidthat the letter was delivered on Tuesday to key members of Congress informing them of Clinton's decision to move forward with the $147 million package of the fiscal year 2011 economic support funds for the Palestinian people, despite Ros-Lehtinen's hold.

Administrations generally do not disburse funding over the objections of lawmakers on relevant committees.

"[The funds deliver] critical support to the Palestinian people and those leaders seeking to combat extremism within their society and build a more stable future. Without funding, our programs risk cancellation," the official, who was not authorized to speak about the issue, said in an e-mail. "Such an occurrence would undermine the progress that has been made in recent years in building Palestinian institutions and improving stability, security, and economic prospects, which benefits Israelis and Palestinians alike.”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...ns_636910.html
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1035  
Old 04-14-2012, 03:04 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Clinton Dangerously Inconsistent on Palestinian Funding

Clinton Dangerously Inconsistent on Palestinian Funding

by IPT News • Apr 13, 2012
http://www.investigativeproject.org/...on-palestinian


In a highly controversial move, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has approved a $147 million economic support package to the Palestinian people despite a hold on these funds by the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The move contradicts previous statements from Clinton that she would never send aid to the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip.

"We will not deal with nor in any way fund a Palestinian government that includes Hamas unless and until Hamas has renounced violence, recognized Israel and agreed to follow the previous obligations of the Palestinian Authority," Clinton told Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y., during a House Foreign Affairs subcommittee hearing in April 2009.

Hamas, a designated terrorist organization, has not met any of these three conditions. Yet, a State Department letter sent Tuesday to key members of Congress alerted them of Clinton's decision to move forward with the aid package.

The funds deliver "critical support to the Palestinian people and those leaders seeking to combat extremism within their society and build a more stable future. Without funding, our programs risk cancellation," a State Department official said in an e-mail to the National Journal. "Such an occurrence would undermine the progress that has been made in recent years in building Palestinian institutions and improving stability, security, and economic prospects, which benefits Israelis and Palestinians alike."

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., who placed the hold on funding to the Palestinians, was angered by Clinton's challenge to her congressional oversight role.

"The U.S. has given $3 billion in aid to the Palestinians in the last five years alone, and what do we have to show for it?" Ros-Lehtinen said in a statement Wednesday. "Now the administration is sending even more. Where is the accountability for U.S. taxpayer dollars?"

Ros-Lehtinen blocked the aid to stop U.S. funds going to assistance and recovery programs in Hamas-run Gaza; road construction projects in the West Bank that are not vital for security; or trade and tourist promotion.

She was willing to release $88.6 million of the $147 million package under terms spelled out in a letter sent to Clinton and U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator Rajiv Shah last month.

But Clinton ignored those recommendations and unilaterally approved the full payment. It's not the first example of her inconsistency regarding Palestinian governance.

In that 2009 House Foreign Affairs subcommittee hearing, she changed her tune ever so slightly to indicate that any future Palestinian government would need to meet these conditions and not necessarily Hamas itself.

"U.S. assistance will only be permitted to any power-sharing government in which Hamas participates, if the president certifies that the power-sharing government has met the three principles I just outlined," she said.
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1036  
Old 04-14-2012, 04:33 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation At Istanbul Talks, US Puts Better Ties with Iran Ahead of Nuclear Issues

At Istanbul Talks, US Puts Better Ties with Iran Ahead of Nuclear Issues
DEBKAfile Special Report April 14, 2012

http://www.debka.com/article/21915/


Wendy Sherman leads US delegation at Istanbul

European diplomats close to the nuclear negotiations which Iran and six world powers launched in Istanbul Saturday, April 14 praised the first session as “constructive” because all the participants agreed that it laid the ground for a follow-up meeting in a month or six weeks. debkafile: For this modest "concession," Tehran won its first advantage, time for advancing its nuclear weapons program and a substantial delay for any US or Israel military action to preempt this advance – up until mid-summer.

At around the same time, in July, President Barack Obama is committed to declare the next round of sanctions against Iran - a tight clampdown on its banks and oil exports.

It is doubtful if then Tehran will consent to go back to the “everything is on the table” policy it pursued surprisingly for the first time in Turkey. Until now, the Iranians refused to allow its nuclear activities, especially in the military field, to be aired at international forums. Yet at the Saturday session, Saeed Jalili, Iran’s senior nuclear negotiator avoided mention of sanctions and, as debkafile predicted on April 11, did not demand the lifting of penalties as a precondition for negotiations.

His statement to the meeting was not released. European diplomatic sources only quoted him as saying generally that he was ready “to seriously engage on the Iranian nuclear issue.”

US Under Secretary for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman is quoted as saying that “relations between Washington and Tehran need not be so bad.”

During the break for lunch, when informal meetings traditionally take place among the delegates, Sherman is reported by Western sources to have asked to talk to Jalili, but whether or not they met was not stated.

Shortly after, sources in Tehran denied that the US and Iranian delegation leaders had met separately but later said Jalili had accepted her invitation.

Diplomatic circles in the West including Israel were surprised at the choice of Wendy Sherman as US delegation leader. She is reputed to be Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s closest and most influential adviser. This is taken as a signal from Washington to Tehran that the Obama administration is more interested in improving the climate of relations with Iran at the diplomatic level than reaching understandings on the nuclear issue.

On April 7, debkafile’s Washington sources disclosed that this goal was underscored in the message from President Obama to Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan delivered on March 29.

The president expressed the hope that Iranian leaders would abandon their hostile rhetoric and stop referring to the United States as their enemy. Erdogan was directed to inform the supreme leader that statements from Tehran crediting Obama’s policy for this improvement in tone would be welcomed, for example, Khamenei’s remark on March 8 in which he welcomed comments by US President Barack for “for pushing forward diplomacy and not war as a solution to Tehran’s nuclear ambition.”

This initial US approach and the absence from the American delegation of any important expert on Iran’s nuclear program have raised concern among some of America’s Western allies as well as Israel about the prospects of the Istanbul talks getting anywhere in their avowed objective of reining in Iran’s nuclear aspirations.

http://www.debka.com/article/21915/
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1037  
Old 04-15-2012, 05:20 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Thumbs down 74 Democrats Join J Street in Urging Concessions

74 Democrats Join J Street in Urging Concessions
Democrats in House of Reps. joined J Street in supporting Obama's attempt to force Israel into making painful concessions.

By Rachel Hirshfeld
4/15/2012
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/154736


Seventy-four Democrats in the House of Representatives have joined the leftist J Street organization in supporting the Obama administration's attempt to force Israel into making painful and possibly dangerous concessions to the Palestinian Authority.

“In our view, support for a two-state resolution is inseparable from such support for Israel, its special relationship with the United States, and its very survival as a democratic homeland for the Jewish people,” the letter asserted.

Seven Jewish members signed the letter, including Reps. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), John Yarmuth (D-Ky.), Reps. Susan Davis (D-Calif.), Bob Filner (D-Calif.), Jared Polis (D-Colo.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and Henry Waxman (D-Calif.).

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee also signed the letter.

J Street’s director of government affairs, Dylan Williams, noted that the signatories “are making clear that to be pro-Israel is to support active U.S. engagement in achieving a two-state solution.”

“If the U.S. Congress does not make a viable resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a cornerstone of foreign policy in the region, then we are not truly helping Israel to face one its most critical challenges,” Williams continued, not mentioning that there are other possible solutions and that the two-state one might bring catastrophe upon Israel.

While J Street claims it is a “pro-Israel” organization, its policies have ranged from supporting the libelous Goldstone Report to opposing sanctions and military actions against Iran. The organization has provided a forum for radicals advocating boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel and has denied, despite evidence to the contrary, that it receives funding from George Soros, the multi-billionaire financier of radically left leaning organizations.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/154736
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1038  
Old 04-17-2012, 04:08 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Thumbs down An American president does all he can to shield Iran from Israel

Iran’s Best Defense
An American president does all he can to shield Iran from Israel
by Michael Widlanski




As US officials again ask Iran to stop its atom bomb program, President Barack Obama seems to be working hard to shield Iran and to prevent Israel from striking at Iran’s nuclear weapons potential. US officials are believed to be behind stories about Israel readying basing and refueling options in countries near Iran, like Azerbaijan.
The Azeris quickly denied they allowed Israel to use their land., and this is a sign the Azeris are feeling pressure not to help Israel, even as Obama reportedly used the Islamist and strongly anti-Israel leader of Turkey, Recep Erdogan, to send a message to Iran that the US would be willing to accept “an Iranian civilian nuclear program.”

For Israel—and for Saudis, Jordanians and Egyptians—Iran’s bomb is not a matter that can be indefinitely delayed in a diplomatic ping-pong match.

President Obama has been rotating his top officials on and off the diplomatic playing field to deter an attack on Iran. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Martin Dempsey, and many others have been sent to Jerusalem to tell Israel NOT to attack Iran.

“It’s not prudent at this point to decide to attack Iran,” said General Dempsey, in an interview with CNN. Meanwhile, Secretary Panetta openly discussed some of Israel’s options and possible time tables in ways that make them less surprising and effective for possible use against Iran.

At the same time, Obama has been seen using the playbook of his favorite pundit, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, whose book is often under Obama’s arm, and Zakaria says “Within the context of Iranian politics, Ahmadinejad is the pragmatist.” For more than three years, President Obama has agreed, trying to “engage” such “pragmatists.”

“Pragmatist” has a special meaning for Zakaria/Obama or maybe they have not heard Ahmadinajad brag about how he felt a halo appear around him when he told the UN that everyone should pray for the Mahdi, an Islamic messiah Ahmadinajad believes has to be born out of a fire that will cleanse the world.

Ahmadinajad and Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, want such a mighty Mahdi. Their ideas are so extreme that Ayatollah Khomeini—hardly a moderate—outlawed them when he was alive. He felt the Mahdi cult would cause Iran’s destruction.

Zakaria thinks attacking Iran is dumb because Iran is run by “rational” men like those who led the Soviet Union. Zakaria has said this for a long time, and he has been wrong for a long time.

The Soviets were led by conservative old men who said Communism would beat the West as part of an “inevitable dialectic.” They could afford to wait. They did not run around handing out weapons of mass destruction to terrorists or client states. Iran is different. It helped Syria build a nuclear program and sends missiles to Venezuela.

Iran’s leaders are not careful old atheists who are deterred or avoid confrontation. They feel God is on their side. They think God wants them to move things along quickly to His paradise on Earth. They sent thousands of children to certain death, to clear minefields with their bare hands, with only “keys to paradise” dangling from their necks. Blood clearly does not deter Iran’s leaders, not even the blood of children.

Obama feels Iran can be swayed by non-military means before it gets a bomb. Recently, Obama has urged “tough” sanctions on Iran, but it took him three years to move away from engaging Iran to trying to strangle it.
However, this is not a real option. Russia and the China will not allow real sanctions, vetoing it at the UN. Obama’s earlier model of talking nicely to the Iranians was really just a huge waste of time, but for Iran, it was time used building a bomb

For a decade, Iran has played the world for fools, processing yellow cake uranium to uranium hexafluoride gas and then to weapons grade uranium. Iran claimed it was working for “civilian purposes.” There is method to Iran’s madness, but it is not playing by the Western playbook or US-Soviet doctrines of deterrence.

Some suggest President Obama wants to reserve for himself the option to face Iran himself in a way that can achieve a dramatic victory a few days before the November elections. More likely, Obama just does not like to use force and also has trouble admitting his various game plans of “engaging Iran” and now “sanctions” have failed.

Still, President Obama needs to recall that this is no game for the Israelis and Iran’s Arab neighbors who realize that Iran is not just playing games.
Israel and many Arab countries—Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia—are not going to wait forever for President Obama to get his game plan together.

Dr. Michael Widlanski is an expert on Arab politics and communications. He is the author of of the new book, Battle for Our Minds: Western Elites and the Terror Threat.

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1039  
Old 04-19-2012, 07:38 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Stakelbeck on Terror: Is the Muslim Brotherhood Winning?

Stakelbeck on Terror: Is the Muslim Brotherhood Winning?


__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
  #1040  
Old 04-19-2012, 07:58 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is online now
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 38,067
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Obama ready to yield on Iran's nuclear transparency. Israel:Tehran will cheat

Obama ready to yield on Iran's nuclear transparency. Israel:Tehran will cheat
DEBKAfile Special Report April 18, 2012


In the direct, secret exchanges between the US and Iran which led up to the Istanbul talks with the six powers, of Saturday, April 14, President Barack Obama quietly backed off from his demand that Iran “come clean” on its nuclear activities and open up to international inspection, debkafile reports.

This concession paved the way for Tehran’s consent to discuss his framework proposal to stop enriching uranium to 20 percent, halt work at its underground facility for higher enrichment near Qom, and export its stockpile of highly enriched uranium for final processing to 20 percent for use in medical isotopes. This would be presented as a deal for settling the nuclear controversy.

debkafile’s military sources: The Iranians may find it worth their while to accept this framework. After all, once sanctions are lifted by the end of June - as Tehran demands - and they are freed of IAEA oversight, the Iranians can go forward with their plans for building a nuclear weapon undisturbed and Washington can celebrate a breakthrough.

Israel has not received word of this deal.

debkafile’s Washington sources report that in contrast with the downbeat mood in Israel, Washington is already celebrating its success in resolving the Iranian nuclear conundrum and averting war.

Our sources have two points to make in this regard:

1. Tehran has not yet put pen to paper to approve the American proposal and agreed only to move forward in their back-door negotiations without prejudice:

2. Obama will eventually have to level with Israel, the American people and the rest of the world on his deal with Iran.

There is no chance of Israel’s Binyamin Netanyahu going along with agreements on the lines under discussion between Washington and Iran, because they would allow Iran to develop nuclear armaments relieved of the hindrances of international oversight and sanctions.

The Israeli prime minister, when he addressed the state ceremony marking the annual Holocaust Remembrance Day Wednesday night, spoke at length of the mortal danger a nuclear Iran for the Jewish state. He said those who maintained Israel lacked the military capacity for dealing with the Iranian menace were wrong.

“We can and will defend ourselves,” he said.“I won’t stop stating the truth (about Iran) at the UN, in Washington and in Jerusalem.”

debkafile reported earlier Wednesday, April 18: Officials in Jerusalem angrily dismissed reports of a breakthrough in last Saturday’s nuclear negotiations in Istanbul between six world powers (P5+1) and Iran and most emphatically the claim that “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu played his expected role in this choreography” by criticizing the negotiators for giving Iran a five-week freebie for continuing enrichment without limitation, as cited in a Washington Post article on Wednesday, April 18, by the columnist David Ignatius.

Iran is presented as ready to agree to stop enriching uranium to 20 percent and halt work at its underground facility for higher enrichment near Qom, and export its stockpile of highly enriched uranium for final processing to 20 percent for use in medical isotopes. Israeli sources say this report is false: Far from this being the shape of an eventual settlement, it was the shape of American demands relayed to Tehran in side-channels going via Paris and Vienna. Israel was never informed of Iran accepting this formula or its presentation to the Istanbul meeting.
Above all, they stressed, Netanyahu has not and will not play a role in any choreography of this kind staged by the Obama administration.

The Americans appear to have been taken in by the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s public pledge in February not to commit the “grave sin” of building a nuclear weapon as representing the Islamic regime’s face-saver for caving in to US pressure. The WP article is indeed captioned” “The stage is set for a deal with Iran.” Nothing, say debkafile's military and intelligence sources, is farther from the truth. According to our Iranian sources, there is no sign of the Iranians caving in.

The article itself appears to represent Washington’s comeback for a radio interview aired a few hours earlier, Tuesday, April 17, by Israeli Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Strategic Affairs Moshe Ya'alon, in which he sharply criticized the Obama administration for its handling of the nuclear dispute with Iran: "We (Israel) no longer believe in the Americans, and on the Iran issue, we are not in the same boat."

“Three years ago, Iran had 1,200 kilos of low enriched uranium; today it has five and a half tons,” he pointed out.

Ya'alon also warned that after the way the proceedings went in Istanbul, right after the second round of talks on May 23 in Baghdad, “Israel will review its steps,”

Citing the classical Hebrew adage: If I do not watch out for myself, who will? (אם אין אני לי מי לי?) , he noted: “Obama too has said Israel has the right to self-defense.”

The deputy prime minister was the first Israeli national figure to suggest that, after May 23, the Netanyahu government would approach a decision on the date for a countdown to an attack on Iran’s nuclear program.

Yaalon certainly said enough to cause some agitation in Washington, judging by the flood of phone calls debkafile’s sources report coming in from Washington with requests for clarifications.

Earlier that Tuesday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in another radio interview that the“P5+1” group’s talks with Iran must result in a clear-cut resolution, the end of Iran’s nuclear program. He did not believe they would, although he hoped to be proved wrong.

The two Israeli ministers would not have delivered their downbeat comments if indeed US talks with Iran over and under the negotiating table had achieved, or even approached, the breakthrough depicted in Washington.
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
Israel Forum
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Israel Military Forum