| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Guests 
Guest Group
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: November 22 2008 at 8:06am |
| Iran navy tightens grip
on Persian Gulf |
|
|
|
|
Iran
upgrades a Persian Gulf naval base in order to tighten its grip on the strategic
gulf, amid military threats against the country.
Iran upgrades a Persian
Gulf naval base in order to tighten its grip on the strategic gulf, amid
military threats against the country.
The Islamic Revolution
Guards Corps (IRGC) has upgraded the Asalouyeh Naval Base to a naval region,
inaugurating its fourth naval region along the waterway.
The IRGC is
responsible for providing security in the strategic gulf as well as defending
the country's Persian Gulf coast.
The Asalouyeh Naval Region will
control a 190-mile (300-kilometer) stretch of coastline west of the strait
between Kish Island and the port of Dayyer, according to the Associated Press.
IRGC senior naval commander Admiral Morteza Saffari said Monday that the
Asalouyeh base would be equipped with a series of 'torpedo boats, fast attack
missile boats, and land based anti-ship missiles'.
The measure comes as
Iran's armed forces prepare for a potential new military conflict in the region.
Israel alleges that Tehran, a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT), has plans 'to build a nuclear weapon', claiming a nuclear Iran
would pose an existential threat to Tel Aviv.
Israeli echelons,
meanwhile, argue that the use of military force is a legitimate option in
retarding Iran's nuclear progress.
"We don't rule out any option. We
recommend others don't rule out any option either," said Israeli Defense
Minister Ehud Barak on Nov. 7.
Tehran insists that its nuclear
enrichment program is solely directed at the civilian applications of the
technology, while maintaining that it would not hesitate to take all crucial
measures in protecting itself - including the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
NATO, meanwhile, has
raised doubts whether in time of war Iran is capable of effectively closing down
the strait -- through which as much as 40 percent of the world's sea-transited
oil supplies pass.
Vice Admiral Maurizio Gemignani, the commander of
NATO's naval forces, said in early November that the threat of closing down the
Persian Gulf waterway is merely a 'fantasy'.
Iran argues that it can
fully shut down the strategic waterway with its anti-ship missiles capable of
targeting any vessel within a range of 185 miles (300 kilometer) from Iranian
shores.
In late October, the IRGC inaugurated a new naval base in the
port of Jask located in the Sea of Oman - the eastern part of the Strait of
Hormuz.
The Jask Naval Base and the Asalouyeh Naval Region, situated in
the west of the strait, will enable the IRGC to provide logistics and support
for its forces in the strategic waterway.
At the Monday address, Admiral
Saffari said the Iranian naval forces will remain 'fully prepared to confront
any possible threat' against the country.
Source: Press TV
Medclinician
|
|
 |
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: November 22 2008 at 8:15am |
Today - November 22, 2008 Israeli intelligence sources say the prospect of military action
against Iran has increased significantly in the past few weeks.
Israeli sources told the Times
on Friday that in the past few weeks Tel Aviv has witnessed an increase
in the chances of launching an airborne attack on Iran's nuclear
infrastructure.
The revelation comes as Israeli military officials recently sent mixed signals about a calculated attack on Iran.
In a Wednesday interview with German weekly Der Speigel,
Israeli Air Force Commander General Ido Nehushtan claimed that his
forces were ready to follow any order to bring Iran's nuclear program
to a halt.
"The IAF is a very robust and flexible force... ready to do whatever is demanded," he said.
Former
Israeli military general Moshe Ya'alon, meanwhile, claimed that Tel
Aviv has the 'right capabilities' to launch a successful strike on
Iran.
"[A strike] is not the end of the game. Then, we should
follow it up with a viable, sustainable military operation to target
the facilities [serving] the regime's interests, and not allow the
regime to rehabilitate itself," he said.
comment: aka War against Iran by Israel
The head of the
Israeli military's Diplomatic-Security Bureau Amos Gilad, however, said
a military attack on Iran would pose a 'considerable challenge'.
"Iran is a country with smart people that have capabilities... It really would be a considerable challenge," he said.
Israel's
military intelligence chief Amos Yadlin also dismissed an Israeli plan
to strike Iran, saying the world financial crisis and Barack Obama's
election as the next US president have dissipated the chances of wiping
out the Iranian enrichment program.
Any military attack on
Iran would require U.S. cooperation as it would almost certainly
involve Israeli warplanes flying through the Washington-controlled
Iraqi airspace.
comment: This is not accurate. There is an alternative to attack Iran without flying through Iraqi airspace. This has been known for almost 6 months. One extremely viable alternative would be to attack directly through Turkey.
The Iranian armed forces have repeatedly
warned that any attempted violation of Iran's territorial integrity
would be a 'suicidal folly'.
"After failure in its 33-day-war
on Lebanon, Israel has realized that any effort or movement against
Iran would have devastating consequences," the top Iranian military
commander Yahya Rahim-Safavi said on Sunday. Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 22 2008 at 6:40pm |
 |
Updated : Sunday December 14 , 2008 8:42:59 AM
|
|
|
By Patrick Seale
Reports from Western
capitals suggest that the possibility of an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear
facilities is once again the subject of intense speculation in intelligence and
diplomatic circles, as it has been at various times over the past year. The
concern is that Israel might seize the opportunity of the last weeks of the Bush
presidency to launch a strike.
In a wide-ranging speech last Friday,
outgoing President George W Bush repeated his pledge that ‘America will not
allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.’ Speaking at the Saban Center, a
pro-Israeli Washington think-tank, he did not say how this was to be achieved.
Some well-placed European diplomats believe an Israeli attack is likely
in the few weeks before President-elect Barack Obama assumes office on Jan. 20.
Their argument – for what it’s worth – is that Israel may be tempted to remove
the strategic threat from Iran in order to prepare the ground for making
territorial concessions to the Syrians in a revived peace process.
According to these diplomats, Israel may calculate that if its strikes
were limited to attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities – while sparing its civilian
infrastructure – Iran’s retaliation would also be limited in scope, and would
therefore not be too disruptive to the already highly disturbed Middle East
order.
Speculation of an Israeli attack has been fueled by the estimate that
Iran is approaching the stage of becoming a ‘threshold’ nuclear power – that is
to say, that it is almost at the stage of being able to manufacture at least one
nuclear bomb fairly rapidly, if it chose to do so.
Last month, the
Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran had
produced 630 kilograms of low-enriched uranium at its Nantanz nuclear facility.
Experts concluded from this report that if this stock of uranium were enriched
to weapons-grade level, and if Iranian engineers were able to master the ability
to design a warhead – two rather big ‘ifs’ – then the Islamic Republic could
acquire a nuclear capability within the next year or so.
Israel – which
is estimated to have between 200 and 400 nuclear warheads, as well as land, sea
and air delivery systems – has repeatedly declared that it would not tolerate
any challenge to its regional nuclear monopoly.
On 4 December, the
Jerusalem Post quoted Israeli Air Force commander Maj-Gen Ido Nehushtan as
saying that the IAF was preparing ‘a wide range of options’ for an operation
against Iran. All it would take to launch an attack, he added, was a decision by
the political echelon. According to the newspaper, the ‘options’ being prepared
did not include coordination with the United States.
“We are willing to
talk to them (the Iranians) directly,” Obama told NBC’s Meet the Press’ program
last Sunday, “and give them a clear choice and ultimately let them make a
determination in terms of whether they want to do this the hard way or the easy
way.” This fuzzy statement seemed intended to encourage Iran to come to the
table, while throwing some meat to the pro-Israeli hawks.
Iran was quick
to reject Obama’s carrot and stick approach. “This (US) policy needs to change
and transform into an interactive policy,” Iran’s foreign Ministry spokesman,
Hasan Qashqavi, said last Monday. “If their (i.e. America’s) new stance is to
remove concerns about Iran’s nuclear activities, we are ready for that. But our
new expectation is… that they should recognize our right to nuclear technology…
Iran will never suspend uranium enrichment.”
Qashqavi’s hint of the need
for “interactive” talks with the US – and of Iran’s readiness to reassure the
world about its nuclear ambitions – is more or less what IAEA chief Mohammad
ElBaradei has been urging. In an interview with the Los Angeles Times on Dec. 6
he called for a ‘grand bargain’ with Tehran in which the West would recognize
Tehran’s role in the region and give it ‘the power, the prestige, the influence’
it craves. But any such policy is, of course, anathema to Israel and its
American supporters, and will be vigorously challenged.
Prominent
pro-Israeli think-tanks, like the Washington Institute for Near East Policy,
continue their barrage of propaganda against Iran. Dennis Ross, one of the
Institute’s leading members – who is said to be angling for a senior job in the
Obama administration – has not hesitated to repeat the old mantra that Iran is a
threat to America and the world. In an article in Newsweek on Dec. 4, he wrote:
“Everywhere you look in the Middle East today, Iran is threatening US interests
and the political order…Tehran clearly wants nukes for both defensive and
offensive purposes…”
Ross – whose record was abysmal when he was a Middle
East peace negotiator under the Clinton administration – seems intent on
preventing Obama from softening the US position. In his Newsweek article –
entitled “Tough Talk with Tehran” – he urged the United States to mobilize the
Europeans, Japanese, Chinese and Saudis to undermine Iran’s economy. “Hitting
the economy more directly,” Ross wrote, “would force the mullahs to make a
choice.”
One of the clearest indications of international concern about
Israel’s intentions regarding Iran is the candid interview which Zbigniew
Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter’s former national security adviser, gave the Israeli
daily Haaretz on Dec. 8.
“One (piece of) advice that I would give the
Israeli government,” he said, “is not to engage in this campaign for an American
attack on Iran, because I don’t think America is going to attack Iran, and if it
did, the consequences would be disastrous.
“It wouldn’t be particularly
good for American-Israeli relations,” Brezezinski continued, “and there will be
a lot of resentment against (Israel). There already has been some after the war
in Iraq.”
He was referring to the real anger felt by some members of
Washington’s foreign policy establishment at the way Israel, and its friends
inside the Bush administration, pushed America into the disastrous Iraq war.
Brezezinski warned the Israelis that the military option was not a real option
for them because, while Israel could damage Iran’s nuclear facilities, he did
not think it had the capability to destroy them on its own.
A strike
would only delay Iran’s nuclear program, he said, while intensifying Iranian
extremism. Israel could not carry out an effective strike against Iran without
America’s permission, he told the Israelis. “If you look at a map,” he said,
“you can see the reason why it is so.” But, he insisted, the military option was
not a real option for the United States.
This was not a message that
hard-line Israeli politicians and security officials wanted to hear. The danger
is that, far from reining them in, Brezezinski’s remarks might incite them to
strike before Obama takes office. [Courtesy: Saudi Gazette]
A storm is still coming.. in fact several. M.C.
Medclinician
| |
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 22 2008 at 11:59pm |
|
hello... in case you want more to read :)
http://www.cicentre.com/news/espionage.html
and Merry Christmas everyone.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 23 2008 at 12:04am |
|
source-
debka.com
Tehran arrests BBC reporters as suspected spies
December 22, 2008, 2:17 PM (GMT+02:00)
An Iranian official said Monday, Dec. 22, that the BBC which had entered the region "under the guise of a news organization… was more involved in recruitment for intelligence activities." Two groups of reporters were arrested and several other groups were pursued, Tehran claimed.
The BBC has not commented on the charge.
Mohammad Karim Ebadi, member of the Security and Foreign Policy Committee of the Majlis. Tehran claims the alleged spy cell was "identified and dismantled" before it could carry out operations. Ebadi said reporters had reserved hotel rooms using pseudonyms. Iran's intelligence services claimed the BBC was aiming to establish a spy network "with the support of the British embassy."
Iran has been in grip of spymania in recent weeks, claiming one intelligence plot after another. Last month, an electronic salesman, Ali Ashtari was hanged after being convicted of spying for Israel, and a Revolutionary Guards commander and the Revolutionary Guards chief Maj. Gen. Mohammad-Ali Jafari disclosed the arrest of an alleged Mossad spy cell.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 23 2008 at 10:00am |
 Mary08 wrote:
Iran has been in grip of spymania in recent weeks, claiming one
intelligence plot after another. Last month, an electronic salesman,
Ali Ashtari was hanged after being convicted of spying for Israel, and
a Revolutionary Guards commander and the Revolutionary Guards chief
Maj. Gen. Mohammad-Ali Jafari disclosed the arrest of an alleged Mossad
spy cell.
|
No doubt Iran should be more
cautious and end its nuclear weapons program. Although there is not a
lot of chatter and comment from TPTB (the powers that be) the silence
is highly significant. This, of course, indicates that big wheels are
in motion, and everyone for the most part for the sake of security, is
remaining very quiet. This thread was started to keep data
that would at least inform some people of the fact of a remaining
situation of the possible outbreak of warfare in the Gulf, specifically
near and within Iran. Iran's continued weapon, nuclear development,
bunker hardening, and buying of technology from numerous nations or
selling oil leaves no doubt as to their ultimate intention of not
defense, but offensive action against Israel, and intent to destabilize
the entire Middle East. IMHO most countries will look at the
economic situation, who has the most to give them, and to this point,
the U.S. has been the most powerful player with the most money. Now
that is working to our disadvantage, for we have a massive trade
deficit, a recession, actually deflation, and the flow of money out of
the country and especially jobs and this is a major problem. As we
approach the New Year, I would say that many people, are looking for
something almost Messianic to happen in terms of leadership and the
solution of huge problems. This is unrealistic. And like the economic
crisis, pushing it off until next year, or next election, has brought
us to the point we are at. Hard times will call for hard choices.
Difficult problems will require difficult solutions. And the leadership
that will be required to face these challenges of 2009, will demand the
equal of a Lincoln or JFK. As ominous as it sounds, the
thread, as far as what I am posting is meant to simply create support
for our government and military, because events may happen rapidly, and
whereas we are war weary, we must not falter in a considered but make a
firm response when necessary. The advisers of our president have been
carefully chosen as to their ability to provide support during a time
when tough decisions will be required- and these may not be popular
decisions. There comes an end to trying to please people and as Lincoln
said "when you try to please all the people all the time, the result is
pleasing none of the people, none of the time."
If people are aware there is danger. That terrorists, the
Hezbollah supported by Iran or Iran itself, will use nuclear weapons in
Europe, even more likely than the U.S.attacking Iran, then our new
president is going to need a lot of starry eyed people to understand as
he makes policy changes and has to steer a wise path backed by
experienced advisers which may vary considerably from election platform
rhetoric. There is that infamous briefing Bill Clinton spoke of when
trying to reform health coverage for uninsured Americans, when the rubber hits the road, and reality tears down many a campaign promise. And then, for many presidents, the honeymoon is
over. To the preppers here- this is an unneeded reminder of
the fact, that your preparation and readiness after years of work,
posting, gathering info, prepping will not be in vain. The prepping you
have done and effort you have put in will not be wasted. Two years ago 99% of the population was thinking no
Pandemic, no war, and less and less now, no serious economic problems. You will have a better chance of what may be the 65% that make it
through. The supplies you have stored, the diligence you have
maintained over years will no doubt, whether it be natural or unnatural
disaster, be ultimately proved to be wise. Yet, from all of us in
the MC family, myself, Bluebird and Little Skye, hope you will put your worries aside on Christmas day,
enjoy your children, your families, and truly those who believe in God or a higher being in anyway, thank
God for our freedom, that we are still the richest nation on the earth,
and are a continuing example of a true democracy and freedom to the world. I
think all nations should be treated with humanity as well as their citizens, but when we are called to
fight for our freedom and our way of life, we should support those who
do, and those who lead them into battle. Medclinician
|
|
coyote
Admin Group
Joined: April 25 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8395
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 29 2008 at 5:56am |
|
FM Spokesman: Iran Begins Preparing Operations Against Israel
www.debka.com
On Monday, Dec. 29, Day 3 of Israel's Gaza operation, the spokesman said Iran had embarked on preparations for operations against Israel, in line with the directives laid down by supreme ruler Ayatollah Ali Khameini in his speech Sunday.
Iranian lawmaker Ali Motahari told the Iranian news agency IRNA that it was time for Iran and Arab nations to go to war with Israel.
(visit the link for the full news article)
|
|
Long time lurker since day one to Member.
|
|
coyote
Admin Group
Joined: April 25 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8395
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 29 2008 at 6:20am |
|
Iran asks ICC to issue arrest warrants for Israeli leaders Tehran, Dec 29, IRNA
Iran-Gaza-President
Iran is asking the International Criminal Court to bring to dock the Israeli leaders for their war crimes in Gaza over the past two years and the crimes against humanity they perpetrated in massive air strikes.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called on the United Nations court specialized in war crimes to sue the Israeli leaders for their crimes against humanity in Gaza Strip.
Meanwhile, members of the Iranian cabinet put the issue of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the issue of sending aid for Gazans on agenda of the Iranian cabinet.
Emphasizing the need for an immediate judicial action against the Israeli leaders, President Ahmadinejad that the ICC must send arrest warrants to the Israeli leaders by the Interpol.
Those involved by any means in such brutality "should be designated as war criminal and murderer," stressed the president.
The cabinet members have also made major decisions about the crisis in Gaza.
The Foreign Ministry will send Iranian request to the United Nations Special Court on War Crimes.
The leading Iranian lawyers will also prepare a law suit against the Israeli leaders in the international court by assistance of the Judiciary.
A special message from President Ahmadinejad will also be sent to heads of other countries in this connection.
Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told reporters at the end of the cabinet session that special envoys would be introduced within the next 48 hours to submit President Ahmadinejad's messages to the heads of other countries.
Members of the cabinet also decided to allocate part of their salary to the Gazans who are suffering from hard conditions under the Israeli siege.
Two days of Israeli strikes on Gaza have left around 300 deaths and 900 wounded.
Some 140 wounded are in critical conditions.
A Hamas advisor earlier told IRNA that Israel backed by the West and the United States, aims to eradicate Hamas in Gaza.
Azam Tamimi also condemned Arab states for their silence.
The horrific brutality of Israel against civilians have triggered international outrage and shocked world public opinion.
Muslims and non-Muslims people in both Western and Islamic world staged protest rallies on Sunday condemning Israel's atrocities in Gaza.
They also called on heads of world countries to help stop Israeli genocide in Gaza.
IRAN SPECIAL MESSAGE TO OTHER COUNTRIES?
www2.irna.ir...
|
|
Long time lurker since day one to Member.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 29 2008 at 9:38am |
.. war a sad situation.
......................................
"should be designated as war criminal and murderer," stressed the president.
...The leading Iranian lawyers will also prepare a law suit against the Israeli leaders in the international court...
This is rich...considering that Ah...mad...in...ejad, during his Islamic verbal barrages,
Has made a point of ranting on the destruction of Israel as part of his political agenda.
And where does he stand..crimes wise, assisting?, declaring, that Israel be wiped off the map?
The man needs a new hobby.
.......
Azam Tamimi also condemned Arab states for their silence.
how about ... condemned Arab states ... for not assisting with solutions all these years.
............................
Jordan's new king shies away from public embrace of Israel
excerpt-
..."The fact that we are returning now to a more traditional Jordanian policy, of being at the point of balance between Israel and the Arabs, is much more in the interests of Jordan in terms of future stability," said Middle Eastern affairs expert Patrick Seale.
"It's only a matter of concentration. The emphasis now is on the Arab side of the equation," said Taher El Masri, a former Jordanian prime minister. ...
........
ok... so carve out a tiny part of Jordan and Syria near the Golan Heights...for the Palestinians... and build them a decent place to live, transfer the ski slope over there..camel/auto races...some schools, malls. If we can spend billions in aid year after year to Africa...etc. the Arab League can aid a new Palestine.
...........................
King of Jordan-
Abdullah II bin al-Hussein, King of Jordan
...born Amman, 4 February 1962) is the ruler of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. He became king of Jordan on 7 February 1999 after the death of his father King Hussein. King Abdullah is a member of the Hashemite family and is reportedly the 43rd-generation direct descendant of prophet Muhammad[1]. Abdullah's parents are King Hussein and Princess Muna al-Hussein. (born England)
Queen of Jordan
Rania Al-Yassin
was born in Kuwait to Palestinian parents from Tulkarm. She attended primary and secondary school at New English School in Kuwait, then earned a degree in Business Administration from the American University in Cairo. After her graduation in 1991, Queen Rania worked at Citibank and Apple Computer in Amman, Jordan.[1]
Carve out a tiny part of Jordan and Syria near the Golan Heights.. New Palestine.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 30 2008 at 12:38am |
also above from coyote...
see article at -
http://www.debka.com/index1.php
FM spokesman in Tehran: Iran begins preparing operations against Israel
DEBKAfile Special Report
December 29, 2008, 9:49 PM (GMT+02:00)
excerpts-
...in his speech, Khameini issued a fatwa calling on Muslims to stand up and defend Palestinians against Israel. He said "true believers" were "duty-bound to defend" the Palestinians. Khamenei did not spell out what he intended. The foreign ministry statement said believers killed in their cause would be counted martyrs.
DEBKAfile: Egypt has led widespread Arab voices blaming Hamas for the Gaza crisis and accusing Iran of manipulating the Palestinian cause as a power play for its own ends.
.............................................................
December 28, 2008
Rick Moran
excerpt-
Ahmadinejad's statement is revealing. Note that he accuses Israel of "take[ing] revenge." This is an informal acknowledgment that Israel is responding to provocations by Hamas - an action that is defined under the UN Charter as self defense. Of course, the pious Iranian president defines Israel's action in religious terms; the Koran forbids revenge unless the party attacking is in the right.
This fatwa is unlikely to generate any more hate or terrorism directed against Israel than there is already. But it establishes Iran in the forefront of the "resistance" to Israel in the Middle East and can therefore be seen as more a political document than a religious decree.
|
|
endman
V.I.P. Member
Joined: February 16 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1232
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: December 30 2008 at 1:33pm |
|
Very interesting Why Gaza. And Why Now?
The only thing that I could think off is again Oil
As soon as the Oil started to be in free fall, Israel lunch the Attack on Gaza
Why not six month ago? The Hams was firing rockets then too
So who is happy know Iran, Russia, Saudis,
What have they learn?
Make war to keep the price of Oil up
So I see more to come and this not going to end soon
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 01 2009 at 7:47pm |
I think for a short time they are happy for the oil to be lower so that fuel will be more affordable and the gears of the economy will move. Early summer may see a rise in oil prices on the expectation that more gas will be consumed over the summer. These are false lows on oil now. US, China and India will not stop demanding oil. Hope to see more on new car designs. Hoping someone can afford them. I think ExxonMobil will be drilling in Alaska as the tar sands oil extraction is so expensive.
Back to Gaza...
ok... so carve out a tiny part of Jordan and Syria near the Golan Heights...for the Palestinians... and build them a decent place to live, transfer the ski slope over there..camel/auto races...some schools, malls. If we can spend billions in aid year after year to Africa...etc. the Arab League can aid a new Palestine.
...........................
Someone else has a thought on helping the Palastinians...
excerpt-
...The 22 Arab states certainly do not have a shortage of land. Many surrounding Arab areas, such as the Sinai Peninsula, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, are very sparsely populated. But absorbing Palestinians would end their refugee status and their desire to harm Israel.
to improve the lives, infrastructure and economy of the people of the West Bank and Gaza. Instead, it supports terror groups who reject Israel's existence and oppose peace with Israel. The average Gaza man has a better employment opportunity if he joins Hamas.
Gazans' breach of their checkpoint with Egypt in January, orchestrated by Hamas, is a result of the Palestinian refugee policy. The checkpoints on the Arab side of Gaza could not keep the inmates inside. The Arab plan to overpopulate Gaza exploded in the wrong direction. After this explosion, Suleiman Awwad, an Egyptian administration spokesman, said, "Egypt is a respected state, its border cannot be breached and its soldiers should not be lobbed with stones." In other words, Egypt is not like Israel, which is a disrespected state. Gazans should not direct the violence at Egypt, only at Israel. This is Arab conventional wisdom.
Last month Hamas threatened to bring 40,000 Palestinians, primarily children and women, to the Gaza border with Israel to protest Israel's restrictions on Gaza. Some Hamas leaders hinted they would send these protestors to breach the border, once again demonstrating that the Palestinian terrorists have no qualms about endangering the lives of innocent people -- Israelis or Palestinians. Fortunately, only 5,000 showed up.
But Hamas did succeed two days later in killing an Israeli, a 47 year-old father of four, during a rocket attack from Gaza while he was sitting in his car next to Sapir College near Sderot. Two weeks earlier, two Israeli brothers, Osher and Rami Twito, ages 8 and 19, were seriously injured by a rocket from Gaza while buying their father a birthday present. Osher's left leg had to be amputated.
Israel completely left Gaza in August 2005. In May and June 2007, Hamas waged war against its Palestinian brothers in Fatah to gain control of Gaza. Hamas intensified its rockets attacks on Israeli towns, compelling Israel to take economic and military measures against Gaza. Hamas has become a danger not only to Israel, but to Palestinians and to neighboring Arab countries, as well. Nevertheless, the Arab world still refuses to see its role in creating this monster. It is difficult to find a similar situation in human history: the intentional creation of a refugee status for a million and a half people, sustained for 60 years. The Arab world has cut its nose to
spite its face.
The world needs to understand that this dangerous mess started when 22 Arab countries agreed to create a human prison called the Gaza Strip. Arabs claim they love the Palestinian people, but they seem more interested in sacrificing them. It is time for the Arab world to open their side of the borders and absorb the Arabs of the West Bank and Gaza who wish to be absorbed. It is time for the Arab world to truly help the Palestinians, not use them.
Nonie Darwish,
who grew up in Cairo and Gaza City, is author of the book, Now They Call Me Infidel.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 01 2009 at 10:06pm |
The thread started in August is nearing the point where there will be war. Starting in May, it was inevitable that Iran would not stop until they achieved nuclear weapons and Israel would not allow them to do so. Defining a tactical nuke as "not a conventional nuclear weapon" will be no more effective than changing the WHO definition of the Avian Alert Status. The first tactical nuke has already been used in Syria last November. It is not like the line in the sand has not already been crossed. This has been one of the best kept secrets in modern warfare and there are MULTIPLE sources to confirm this.
Rather serious if true:
The September 6 raid over Syria was carried out by the
US Air Force, the Al-Jazeera Web site reported Friday. The Web site
quoted Israeli and Arab sources as saying that two US jets armed with
tactical nuclear weapons carried out an attack on a suspected nuclear
site under construction.
A US Air Force F-22 Raptor, an F-117 Nighthawk, an F-4 Phantom and an F-15 Eagle fly over Holloman Air Force Base, N.M.
Photo: US Air Force
The sources were quoted as saying that Israeli F-15 and F-16 jets provided cover for the US planes.
The sources added that each US plane carried one tactical nuclear
weapon and that the site was hit by one bomb and was totally destroyed.
If true, the US stepped past the bright red line. Nukes? The, er,
fallout, will be extreme overseas. The use of nukes is the last taboo.
Ian Welsh November 3, 2007 - 8:03pm The Syrians did not make a big deal out of this because it was a covert operation and they were preparing to manufacture nuclear bombs. The site, for national security, had to be destroyed. Recently, another raid was done in which Syrian citizens were killed and there was not nor will there ever be an official comment on this raid which was had many witnesses. We fight to prevent a nuclear armed unstable Middle East which will turn these weapons over to the Hamas and Hezbollah to be used to destroy Israel and eventually target Europe. This thread is a necessary one in the sense the American people need to know the gravity of the situation and how we are a hair's breadth from war. Also, great pressure is on to do this before January 20. This has been posted dozens of times, and it is accurate. If these attacks are done before the next administration, it will inherit the war instead of being responsible for it. Under supreme pressure from the Israelis we are not intervening. This lack of action, may allow the situation to escalate to a point where super powers are pulled into the confrontation resulting in dire and serious complications. Military personnel and weapons and ships are in place. The entire area across from the Gulf in Iran is at high alert. It is no longer something is about to happen. Something is happening. Medclinician Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 02 2009 at 8:41pm |
And now Iran totally has it - the excuse to launch a nuclear missile at Israel. Iran warned Israel on Friday not to launch a ground offensive into
the Gaza Strip as protests against the Israeli bombardment of the
Hamas-run Palestinian territory, now in its seventh day, swept several
Mideast capitals.
The demonstrations began shortly after Friday prayers in Teheran,
Cairo, Amman and Damascus. Similar protests have been held daily across
since Israel launched the bombing campaign last Saturday, but these
gatherings were larger _ mainly because Friday prayers are a
traditional opportunity for Muslims to assemble in great numbers. comment: if they didn't have a reason to launch an attack against Israel - Muslim viewpoint - they certainly do now. Medclinican
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 02 2009 at 9:24pm |
Protesters to converge on central London to demand Gaza ceasefire
..........................................................................................................................................
Owen Bowcott
guardian.co.uk
Friday 2 January 2009 17.41 GMT
Thousands of demonstrators are expected to converge on central London tomorrow to demand a ceasefire in Gaza amid growing international anger over Israel's week-long bombardment.
The singer Annie Lennox, the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, comedian Alexei Sayle, Palestinian solidarity groups, Muslim organisations, the Stop the War Coalition and several MPs are among those backing the midday march from Embankment to Trafalgar Square.
Since Israeli air strikes started there have been daily protests outside the Israeli embassy in Kensington, west London, where large numbers have forced the closure of nearby streets. A rally was held outside the Egyptian embassy in Mayfair /today to call for the opening of the Gaza-Egypt border, allowing the delivery of more humanitarian supplies.
Other supporters of /tommorrow's mass protest include the former model Bianca Jagger, Tony Benn, the musician Brian Eno, Respect Party MP George Galloway, Liberal Democrat MP Sarah Teather, Labour MP Jermy Corbyn and the socialist activist Tariq Ali.
Speaking at a press conference ahead of the rally, Jagger appealed to the US president-elect, Barack Obama, to "ask for the immediate cessation of the bombardment of the civilian population in the Gaza Strip."
Ken Livingstone condemned the "Israeli kill ratio of 100 to one" as "obscene". The UK government's response so far had been completely inadequate, he said. "The only time a British government was even-handed [in the Middle East] was Edward Heath in 1973 ... when he refused to let arms shipments through to Israel."
Despite years of courting mainstream Muslim opinion, a rift appeared to be opening up between government departments and certain groups. The Muslim Council of Britain called for a meeting with the Foreign Office but declined to attend the briefing unless it was given by the Foreign Secretary, David Milliband.
Dr Daud Abdullah, deputy secretary-general of the MCB, declared: "There is widespread consternation that our government, along with the United States, did not approve a vote in the Security Council, calling for an immediate ceasefire and an end to the siege of Gaza. We find this incomprehensible given the dire humanitarian crisis."
But the Foreign Office dismissed the allegation. "We support the Arab League's efforts towards a UN Security Council Resolution," a spokesperson insisted. "To be effective, any resolution must be one that will command broad support and that demands an end to Hamas rocket attacks against Israeli civilians as well as an end to Israeli military action in Gaza. It is wrong to suggest that Britain would block action towards a permanent ceasefire. We have not and are not doing so."
The Stop the War coalition has called for protesters to bring old shoes to leave for Brown when the march passes Downing Street "in the spirit of Iraqi journalist Muntadar al-Zaidi". Local protests are also being organised in other UK cities /tomorrow.
A jihadist group, the Followers of Ahlulsunnah Al Jamal, today organised a protest march from the Central Mosque in Regent's park to the US embassy. Their placards declared: 'Shariah for Palestine', 'United Nations Go To Hell - Islam Is The Only Solution' and 'Hands off Muslims'.
Protests against the Israeli bombing erupted in many parts of the Muslim world. In Kabul, around 1,000 protestors gathered outside the Nabawi mosque chanting 'Death to America, Israel and Britain and waved green Hamas flags.
In Cairo, Egyptian police used batons to beat back protests called by the Muslim Brotherhood. Teargas was fired in Jordan to keep demonstrators away from the Jordanian embassy.
source
...............
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 02 2009 at 9:56pm |
Israel lets Palestinians flee; UN warns of crisis
ARON HELLER and IBRAHIM BARZAK
The Associated Press
excerpt-
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accused Hamas' leaders of holding the people of Gaza hostage.
"The Hamas has used Gaza as a launching pad for rockets against Israeli cities, and has contributed deeply to a very bad daily life for the Palestinian people in Gaza and to a humanitarian situation that we have all been trying to address," she said.
International calls for a cease-fire have been growing, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy is expected in the region next week.
Bush said no peace deal would be acceptable without monitoring to halt the flow of smuggled weapons to terrorist groups.
"The United States is leading diplomatic efforts to achieve a meaningful cease-fire that is fully respected," Bush said Friday in his weekly radio address, released a day early. "Another one-way cease-fire that leads to rocket attacks on Israel is not acceptable. And promises from Hamas will not suffice , there must be monitoring mechanisms in place to help ensure that smuggling of weapons to terrorist groups in Gaza comes to an end."
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 02 2009 at 11:35pm |
some history on Gaza
........................................
videos
...............
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 02 2009 at 11:48pm |
source
MIDEAST: Media Banned From Gaza as Humanitarian Crisis Escalates
By Mel Frykberg
Sammy Hassan, spokesman for Gaza's Shifa Hospital.
Credit:Mel Frykberg
RAMALLAH, Dec 31 (IPS) - Israel is again preventing journalists from entering Gaza to report first-hand on the escalating crisis there as its military operation, codenamed Operation Cast Lead, enters its fifth day.
Israel imposed an unprecedented news blackout in November and banned foreign journalists from the Gaza Strip for an entire month.
This followed an Israeli cross-border military incursion into the coastal territory which broke the fragile ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, and set off the current cycle of violence.
The media ban was eventually lifted after the Foreign Press Association (FPA) in Israel petitioned the Israeli Supreme Court, and editors from a number of foreign media outlets sent a letter of protest to the Israeli government.
The foreign media is once again petitioning an Israeli court for permission to enter Gaza and cover the conflict.
Media outlets have had to rely on international human rights activists, aid organisations and Palestinian journalists based in Gaza to update them on unfolding events.
Meanwhile the number of civilian casualties continues to rise. The total Palestinian death toll now stands at 390 with 1,800 injured. Two Israeli-Arabs and one Jewish Israeli have been killed in rocket attacks from Gaza.
The civilian toll on the Palestinian side is shooting up. On Sunday a family from the Jabaliya refugee camp near Gaza city lost five sisters, aged 4 to 17, when an Israeli air strike hit a mosque next to their home.
The same day seven teenagers from a UN Relief and Welfare Agency (UNRWA) school were killed when a missile hit them as they waited after school for a bus to take them home. The UN has called for an investigation into their deaths.
On Tuesday two sisters, aged 4 and 11, perished in an air strike as they rode in a donkey cart in Beit Hanoun in northern Gaza.
The UN released a report on Monday stating that by a conservative estimate more than 60 Palestinian civilians had been killed.
On Wednesday Mahmoed Daher, spokesman for the World Health Organisation (WHO) in Gaza told IPS, "Thirty-four children have been killed and 260 injured, many of them critically."
A Palestinian Health Ministry official, Moaiya Hassanain, went further and estimated that one-third of those killed were non-combatants. Children comprise 56 percent of Gaza's population of about 1.5 million.
Earlier in the year an Israeli operation into Gaza, codenamed Warm Winter, left 120 people, mostly civilians dead, including 33 children.
According to the Defence of Children International (DCI) Palestine branch, since the beginning of the year 700 Gazans and four Israelis have been killed.
"We attended to 15 seriously injured elderly people and more than 20 children in the last few days," said Sammy Hassan, a spokesman from Gaza's Shifa hospital.
"At one stage over 140 dead and injured were brought in at one go. Our staff was completely overwhelmed, we simply didn't have the resources to cope. The wounded and dying were lying in the corridors and on the floors," Hassan told IPS.
"We don't have sufficient medicine or properly functioning medical equipment to deal with the patients. Electricity is cut for a number of hours and fuel supplies for our emergency generator have run precariously low."
Ann Sophie Bonefeld, spokeswoman for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Jerusalem, said her organisation was deeply concerned about the deteriorating humanitarian situation.
"There are shortages of blood, medicine and spare parts for essential medical equipment. Medical staff are overstretched and worried for their own safety," Bonefeld told IPS.
"It is imperative that the crossings into Gaza are opened in the next few days because these are Gaza's only link to the outside world now that the tunnels from Egypt have been destroyed," she added.
Israel's siege of Gaza, imposed after Hamas took over in June of last year, permits only a trickle of the barest humanitarian aid into Gaza.
In a separate incident, a boat carrying urgent humanitarian supplies from Cyprus was rammed and fired on by the Israeli navy as it approached Gaza on Tuesday.
On board were former U.S. Democratic congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, a CNN news crew and a number of doctors and journalists. The CNN crew filmed the incident.
The boat, which was in international waters, was seriously damaged and forced to head to Beirut for emergency repairs as water started to flood the vessel.
And as Israel fights a military battle in Gaza, it is simultaneously fighting a diplomatic battle on the international front in an effort to justify the Gaza onslaught.
Karen Abu-Zayd, the UNRWA commissioner in Gaza, has said Israel may have breached a 48-hour lull in fighting when it launched its aerial onslaught over Gaza on Saturday.
"What we understood was that there was a 48-hour lull to be called, and this was called by the Israelis," Abu-Zayd said.
On the morning of Friday last week, the Israelis had said they would wait 48 hours until Sunday morning and then they would re-evaluate the situation, according to Abu Zayd.
"There was only one rocket that went out on Friday, so it was obvious that Hamas was trying, again, to observe that truce to get this back under control," she said.
Israel's UN Mission referred any comment on the reported lull to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office in Jerusalem. Olmert's office did not answer telephone calls for comment early Tuesday morning. (END/2008)
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 02 2009 at 11:53pm |
sourcehttp://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45276
MIDEAST: Israel Looking to Silence Hamas Forever
By Jerrold Kessel and Pierre Klochendler
JERUSALEM, Dec 31 (IPS) - This is the most senseless of all the wars that Palestinians and Israelis have fought, says Israeli President Shimon Peres. The futility, he suggests, stems from the Hamas insistence, ever since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, on continuing to shell Israeli towns and villages.
"Their shooting has no point and no logic. Nobody understands what are Hamas's goals," said Peres, speaking alongside Prime Minister Ehud Olmert who was briefing the President on the state of the war Tuesday evening.
"The Gaza offensive will not end until our goals are reached," said Olmert in response to reports that Israeli defence officials were considering a 48-hour truce in the devastating air attacks prior to possibly launching a major ground operation.
So, what are Israel's goals?
There seems to be national consensus -- at least among Israeli Jews -- on the two declared objectives of the military operation: long-term ceasefire, and deterrence -- that Hamas is compelled to hold its fire.
The Israeli consensus extends to another front -- there is already a 'ceasefire' with respect to the Feb. 10 Knesset (parliament) election. So much so, that the front-runner in the polls, right-wing Likud opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu, has been enlisted to front Israel's information campaign to the world.
Netanyahu, even within the guise of national advocate, is positing the war targets in much starker terms than the governing centre-left coalition. On Wednesday morning he stressed in an interview on Israel Radio that the choice lies with Hamas -- agree to a real ceasefire, or risk Israel following up its offensive and forcing regime change in Gaza. Otherwise, argued Netanyahu, Israel would have achieved nothing "since next time Hamas will be in a position to shell and rocket towns as far afield as Tel Aviv itself."
When former prime minister Ariel Sharon unilaterally withdrew all Israeli settlers and troops from Gaza three years ago, he was less focused on creating conditions favourable for a full-fledged peace process, and more on positioning Israel better to fight the Palestinians if that became necessary. Since then, and especially with the ensuing Hamas takeover of Gaza 18 months ago -- after Hamas won the election in Gaza in 2006 -- Israel's punishing military action now could never have been legitimate to the international community.
Despite the temptation to take the 'smash 'em to bits' option all the way and to oust Hamas from power "once and forever", that does not seem to be on the cards. There is simply no answer to the question of who would take charge of Gaza in place of Hamas: Israel is not interested in re-engaging Gaza and, in the present circumstances, it is unimaginable for the Palestinian Authority to be carried back to Gaza on the shoulders of the Israel military. Israel has been through that in 1982 in Lebanon after they routed the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) and tried to install a friendly regime in Beirut.
A second option would be to go all the way with the Gaza disengagement policy -- leaving Israel no longer responsible for any developments in Gaza. That too, however, is unfeasible, at least in the short term, since it would mean permanent Hamas entrenchment in Gaza and allowing it to argue -- as Hezbollah did in Lebanon two years ago -- that it has beaten Israel in battle.
It would in effect transform the two-state solution into a three-state solution -- between Israel and the West Bank and Gaza separately, something that would change the agreed parameters of the whole peace process and thus condemn any negotiations on the future at least on east Jerusalem and the West Bank to definite failure; few in the international community, or in the Arab world, are keen on that.
Thus, the legitimacy of self-defence being so critical to Israel, whatever secret wishes they harbour, the government projects its war aims in not overly-ambitious terms: make conditions so painful for Hamas that it will have to subscribe to a long-standing ceasefire.
That said, Israeli leaders continue to retain an element of ambiguity about the purpose of the war. Sizeable ground forces have been massed around Gaza. But even within Israel, there is growing concern about whether the use of force might not be disproportionate.
Israeli Television Channel 2 reported an opinion poll conducted on Wednesday which shows 58 percent of the Israeli public opposed to a ceasefire, as against 42 percent who believe a ceasefire should come into force right away. Analysts noted that of the 42 percent in favour many are likely to be Arab Israelis who appear to be strongly critical of the war. Arabs comprise almost 20 percent of the Israeli population.
Against this potential escalation, prize-winning novelist David Grossman has called for a temporary pause in the fighting by Israel, in effect to test Hamas's intentions while implicitly testing this Israeli strategic ambiguity. In the liberal Tel Aviv daily Haaretz, Grossman suggested: "We will hold our fire unilaterally and completely for the next 48 hours. Even if you fire at Israel, we will not respond...Israel must constantly check to see when its force has crossed the line of legitimate and effective response and from what point it is once again trapped in the usual spiral of violence."
The coming 48 hours will be critical in testing an ever-relevant equation in Middle East stability -- will Israel accept the limits of its own power, and will the Palestinians -- in this instance Hamas -- abide by the limits of their own weakness? (END/2008)
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 03 2009 at 4:34am |
This action, the invasion of Palestine is a mistake. Supporting it will be a mistake, and the cost over all will be likely escalate into the conflict we have all known was coming. Of course, there was no choice. We are on the verge of a nuclear Middle East. In fact, it is likely we already have a nuclear Middle East. Desperate measures are in effect to stop the Muslims from plopping a nuke on a missile and blowing up Tel Aviv. That is what this is all about. I do feel much like Charleton Heston on the beach beating his fists on the sand as he looks at what is left of the statue of liberty after a nuclear war. Things are going bad. It is like a love affair the goes sour, a marriage that collapses (and I know many of you can understand that one), the very thing we do not want to happen seems fated to happen. Prep. Its not like many of us did not see this coming. Whether raging disease, war, or the day when world leaders stand in safe bunkers and watch what they cannot prevent. Religion is not rational. Blowing yourself up to get to paradise is not rational. Our nation was founded on the belief that people can rise from the dead, that 2,000 years ago someone did, and that our God, is the God. Why is it unfathomable to us, that to the Muslim, their God is the God? And they are willing to fight to the death for this? We were willing to fight to the death against the British? Sigh. You see, you cannot justify war. War is like murder. If you are trapped in a corner and someone is trying to kill you or murder your family you must kill them. And for the Jews (and I do hate to use that word it conjurs such emotional things) they are trapped in a corner and they either wipe out Palestine or be wiped out with nuclear weapons themselves. <posting>
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 03 2009 at 5:18am |
|
This action, the invasion of Palestine is a mistake. Supporting it will
be a mistake, and the cost over all will be likely escalate into the
conflict we have all known was coming.
Of course, there was no
choice. We are on the verge of a nuclear Middle East. In fact, it is
likely we already have a nuclear Middle East.
It isn't that complicated. Obama will arrive as the great peacemaker in
the midst of war and could he but pull it off, this making of peace,
fixing the economy, and fulfilling the impossible, he will be sainted.
Personally, I truly wish we had elected a political Messiah and that
the dreams of those who dared to dream, as Martin Luther King said - I
have a dream - could pull it off.
Unfortunately, destiny, fate, prophecy, the very prophecy in the book
sworn on by Abraham Lincoln he will place his hand on on January 20,
has a most profound and differing view of what will soon come to pass
and I in my heart of hearts believe it.
I am not ashamed to be a Christian, but am saddened by a nation who is
drawing away from the basic foundation of what made it a great nation.
Is drawing away from the constitutional rights and goodness that made
us America, the greatest and most powerful country on earth.
No life is worth less than another. And no woman or child bleeding from
head to foot who is an innocent should be hidden from cameras and
reporters, so people will not see the horror of war.
Prep. You know what is coming. Be it by disease or weapon or the struggle for power to rule the world. It will not matter why.
As they said in Apocalypse Now - the horror.. the horror... we must
make every effort possible to end this conflict, and pressure our
leaders to do so.
The fighting must stop. Make no mistake - or in the end - it will
stretch far beyond enemies locked in a death grip 12,000 miles away. I
was never a protester during Vietnam. I volunteered to fight in the war
which now seems - well - as it was.
Are the prophecies all myths? This battle is ancient.
If we do not contain this, then all that has been foretold will finally
come about in our lifetimes. I know there are those of you out there
who totally understand what I am saying. I do not wish it to be so, I
have no power to change it, but I surely can see it coming.
Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 03 2009 at 8:44am |
source
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45267
MIDEAST: Jewish Organisations Call For End to Gaza Bombings
By Ali Gharib
WASHINGTON, Dec 30 (IPS) - With a fresh outbreak of violence between Israel and Palestine, a battle of a different sort is being waged in Washington between various interests in Mid- East policy circles.
As Israeli air strikes continue to pummel the Gaza Strip for a fourth day and crude home-made rockets launched by Palestinian militants land in Israeli towns near the densely populated and besieged Strip, Jewish groups in the U.S. are taking two distinctly differing tacks at addressing the latest Middle East bloodshed.
Some of what are traditionally thought of as pro-Israel groups are undertaking a major public relations campaign to support the bombing runs against Hamas that have claimed more than 370 Palestinian lives -- largely parroting the Israeli government that the attacks are a justified defence of Israelis.
The American Jewish Committee "expressed strong support for Israel… in it's military operation aimed at terrorist targets in Gaza."
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) urged U.S. leadership to "stand firmly with Israel as it strives to defend itself…."
In addition to a flurry of press releases, officials from the groups are making regular appearances in the media and organising conference calls.
But, rather than unquestioning support of Israel's latest military venture in the decades-long conflict, four major Jewish organisations here are calling for an immediate end to the bombings, and for humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip.
One of the groups, Americans for Peace Now, the sister organisation of the Israel-based Peace Now, called for "the government of Israel to end its military operation in the Gaza Strip and to act toward achieving a ceasefire."
And Bit Tzedek v'Shalom, the Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace, called on the outgoing U.S. President George W. Bush administration "to initiate an international effort aimed at negotiating and immediate ceasefire."
These strong statements, along with ones from J Street (the political arm of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement) and the Israel Policy Forum (IPF), are in sharp contrast to many of the more hawkish traditional pro-Israel groups, who make no mention of a cessation of armed hostilities. The confident assertions from the four groups are a relatively new sort of campaign.
"You see a voice that is increasingly clear and has a significant resonance in the American Jewish community, and beyond the Jewish community, that takes a position, stakes it grounds and won’t be intimidated," said Daniel Levy, a former Israeli negotiator and the director of New America Foundation’s Middle East Task Force, one of the four groups.
"This is an important position to be taking," he told IPS. "It's moving the ball forward on redefining the parameters of the debate on what it means to be responsibly and thoughtfully -- rather than reflexively -- pro-Israel."
The move by the groups is in many ways the culmination of a public relations effort of it's own that seeks to establish a strong pro-peace, pro-Israeli voice that is not afraid to depart from the line of the Israeli government.
The groups are expressing a position that they, too, appreciate and support Israel and believe in it's right to defend itself, just like their counterparts in the traditional, more powerful, so-called pro-Israel groups.
But Jeremy Ben-Ami, the executive director of J Street, says that the issue does not lie in a right to self-defence -- a given -- but whether an operation like the attacks on Gaza will even work.
"While… air strikes by Israeli Defence Forces in Gaza can be understood and even justified in the wake of recent rocket attacks," according to Ben-Ami, "we believe that real friends of Israel recognise that escalating the conflict will prove counterproductive, igniting further anger in the region and damaging long-term prospects for peace and stability."
J Street echoed its director's statement with a press release declaring that the recent massive escalation was "pushing the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict further down a path of never-ending violence."
Therein lays the crux of these groups' assertions. While many of the other Jewish groups have been at best lukewarm on the peace process and the two-state solution, the peace groups see them as essential to the continued existence of Jewish state.
By encouraging steps that they see as contributing to peace between Israel and her Arab neighbours, including the Palestinians, they contend they are helping Israel in the long run.
Levy said that the groups are essentially saying, "We love Israel too, but it doesn't do us or Israel any good to be the mouthpiece for the talking points of the Israeli foreign ministry."
Levy also pointed to the peace groups' statements as an indication of a U.S. Jewish perspective, rather than strictly an Israeli one.
Indeed, the J Street release stated that re-establishing the ceasefire and making a concerted, international-led effort towards a sustainable resolution to the broader conflict "is a fundamental American interest."
"We too stand to suffer as the situation spirals, rage in the region is directed at the United States, and our regional allies are further undermined," said the statement, speaking from a U.S. perspective.
J Street is circulating a petition that has already garnered 14,000 signatures and which the group says it is already using to lobby President-elect Barack Obama's transition team and congressional leaders.
The petition calls for "strong U.S.-led diplomatic efforts to urgently reinstate a meaningful ceasefire that ends all military operations, stops the rockets aimed at Israel and lifts the blockade of Gaza." Those actions, it says, are "in the best interests of Israel, the Palestinian people and the United States."
The intense pressure from both sets of groups is very much aimed at the transition team, with Obama just three weeks away from being sworn into office, said an analysis of varying views in Jewish Week, a New York-based newspaper.
Obama and his transition team have been very cautious in their brief statements about the escalation, often repeating a talking point that there is only one president at a time.
But Obama campaigned on a renewed and vigorous attempt at Israeli-Arab peace, and he reiterated his commitment when announcing his foreign policy team last month.
(END/2008)
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 03 2009 at 4:54pm |
Operation Cast Lead Ground Incursion
.......................................................................
videos
.............
excerpt...
Israel Air Force warplanes stepped up airstrikes on Gaza, bombing the main road that runs throughout the strip in three different spots, making travel from one side of the Strip to the other close to impossible. Palestinian health officials in Gaza reported Saturday evening that 13 people had been killed in another IAF bombing of a mosque in Beit Lahiya. They said that 26 Palestinians had died in IAF raids after dark Saturday. The air force struck more than 40 Hamas targets over the course of Saturday, killing the third senior Hamas official since Israel's aerial assault began. On Saturday morning, Israel Radio quoted a spokesman for the Hamas military wing as saying it had repelled an attempt by Israel Defense Forces soldiers to infiltrate the Shajaiyeh section of Gaza City. According to Israel Radio, Hamas said that its militants detected the soldiers and fired six mortar shells. Hamas said the soldiers reportedly opened fire and then returned to Israeli territory.
video Source: 
Brainwashing hatred
Iranian toddlers (children) taught about martyrdom in wake of Gaza
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 03 2009 at 8:33pm |
.
Source-
UN Security Council has 'failed' in Gaza: Arab League
7 hours ago
excerpt-
CAIRO (AFP) — Arab League chief Amr Mussa accused the UN Security Council on Saturday of "ignoring" Israel's onslaught on Gaza, saying the delay in agreeing a resolution is proof of failure to handle the conflict.
Arab regimes cannot put pressure on Israel but the Security Council could pressure the Jewish state into ending its eight-day bombardment of Gaza, he said.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 16 2009 at 2:13pm |
Iran's Postmodern Beast in Gaza Israel has just embarked on a land invasion of the Gaza Strip
after a week of aerial bombing. Gaza is bordered by Egypt, and was under
Egyptian military control from 1949 through 1967. And yet in a startling rebuke
to geography and recent history—and in testimony to the sheer power of audacity
and of ideas—the mullahs in Teheran hold more sway in Gaza today than does the
tired, Brezhnevite regime of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. Gaza constitutes the
western edge of Iran’s veritable new empire, cartographically akin to the
ancient Persian one, that now stretches all the way to western Afghanistan,
where Kabul holds no sway and which is under Iranian economic domination.
Israel’s attack on Gaza is, in effect, an attack on Iran’s empire, the first
since its offensive on Iranian-backed Hezbollah in
2006. That attack failed for a number of reasons, not least of which was
Israel’s poor intelligence on Hezbollah: historically, its intelligence on the
Palestinians has been much better. Moreover, this attack seems more deliberately
planned, with narrower, publicly stated aims – all in all, a more professional
job. But there is a fundamental problem with what Israel is doing that goes to
the heart of the postmodern beast that the Iranian empire represents.
To start with, Hamas does not have to win this war. It can lose and still
win. As long as no other political group can replace it in power, even as some
of its diehards can continue to lob missiles, however ineffectually, into
Israel, it achieves a moral victory of sorts. Moreover, if Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah movement
tries to replace Hamas in power, Fatah will forever be tagged with the label of
Israeli stooge, and in the eyes of Palestinians will have little moral
legitimacy. Israel’s dilemma is that it is not fighting a state but an ideology,
the postmodern glue that holds together Greater Iran.
Whether it is the sub-state entities of Hamas in Palestine, Hezbollah in
Lebanon, or the Mahdi movement in Shiite southern Iraq; or the hopes, dreams,
and delusions of millions of Sunni Arabs, principally in Egypt, who feel a
closer psychological identity with radical Shiite mullahs than with their own
Pharaonic Sunni autocracy, Iran has built its dominion on a combination of
anti-western ideas and the dynamic wiliness of its intelligence operations
(which, in turn, are a reflection of a civilization more developed and urbanized
than that of the Arabs). Iran’s message of anti-Semitism and hatred toward the
United States plays well across sectarian lines in the Sunni Arab world, which
identifies its own fatigued, uninspiring, and detested rulers with the side of
the U.S. and Israel. Sunni Arabs hate their own rulers, but despairing of
changing their own lot, they channel that hatred toward us: thus the potency of
the Iranian message. A nuclear weapon will only supply Iran with more prestige
among the Arab lumpen faithful.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 16 2009 at 3:06pm |
|
Please break this thread up into pages
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 16 2009 at 3:07pm |
|
Closer to nuclear launch and Jihad
Iran
decree: All Muslims must defend against Israeli raids in Gaza
| | Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
issued a religious decree to Muslims around the world on Sunday, ordering them
to defend Palestinians against Israel's attacks on Gaza, state television said.
"All Palestinian combatants and all the Islamic world's pious people are
obliged to defend the defenceless women, children and people in Gaza in any way
possible. Whoever is killed in this legitimate defense is considered a martyr,"
state television quoted Khamenei as saying in a statement.
Israel launched an unprecedented assault on the Gaza Strip on Saturday,
killing 230 people and sparking protests and condemnations throughout the Arab
world. By early afternoon on Sunday, the death toll had climbed to at least 280.
Many of Israel's Western allies urged restraint, though the U.S. blamed Hamas
for the fighting.
In his statement on Sunday, Khamenei also criticized some Arab governments
for their "encouraging silence" towards the Israel's raids on Gaza.
Meanwhile, Hamas' political leaders in the Gaza Strip have gone into hiding
in the wake of Israel's operation on the coastal territory, fearing that they
will once again be targeted in the attacks.
comment: how many ways can you say call to Jihad without saying the J word. Well, those are a few.
Bleeding bodies of innocent women and children do not make a good
foundation for a cease fire while the Hamas.. leaders who can be
replaces like straw men - will utilize every mutilated child's body to
stir up the Muslims and the rest of the Arab world, will NEVER bring
peace to the Middle East.
There are 1.2 billion Muslims. Of these as least 1% or extremists.
There was a cease fire. Israel had finally left. With the right leaders
and negotiators in there, this could be turned from a lasting battle.
Unite Israel and Palestine and there will be no more border to fire
missiles over. In 20 years Israel will be more Muslims than Jews by
sheer number.
The one voice that cannot be found in any media, policy, or plan
is wisdom. So much was said when there were votes to be counted. Now
there are bodies to be buried the voices are silent.
What say the American people? Has anyone expressed a desire to
know what they want? Could it be peace - properity - an end to whole
hatred filled fighting and fighting for control of the world oil
supply?
When the nuclear bomb goes off, wherever it is - will there be
talk of peace or more bombs. If Gaza is any examples.. as the people
cry for peace.. the tanks will role in, the jets will bomb, and war
breeds more more.
it is time to say.. enough. Across the Middle East, to focus our eyes on our own problems, people, and crisis.
It is time to bring our soldiers home, so they may til their own
fields, be reunited with their families, and the word never spoken..
for decades by so many..
we have made mistakes - and it is time for change - no words -
If we do not. We will fall. We need to tend our own garden... it is truly in disarray.
Medclinician
|
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 24 2009 at 3:58pm |
An election, an inauguration, and how quickly we forget. Two wars mentioned and what about Iran. Well, yes with the leader of Iran cheering for the new president one would think things would simmer down. Especially since we were supposed to (according to campaign jargon) be doing some serious talking with Iran concerning the fact they are about to launch a missile at Israel. How strange the Israelis would beat the pulp out of Gaza (mostly civilian women and children) and totally neglect nasty nasty Iran with its probable nukes. Bush was getting ready to stomp them before they made Tel Aviv into a crater. Well.. so much for tough talk to Iran. http://firedoglake.com/2009/01/11/nyts-sanger-sure-gets-it-wrong-us-did-sell-israel-bombs-for-iran-attack/
|
By: Siun Sunday January 11, 2009 7:30
am |
|
 David
Sanger has been a very busy chief Washington correspondent. His report on the
“sheer scariness” of the insecurity of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal appears today
in the New
York Times Magazine, but he also had a major article in the paper yesterday.
The Saturday article, "U.S.
Rejected Aid for Israeli Raid on Iranian Nuclear Site," discusses the
Israeli desire for a U.S. attack on Iran to which Bush said no – but also claims
that Bush turned down the Israeli request for key assistance for an Israeli
launched operation.
In place of a direct attack by either country, Sanger reports that Bush "told
the Israelis that he had authorized new covert action intended to sabotage
Iran’s suspected effort to develop nuclear weapons, according to senior American
and foreign officials."
We seem to be back in “sheer scariness” territory again but there’s a problem
with Sanger’s report. He gets a central fact wrong in his very first sentence
which reads:
President Bush deflected a secret request by Israel last year for specialized
bunker-busting bombs it wanted for an attack on Iran’s main nuclear complex
…
He later repeats the claim saying that:
The United States did give Israel one item on its shopping list: high-powered
radar, called the X-Band, to detect any Iranian missile launchings. It was the
only element in the Israeli request that could be used solely for defense, not
offense.
Yet, as we discussed back
in September, the U.S. actually did approve the sale of 1,000 GBU-39, those
“specialized bunker-busting bombs.” As we noted then, Ha’aretz reported
the sale on September 14th:
Haaretz, 9/14/08:
Despite reservations in Washington regarding a possible Israeli strike on
Iran, the American administration will supply Israel with sophisticated weapons
for heavily fortified targets, the U.S. administration announced…
The Pentagon's announcement, which came on Friday,
said the U.S. will provide Israel with 1,000 units of Guided Bomb Unit-39
(GBU-39) - a special weapon developed for penetrating fortified facilities
located deep underground.
The $77 million shipment, which includes launchers and appurtenances, will
allow the IAF to hit many more bunkers than currently possible. Although each
bomb weighs 113 kilograms, its penetration capabilities equal those of a one ton
bomb, according to professional literature.
And the Jerusalem
Post has reported that Israel is now using those GBU-39 “bunker busters” in
Gaza
Reuters
is now reporting that the U.S. in a “rare” move has commissioned a merchant
vessel to transport “hundreds of tons of arms to Israel” and:
stipulated a ship to be chartered for 42 days capable of carrying 989
standard 20-foot containers from Sunny Point, North Carolina to Ashdod.
The tender document said the vessel had to be capable of "carrying 5.8
million pounds (2.6 million kg) of net explosive weight," which specialist
brokers said was a very large quantity.
The Reuters report notes that this is a very unusual amount of arms for one
shipment and goes on to speculate that the shipment is in fact GBU-39s.
Such a shipment could either be the delivery of the balance of those 1,000
bombs – or replacements for those already used in Gaza.
Either way Mr. Sanger’s claim that Bush “deflected” Israel’s request for the
weapons needed to attack Iran is wrong.
And while Israel seems unlikely to undertake an attack on Iran while in the
midst of their war on Gaza, given their rhetoric on Iran it would not be
surprising to learn that they are stocking up – with Bush’s permission - on the
weapons needed for an Iranian attack before Obama comes into office.
Israel has already demonstrated their ability to fly and refuel in air as
needed for an attack on Iran – in fact, Sanger describes that exercise in his
article:
Last June, the Israelis conducted an exercise over the Mediterranean Sea that
appeared to be a dry run for an attack on the enrichment plant at Natanz. When
the exercise was analyzed at the Pentagon, officials concluded that the
distances flown almost exactly equaled the distance between Israel and the
Iranian nuclear site.
This means that Israel no longer requires direct U.S. support during such an
attack – support which Sanger reports was Israel’s second request to Bush. This
leaves only the third request -permission to fly over Iraqi air space. On this
Sanger does ask the right question:
White House officials discussed the possibility that the Israelis would fly
over Iraq without American permission. In that case, would the American military
be ordered to shoot them down?
While Sanger’s account of the cloak and dagger efforts Bush apparently
approved (not quite secret given Sy Hersh’s earlier reporting of just such
efforts) is interesting, his apparent desire to portray Bush as opposing an
Iranian attack on Iran and his critical mistake on the question of the
bunker-busters may well have led him to miss the real story comment: Well they missed their window. Now we will resume 5 years of table talk tennis as Iran stocks up on new Russian, Chinese, and Korean super tech and Mig jets. Coming soon at 3 a.m. "Guess what Mr President - Israel has attacked Iran." Um .. ok.. no comment. Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 25 2009 at 2:47pm |
http://www.debka.com
Iranian arms ship intercepted by US warship has sealed secret holds
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
January 25, 2009, 9:15 PM (GMT+02:00)
The Iranian ship boarded by a US Navy Coast Guard team on the Red Sea last week before it could smuggle arms to Hamas is now disclosed by DEBKAfile's military sources to have tried to trick the search team by enclosing its rocket cargo in secret compartments behind layers of steel. Furthermore, our sources reveal, the US has not yet found a harbor in the region for carrying out a thorough search.
The Cypriot-flagged Iranian freighter Nochegorsk was intercepted last week by the new US Combined Task Force 151 in the Bab al-Mandeb Straits. Its presence in the Red Sea was first revealed by DEBKAfile on Jan. 20. For this article click HERE.
The Americans decided not to give the Israeli Navy a chance to seize the vessel and tow it to Eilat for fear of a Tehran ultimatum to Jerusalem, followed by Iranian attacks on Israeli naval craft patrolling the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea.
Iran maintains two warships in those waters to guard its shipping against Somali pirates as well as a military presence in the Eritrean port of Assab. The arms smuggling ship was first reported escorted out of the Suez Canal Saturday night, Jan. 23, after which Washington imposed a blackout on the incident. It is now moored at an Egyptian Red Sea port at the entrance to the Gulf of Suez.
But the US and Egyptian governments are in a fix. To break the Iranian ship's holds open and expose the rockets destined for Hamas, the facilities of a sizeable port are needed. It would have to be Egyptian because the other coastal nations - Eritrea, Sudan and Somalia - are hostile or controlled by pirates. Both the US and Egypt are hesitant about precipitating a full-blown armed confrontation with Iran. The timing is wrong for the new Barack Obama administration, which is set on smoothing relations with Tehran through diplomatic engagement. Cairo has just launched a campaign to limit Tehran's aggressive drive in the Middle East but does not want a premature clash.
DEBKAfile's Iranian sources disclose that the ship's captain had orders not to resist an American boarding team but impede a close look at its freight. The Navy Coast Guard searchers first found a large amount of ordnance and explosives in the ship's hold, which the Iranian captain claimed were necessary for securing Iranian freighters heading from the Red Sea to the Suez Canal. But then, the US searchers using metal detectors perceived welded steel compartments packed with more hardware concealed at the bottom of the hull.
The option of towing it to a Persian Gulf port for an intensive search was rejected because the Gulf emirates hosting US bases were almost certain to shy away from involvement in the affair. Moreover, Tehran would be close enough to mount a naval commando operation to scuttle the ship before it was searched.
Our military sources estimate that eventually the US government may decide to let the Iranian arms ship sail through the Suez Canal out to the Mediterranean for lack of other options.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 27 2009 at 7:58am |
More on the ...
Jan 25, 2009 1:13 | Updated Jan 25, 2009 11:09
US seizing of Iranian ship 'a covert op'
...is being played down by the US military due to the lack of a clear legal framework for such operations, an American expert on Iran told The Jerusalem Post on Saturday evening.
article here-
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 30 2009 at 5:11am |
medclinician wrote:
Please break this thread up into pages
|
Thanks.. there is definitely more to come on this one and Iran will most certainly either attack, be attacked, or both. Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 30 2009 at 5:23am |
courtesy of David E. Sanger - New York Times
Since his election on Nov. 4, Mr. Obama has been extensively briefed on the
American actions in Iran, though his transition aides have refused to comment on
the issue.
Early in his presidency, Mr. Obama must decide whether the covert actions
begun by Mr. Bush are worth the risks of disrupting what he has pledged will be
a more active diplomatic effort to engage with Iran.
Either course could carry risks for Mr. Obama. An inherited intelligence or
military mission that went wrong could backfire, as happened to President
Kennedy with the Bay of Pigs operation in Cuba. But a decision to pull back
on operations aimed at Iran could leave Mr. Obama vulnerable to charges that he
is allowing Iran to speed ahead toward a nuclear capacity, one that could change
the contours of power in the Middle East.
Those reports indicated that Iranian engineers had been ordered to halt
development of a nuclear warhead in 2003, even while they continued to speed
ahead in enriching uranium, the most difficult obstacle to building a weapon.
The “key judgments” of the National Intelligence Estimate, which were
publicly released, emphasized the suspension of the weapons work.
The public version made only glancing reference to evidence described at
great length in the 140-page classified version of the assessment: the suspicion
that Iran had 10 or 15 other nuclear-related facilities, never opened to
international inspectors, where enrichment activity, weapons work or the
manufacturing of centrifuges might be taking place.
comment: talk about non-tranparency. This data was known 3 years ago January 2006
Times also said that special IDF forces would be helicoptered into Iran
to take out targets that could not be destroyed in an air strike.
Iran's nuclear facilities, according to the newspaper report, are widely
dispersed at some 40 underground sites throughout Iran, which would make any
attack by Israel - or any other nation - exponentially more difficult that
Israel's successful attack on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981.
Not a clue why they keep talking about two key sites which now are heavily fortified and deep underground. They have enough plutonium to make a decent size nuke, and can easily import the fuses and technology to polish it off. Do the Iranians currently possess advanced missile technology from Russia and Norh Korea capable of lopping warheads and fuses on to already made and tested delivery missile batteries - not a far stretch for that one. There were some very cryptic remarks during McCain's speeches during his campaign concerning Iran. Are they going to have it- speclation yes - do they already have several in the real world?
Well, we know this... As late as November, 2008, Iran has been testing medium-range ballistic missiles
with a range of up to 1,200 miles. The IAEA has already found Iran in the
process of modifying the payload area of the Shahab-3 medium-range missile to
accommodate a re-entry vehicle that could accept a nuclear warhead. more to come... Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 31 2009 at 8:38pm |
Netanyahu says Iran will not get hands on nukes
By ARON HELLER,Associated Press Writer AP - Sunday, February 1
JERUSALEM - Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's leading candidate for prime minister, said Saturday that Iran "will not be armed with a nuclear weapon."
In an interview with Israel's Channel 2 TV, Netanyahu said if elected prime minister his first mission will be to thwart the Iranian nuclear threat.
article-
http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/ap/20090201/twl-ml-israel-politics-38359fb.html
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: January 31 2009 at 8:50pm |
.
Cyprus fears if Iran arms ship is released, Israeli navy will seize it
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
January 31, 2009, 11:12 PM (GMT+02:00)
Israel informed Washington, Cairo and Nicosia that surface missiles bound for Hamas are concealed in the Cypriot-flagged Iran Hedayt which the US intercepted but did not stop in the Red Sea last week.
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 02 2009 at 11:17am |
Hamas Can't Stop Firing On Israel
Israel air raids hit Gaza after Palestinian missile-mortar salvoes
DEBKAfile Special Report
February 2, 2009, 8:40 AM
article-
debka.com
and...
Hizballah terror teams fan out in six countries prompting maximum Israeli alert
DEBKAfile Special Report
February 2, 2009, 8:18 AM (GMT+02:00)
DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources report that last week the Lebanese Hizballah put together a large number of terrorist teams and deployed them in six countries for attacks on Israeli targets.
This intelligence prompted the counter-terror bureau in Jerusalem to publish Sunday, Feb. 1, an exceptionally high alert for traveling Israelis to be on the lookout for terrorist attacks including abductions. Security is also high in Israel and at embassies and Jewish institutions worldwide.
...............
|
|
dennis2
Valued Member
Original Join Date: Long Term Member
Joined: July 31 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 267
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 02 2009 at 12:21pm |
This is interesting, but I worry more about N Korea. They have nukes and are making sounds.
|
|
after all is said and done- more is said than done
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 02 2009 at 8:31pm |
dennis2 wrote:
This is interesting, but I worry more about N Korea. They have nukes and are making sounds.
|
No doubt, Dennis, North Korea is a problem. They are probably more a bioweapons problem than a nuclear problem since they have possibly 11 labs actively working on making some really nasty viruses and prions. However look at this way. How many North Koreans are waiting for the 12th Imam, want to bring on the Apocalypse as their leader "talked to him in his tent and received guidance". How many Koreans are Muslim and want to make Tel Aviv and the rest of Israel into a crater. Extremists do not think that suicide or dying to destroy Israel would be unwise. They would launch a nuclear weapon killing many Muslims who at the critical moment would ascend in their thinking to paradise and bring honor and glory to the Muslim world. It isn't who has the nuclear bomb. It is who will use it. http://www.mediacircus.com/2008/10/iran-capable-of-building-first-nuclear-bomb-by-february-2009/And one cannot seriously think they will launch it far away from the target from Iran so it can be intercepted. It is likely Korea wants more money. It is more likely that the extremists in Iran would rather vaporize Israel with no consideration of money. Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 03 2009 at 1:35pm |
Iran Satellite Launch Spurs U.S. Concerns
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would show
openness to Iran but urged it to respond in kind.
Reuters
......................
Iran launches homegrown satellite
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7866357.stm
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 04 2009 at 1:55am |
http://www.iranfocus.com/en/iran-general-/iran-satellite-launch-cause-for-concern-pentagon-17110.html
IRAN LAUNCHES SATELLITE
WASHINGTON, Feb 3 (Reuters) - A satellite launch by Iran is a cause for concern
as some of the technology could also be used to develop ballistic missiles, a
Pentagon spokesman said on Tuesday.
"It is certainly a reason for us to be concerned about Iran and its continued
attempts to develop a ballistic missile program of increasingly long range,"
Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told reporters. (Reporting by Andrew Gray
and David Morgan) comment: As Iran launches a satellite in preparation for the deployment of a nuclear ballistic missile system, once again there a few grumbles from Washington, but no real action to stop their preparation of a fully function nuclear arsenal with satellite guidance.
The formal statement from capitol hill concerning this was
WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States will use "all elements of our national
power" to deal with Iran, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Tuesday after
Iran said it had launched a satellite into orbit.
"This action does not convince us that Iran is acting responsibly to advance
stability or security in the region," Gibbs told reporters, asked if the
satellite launch undermined Obama's desire to open talks with Iran.
"All of this continues to underscore that our administration will use all
elements of our national power to deal with Iran and to help it be a responsible
member of the international community," he said. comment: we are most certainly reverting to memories of the Carter Administration with statements such as "this is of acute concern." How exactly do we intend to help Iran become a responsible member of the international community when they have been developing nuclear technology for five years on a collision course to launch against Israel?
"Efforts to develop missile delivery capability, efforts to continue on an
illicit nuclear program, or threats that Iran makes toward Israel and its
sponsorship of terror are of acute concern to this administration.
"The president is clear that he wants Iran to be a responsible member of the
world community."
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinajad announced his country had launched its
first domestically made satellite into orbit, declaring the Islamic republic had
"officially achieved a presence in space."
State Department acting spokesman Robert Wood expressed concern after another
US official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Tehran appeared to
have put the satellite into low Earth orbit. comment: so is this a static position of the satellite over Iran or it circling the globe? Quite precisely a low orbit satellite could easily launch an extremely effective EMP weapon which could be much more devastating than a nuclear bomb alone. If anyone has seen World of the Worlds (new version movie with Tom Cruise) - an EMP is set off crippling the power grid from coast to coast in the U.S. as well as 1/3 into Canada and 1/3 into Mexico.
This is extremely uncharacteristic of advisers of Obama who were extremely verbal and Hawkish during the Bush administration and basically stated we would attack Iran if it did not stop - at the very enter the region and stop ships. This is disturbing.
"Developing a space launch vehicle that ... could put a satellite into orbit
could possibly lead to development of a ballistic missile system," Wood told
reporters.
"That's of great concern to us," he said.
comment: Where are the promised talks of non-proliferation of nuclear technology to countries which are irresponsible and are we getting soft on fighting Muslim extremists and potential national threats?
In a reversal of the last eight years (change) we seem to letting Iran move right along with its nuclear agenda with nothing but the vaguest of growls as they continue to position themselves for a nuclear launch.
comment: What in the world does the United States would show
openness to Iran but urged it to respond in kind, mean?
Why extend an olive branch to Iran as it continues down the reckless path which will clearing end in a nuclear launch in the Middle East? It begs the question - is the current administration ready to accept nuclear proliferation to terrorist group supporting nations? Knowing most certainly, these countries will eventually set off the fuse in the Middle East, it is frustrating to continue to report Iran's unfettered development and growing threat to the region. There needs to be some sort of specific tactical plan to halt Iran's development of nuclear weapons. Gone is the philosophy with the old administration, of the urgency to do something. As was stated throughout this thread, if some type of military intervention was not done before the arrival of the current administration, it was unlikely to happen. That is what we are seeing.
Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 04 2009 at 11:13pm |
.
Cheney warns of new attacks
By JOHN F. HARRIS & MIKE ALLEN & JIM VANDEHEI
Updated: 2/4/09 9:11 PM EST
excerpt-
"When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with
protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry," Cheney said.
VIDEO-
.......
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 05 2009 at 1:27pm |
Mary08 wrote:
.
Cheney warns of new attacks
By JOHN F. HARRIS & MIKE ALLEN & JIM VANDEHEI
Updated: 2/4/09 9:11 PM EST
excerpt-
"When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry," Cheney said.
.......
|
There are some very interesting comments in the rest of the article. Hitler was waving a banner and talking about peace as his troops invaded Poland... quote from article “I think there are some who probably actually believe that if we just
go talk nice to these folks, everything’s going to be okay,” he said.
He said his own experience tempers his belief in diplomacy.
“I think they’re optimistic. All new administrations are optimistic. We were,” he said.
“They may be able, in some cases, to make progress diplomatically that
we weren’t,” Cheney said. “But, on the other hand, I think they’re
likely to find — just as we did — that lots of times the diplomacy
doesn’t work. Or diplomacy doesn’t work without there being an implied
threat of something more serious if it fails.”
As examples of the dangerous world he sees — and one he predicted Obama
and aides would find “sobering” — were Russia’s backsliding into
authoritarianism and away from democracy, and the ongoing showdowns
over the nuclear intentions of Iran and North Korea.
But it was the choice over Guantanamo that most dominated Cheney’s comments.
“If you release the hard-core Al Qaeda terrorists that are held at
Guantanamo, I think they go back into the business of trying to kill
more Americans and mount further mass-casualty attacks,” he said. “If
you turn ’em loose and they go kill more Americans, who’s responsible
for that?”
Of one alternative — moving prisoners to the U.S. prisons — Cheney said
he has heard from few members of Congress eager for Guantanamo
transfers to their home-state prisons, and asked: “Is that really a
good idea to take hardened Al Qaeda terrorists who’ve already killed
thousands of Americans and put ’em in San Quentin or some other prison
facility where they can spread their venom even more widely than it
already is?”
comment: It is a fine balance. No specific instances will be sited here, but let's say you were interrogating a terrorist that knew the location of a bomber with a suitcase nuke in Seattle several years ago. Let's say because of extreme measures done at a black site in Europe using horrific torture the terrorist and the bomb were terminated as a threat only days before it went off. Just a hypothetical situation. So then, millions of lives were saved, and one person's rights were violated? At war, do enemy combatants get a trial before they are shot? Terrorists don't play nice. And unlike some criminals or psychos who kill without emotion, they kill with great emotion. As they believe they are about to go to paradise, there are no limits at all. So you find a laptop, and it is paydirt. You track down a dozen leads to cells positioned throughout the U.S., you follow the money trail, you then have a person who owned the laptop in custody and if he doesn't talk- millions will die. The people that have to get the information have nightmares. At one point they cannot justify the acts on another human being. If we do not stop talking and start acting, many will be bowing towards Mecca several times a day not by choice accept to save their lives, or will be dead. Diplomacy did not work on Hitler. Surrounding yourself with Hawks doesn't make you one. We deal with another culture and another civilization where talking is considered cowardice and only is done when you are at a disadvantage. An extremist Muslim, as is taught in the Qu'ran, will submit to overwhelming odds, until the chance is right to strike back. It is a live to fight another day scenario. Imagine, as in John Lennon, is still Imagine. In the real world, they kill you, your family, and your little dog Toto too. Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 05 2009 at 2:39pm |
Multiple Deployments Are Too Stressful
.................................................................
Army official: Suicides in January 'terrifying'
From Barbara Starr and Mike Mount
CNN
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- One week after the U.S. Army announced record suicide rates among its soldiers last year, the service is worried about a spike in possible suicides in the new year.
article here-
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 06 2009 at 10:16am |
Older, but good - from 2008 - video of the preparation by Israel to attack Iran. Posted because of very well done and brief including comments of US/Israel attack on Syria. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4199602nNothing has changed except the administration. And that puts Israel much more on their own in attacking Iran after they already have nuclear missiles? Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 06 2009 at 10:54am |
Time running out for attack on Iran -Israeli expert
04 Feb 2009 12:03:43 GMT
Source: Reuters
By
Dan Williams
HERZLIYA, Israel, Feb 4 (Reuters) - Israel has a year in which to attack
Iran's nuclear facilities preemptively, an Israeli legislator and weapons expert
said on Wednesday.
Israeli forces could pull off successful strikes independently, Isaac
Ben-Israel said, though these would only delay, rather than end, Iran's progress
towards atomic weaponry.
Echoing Israeli government assessments, shared by some in the West, that
Iran is about a year away from acquiring enough enriched uranium for a warhead,
comment: I think someone is a little behind the times or seriously
misinformed. Iran already has enough highly refined plutonium for a
large nuclear weapon. The last ditch for a serious
attack was January 20, 2009 which is now past. It is feasible that Iran
already has a nuclear weapon. One of the best kept secrets was that of
a whole crate of nuclear firing mechanisms shipped to Taiwan by
mistake by the U.S. and mislabeled and easily accessible to terrorists.
Considering extremist groups have had suitcase nukes since the 90s, the
hoopla about one bomb is vastly misdirected. Iran launched a satellite
days ago and has their eyes now set on developing an entire nuclear
system, not just one bomb. The horse is already out of the barn, had a
colt, who is almost a year old now in terms of a timely strike on Iran.
They have been at it for 5 years at least while the Western block has
done nothing to slow them down except grumble.
He said a window for last-ditch military action was closing.
"Last resort means when you reach the stage when everything else failed.
When is this?" Ben-Israel, a retired general and former senior Defence Ministry
official, told an Israeli security conference in Herzliya. "Maybe a year, give
or take."
Iran says its atomic programm is peaceful but Western nations suspect it
could be used to make bombs. Its virulently anti-Israel rhetoric has stirred
fears in the Jewish state, believed to have the Middle East's only nuclear
arsenal.
comment: Guess they forgot about Pakistan with Taliban crawling all
over it and nuclear weapons in their country tested and ready to
launch.
However Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the U.N. International
Atomic Energy Agency, said this week Iran would face technical and political
hurdles if it sought to build nuclear arms and there was "ample time" to deal
with the issue.
"Even if I go by the CIA and other U.S. intelligence, the estimations
(are)... we're still talking about two to five years from now" for Iran to have
nuclear weapons capacity,
comment: this is beyond believable. For one, they could simply have
bought a few during the Russian breakup, secondly since there are
numerous terrorists they could have brought in the parts and assembled
it. It is amazing, considering their oil money, and working on this for
five years and with thousands of centrifuges they don't already have a
working nuke.
he said.
MILITARY OPTION "POSSIBLE"
Ben-Israel, who belongs to the centrist, ruling Kadima party, is a member
of parliament's Foreign Affairs and Defence committee and once headed the
Defence Ministry's weapons research and development unit.
Israel, like the United States under President Barack Obama, has refused
to rule out using military force to deny Iran nuclear weapons.
comment: How quickly we forget. Once again with a little research
one can find statements by Hilary Clinton, now Secretary of State -
flashback a few months here for this...
Sen. Hillary Clinton sounded the warning this week: Iran
should never use nuclear weapons against Israel
if it wants to survive. "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly
consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate
them," she said on ABC. "That's a terrible thing to say but those people who run
Iran need to understand that, because that perhaps will deter them from doing
something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic." That's extraordinarily
tough language from a presidential candidate; was Clinton right to make the
statement?
restated direct quote here : http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=293843147326784
"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran,"
she told ABC's Chris Cuomo. "In the next 10 years, during which they might
foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally
obliterate them."
But in break with
the administration of President George W. Bush, Obama has pledged to talk
directly with Tehran about its nuclear programme.
For now, Washington is leading international efforts to solve the dispute
by a "carrot and stick" combination of diplomatic overtures and economic
sanctions.
comment: meanwhile, they launch a satellite, have enough plutonium to make a sizable bomb, and are only to will to sit down for five years more and talk. The carrot and the stick has already been rejected by Iran. Looking at Obama's first 100 days (we are nearing a month now) this approach has already swan dived.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/08/iran-rejects-obamas-carro_n_149281.html
comment: another - would someone please bother to read the news statement -
TEHRAN, Iran — Iran on Monday rejected a proposal by
President-elect Barack Obama
that a combination of economic incentives and tighter sanctions might persuade
the Iranian government to change its behavior. Israel bombed Iraq's atomic reactor in 1981 and carried out a similar
sortie over Syria in 2007 which the CIA said destroyed a secret reactor, though
Damascus denied having such a facility.
Many independent analysts believe Israel's air force is too small to take
on Iran's nuclear installations, which are numerous, distant, dispersed and
fortified.
But Ben-Israel disagreed.
"The military option is possible. It's possible also for the independent
forces of the State of Israel. It's possible in the sense of delaying (the
Iranian programme) for a few years. It won't be more than three years, say, and
the more time passes, the more it (potential delay) is diminishing."
He said Iran was steadily producing a stockpile of enriched uranium and
would eventually recover from any attack to make more.
Addressing the Herzliya Conference on Tuesday, Israeli Defence Minister
Ehud Barak called for a "strategic agreement" with the United States on Iran's
nuclear programme.
Such an agreement, he said, would ensure the duration of any talks the
new U.S. administration might hold with Iran "should be kept short and followed
by harsh sanctions and readiness to take action".
Barak said "all options" must be kept on the table in preventing a
nuclear Iran that "would be a danger not just to Israel but also to the region
and the entire world". (Editing by Dominic Evans)
aside: there are those of us who truly wish Hilary had gotten a chance
to run for office. It was good choice to bring her into the fold around
Obama, but she seems uncharacteristically dovish these days. It
certainly is no time to be play table talk tennis with the guy who
wants to make Israel a crater and is seeing visions from the 12th Imam,
in his tent, telling him to start a Jihad. The best window to attack
Iran is past. Iran has hardened its bunkers to probably entire all but
the most sincere bunker bomb, sink the tactical nuke drop. For one they
have scattered their nukes (oops should we say centrifuges) to multiple
locations and have some hefty Russian fire power Sam type tech for
missile and plane take down.
The year figure is highly questionable. And the 2-5 years way out in
the ozone. We'd be fortunate if they didn't have one one board a
submarine, having modified one of their long ranch deployable missiles
already. Should have been there, done that. Now it is going to be
way tougher and with some talking tolerating a nuclear Middle East, we
are looking at instability to the nth power.
Medclinician
|
|
Guests
Guest Group
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: February 21 2009 at 6:08pm |
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/world/middleeast/20nuke.html
Iran Has More Enriched Uranium Than Thought
Published: February 19, 2009
In their first appraisal of Iran’s
nuclear program since President
Obama took office, atomic inspectors have found that Iran
recently understated by a third how much uranium it has enriched, United
Nations officials said Thursday.
The officials also declared for the first time that the amount of uranium
that Tehran had now amassed — more than a ton — was sufficient, with added
purification, to make an atom bomb.
In a report issued in Vienna, the International
Atomic Energy Agency said it had discovered an additional 460 pounds of
low-enriched uranium, a third more than Iran had previously disclosed. The
agency made the find during its annual physical inventory of nuclear materials
at Iran’s sprawling desert enrichment plant at Natanz.
Independent nuclear weapons experts expressed surprise at the disclosure and
criticized the atomic inspectors for making independent checks on Iran’s
progress only once a year.
“It’s worse than we thought,” Gary Milhollin, director of the Wisconsin
Project on Nuclear Arms Control, said in an interview. “It’s alarming that the
actual production was underreported by a third.”
The political impact of the report, while hard to measure, could be
significant for the Obama administration. Mr. Obama has said that he wants to
open direct talks with Iran about its nuclear program. But starting that process
could take months, and the report suggests that Iran is moving ahead briskly
with its uranium enrichment.
“You have enough atoms” to make a nuclear bomb, a senior United Nations
official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the topic’s
diplomatic sensitivity, told reporters on Thursday. His remarks confirmed
estimates that private nuclear analysts made late last year. But the official
noted that the material would have to undergo further enrichment if it was to be
used as fuel for a bomb and that atomic inspectors had found no signs that Iran
was making such preparations.
On Thursday evening, an Obama administration official who had reviewed the
new report said, “There is a steady timeline of improvement, especially in terms
of mastering the efficiency of the centrifuges,” meaning that Iran has been able
to increase its output of enriched uranium.
The official acknowledged that there were longstanding suspicions that Iran
could have additional uranium enrichment sites that the inspectors had not seen
or heard about. “Everyone’s nervous and worried about the possibility of Iran
pursuing a clandestine capability,” he said.
The disclosure of the unaccounted third came in the atomic agency’s quarterly
report to its board, which was made public on Thursday. The report noted that
Iran had now produced a total of 1,010 kilograms — or 2,227 pounds — of
low-enriched uranium.
The discrepancy came to light when the report noted that the new total came
from the addition of 171 kilograms of new production to 839 kilograms of old
production. But the agency had previously reported the old production as 630
kilograms.
So the Iranians had actually made far more uranium than previously disclosed
— 209 kilograms more, an increase of a third. That amounts to a little more than
460 pounds.
The United Nations’ officials explained the discrepancy as resulting from
Iran’s estimates versus careful measurement. They called the inconsistency
reasonable for a new enrichment plant.
The officials dismissed suggestions that the discrepancy meant that Iran
could smuggle enriched uranium out of the Natanz plant for processing at a
secret location. “We’re sure that no material could have left the facility
without us knowing,” the senior United Nations official said. But he admitted
that the inspection teams do their own inventory just once a year. “It’s only at
that moment,” he said, “that we have our own independent data.”
The report also gave updated figures for Iran’s use of centrifuges — the
machines that spin incredibly fast to enrich uranium into nuclear fuel. At
Natanz, it said, Iran is feeding uranium into about 4,000 centrifuges and has
1,600 more in the wings, for a total of 5,600. That compares with 3,800 working
centrifuges listed in the agency’s November report.
In Paris earlier this week, the head of the United Nations nuclear agency,
Mohammad ElBaradei, said Iran appeared to have made “a political decision” to do
less enrichment than it physically could. The Security Council has imposed
sanctions on Iran for failing to suspend enrichment, which can be used to make
fuel for nuclear reactors or bombs. While Iran insists that its efforts are
entirely peaceful, the United States and other Western nations see the
enrichment as a bid for atom bombs.
In a separate report to its board, the atomic agency said it had analyzed
uranium particles found at a Syrian facility that Israel had bombed in 2007 and
found “a low probability” that the tiny specks came from Israeli bombs, as Syria
has insisted. Uranium, heavier than lead, is sometimes used in arms meant to
destroy hardened targets.
But the report said the shape and composition of the particles “are all
inconsistent with what would be expected from the use of uranium-based
munitions.” The United States has charged that the facility was a reactor that
Syria could have used to make fuel for nuclear
arms. Medclinician
|
|
as