Step Into Their Shoes For A Moment - Let's Play Pretend

from the blog Holger Awakens

199 Missiles Fired at Israel Since Operation Cast Lead
From the Sderot Media Center:
by Jacob Shrybman

The weekly Jewish Sabbath intended for rest and rejuvenation was nothing of the sort this Friday and Saturday as more rockets and mortars struck southern Israel. One qassam and two mortars were fired from the Gaza Strip into Israel prompting the Israeli Air Force to target 5 smuggling tunnels between Egypt and the Hamas controlled territory. The Israeli Defense Forces said that this targeting of tunnels was a clear message that there would be a response to every rocket fire.

In the 105 days since the end of the 21 day Operation Cast Lead on January 18th there has been 199 missiles fired at Israeli civilians. More specifically there have been 128 qassam rockets, 66 mortar shells, and 5 grad missiles. These most recent attacks only add to the well over 10,000 missiles that have been fired at Israeli civilians since January 2001.

In a cease-fire both sides must stop all attacks. The Israelis stopped Operation Cast Lead as a favor to Barack Obama, yet they have gotten nothing in return. How much longer does Israel have to endure before they finally finish the job that they started last December?

Click to read the rest of the article

'US not seeking Iranian regime change' - John Kerry - a living Benedict Arnold

Saying that Obama has a foreign policy is really a stretch. Regardless, the decisions he's been making, and the comments made in the press and behind closed doors are not only dangerous for The United States and Israel, but they are borderline traitorous. Obama's reckless foreign policy will end-up being responsible for the deaths of millions of people across the Middle East.
Rees

from The Jerusalem Post
By Hilary Leila Krieger
Jerusalem Post Correspondent

The United States has stepped back from the notion of "regime change" in Iran, US Sen. John Kerry stressed Wednesday, urging that Iran also moderate its actions.

We are not in a regime change mode," said the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during a hearing on the Islamic Republic. "Just as we abandon calls for regime change in Teheran and recognize a legitimate Iranian role in the region, Iran's leaders must moderate their behavior and that of their proxies, Hizbullah and Hamas."

Kerry praised the Obama administration's focus on diplomacy with Iran, adding that "engagement alone is not a strategy and talks are not an end in themselves." The Senate committee is set to release a report on Iran and its nuclear ambitions Thursday.

Kerry also raised questions about the utility of sanctions, an option the administration has threatened to ramp up if talks fail.

"Sanctions - even coordinated, multilateral sanctions - are a blunt instrument with an imperfect track record. When it comes to Iran, the verdict on them is mixed at best," he said. "Sanctions slowed Iran's nuclear program, but they did not prevent it from acquiring the capacity to enrich uranium on an industrial scale."

Still, he described sanctions as "far more likely" to succeed that military force when that possibility was raised by witness Nicholas Burns, a top State Department official in the Bush administration tasked with the Iran portfolio.

"I don't see Iran negotiating seriously if there isn't a marriage between diplomacy and the threat of force. It's a language they understand," said Burns, who recommended that the Obama administration to reiterate the possibility that force could be used.

In response to Burns's comments, State Department Spokesman Robert Wood said later Wednesday that, "Our policy's very clear. We're pursuing diplomacy, a two-track approach with our other partners … and that's where our efforts are focused." Burns emphasized that he didn't think force should be seriously considered in the near term, and also cautioned that "I don't think it could work" if used later on.

For now, he praised the Obama approach to the issue and its focus on engagement, differing from recent comments from Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman that only three months should be allowed for diplomacy.

"My assumption is there is time," he said, though added that a timetable should be set so negotiations don't continue indefinitely.

On Tuesday, Kerry defended the Obama administration's approach on Iran in a speech before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. "When we have engaged effectively with hostile nations in the past, we did so fortified by moral authority, committed allies, and the strongest military in the world," he said. "That's exactly how we should engage Iran today - not to accept the unacceptable, but to make sure Iran never gets a nuclear bomb."
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Poll: Most Israelis would support Iran strike

from The Jerusalem Post
By HERB KEINON

A vast majority (66%) of Israelis said they would support military action if diplomatic and economic efforts failed to get Iran to stop uranium enrichment, and of that number, 75% would support this action even if the Obama administration were opposed, according to a survey jointly commissioned by Bar-Ilan University's BESA center and the ADL, published on Sunday.

Regarding the US president, most respondents have an overall favorable opinion of Barack Obama, but are skeptical about his Middle East policies; while 60 percent said they had either a "somewhat favorable" or "very favorable" opinion of Obama, and 14% said their attitude toward him was unfavorable, only 32% of the respondents said they approved of Obama's policies toward Israel, and 21% said they disapproved.

Fully 47%, however, had no answer regarding those policies, an indication that people were still forming an opinion.

Bar-Ilan University's Eytan Gilboa, a professor of international communications who directed the poll along with BESA director Efraim Inbar, said Israelis were making a distinction between Obama, whom they liked, and his policies toward the region, of which they were more skeptical.

While a 60% approval rating for Obama among Israeli Jews is high, it is still significantly below the president's popularity rating among American Jews, where tracking polls conducted through the new president's first 100 days in office showed that 79% of Jews approved of Obama's performance so far.

The BESA/ADL poll showed that Israelis were ambivalent about Obama's connection to Israel, with 38% characterizing his attitude toward Israel as "friendly" or "very friendly," 33% as "neutral," and 8% characterizing it as "unfriendly" or "very unfriendly."

Gilboa noted that throughout the survey, the younger respondents, aged 18 to 41, were more hawkish in their views than the older ones.

Gilboa said that, counterintuitively, the younger respondents had less trust in Obama and were more in favor of military action against Iran, even against US wishes.

He said this represented a degree of distrust among the youth of politicians and politics as usual, and said the attitude was consistent with the fact that Israeli youth voted more heavily for Israel Beiteinu in the last elections than their elders,

The poll, which was taken in advance of a conference on US-Israel relations to be held at Bar-Ilan University later this week, was very similar to a poll taken two years ago - albeit without reference to Obama - and the earlier poll provided a baseline for comparison.

As opposed to the 2007 poll, where 62% of the respondents said that American Jews should feel free to criticize Israel and the government's policies, and 36% said they should not, this time the numbers were reversed, with 35% saying American Jews could criticize Israel, and 52% saying they should not.

Gilboa interpreted this as an indication that Israeli Jews felt less secure about US policies than they did two years ago.

"What the public is saying is that since we don't know much about Obama, and don't trust him, US Jews must be careful about criticizing us," he said.

Among the other findings in the poll were that fully 72% of Israelis had a positive attitude of the US, up eight points from 2007, and 76% believe that the US would come to Israel's aid in a serious crisis involving a threat to Israel's existence, a figure down four percentage points from 2007.

Some 49% of the respondents said that US relations with Israel were close because of Israel's role as a strategic partner, 26% attributed the support to the political power of American Jewry, and 15% said it had to do with the democratic tradition and values shared by the two countries.

The telephone poll, carried out by Maagar Mochot, was conducted among a representative sample of 610 Jewish Israeli adults aged 18 and above. The poll had a 4.5% margin of error.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Neutering An Ally - to death...

from Investor's Business Daily
Posted Wednesday, May 06, 2009

Middle East: The U.S. may be embracing a radical foreign-policy position fraught with danger for the whole world: the nonsensical notion that de-nuclearizing Israel will stop Iran.

According to Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, D-Mass., we are no longer "in regime change mode" toward Iran.

The dirty little secret is that we never were. Years of opportunities to wage serious economic warfare against the Islamofascist regime in Tehran have been squandered.

Nor did the U.S. follow the advice outlined by Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute in his book, "The Iranian Time Bomb," and publicly aide Iran's many dissident leaders with material support like satellite phones, laptops and software to confound the regime's filtering of the Internet.

Ledeen wanted such items "distributed to the key groups: students, teachers . . . key religious leaders, both inside Iran and to their supporters outside."

Paired with pumping up the strike funds of worker organizations within Iran, such moves could have led to general strikes and mass demonstrations, possibly bringing down the mullahs' regime in the manner in which it was founded 30 years ago.

Finally, we have not taken military action against Iran's well-spread-out and fortified nuclear sites — a difficult task that isn't getting any easier with the passage of time.

Nicholas Burns, the third-ranking official in the State Department during the Bush administration, even unhelpfully told the world this week there was no "scenario where military force could actually fully stop" Iran's nuclear program.

It's in this highly troubling context that the U.S. seems to be saying, "Well, maybe if we have Israel get rid of nukes, Iran will do the same." By that thinking, World War II could have been avoided by our sinking the Pacific Fleet ourselves and saving Imperial Japan the trouble of traveling to Pearl Harbor.

An explosive report by Eli Lake in Wednesday's Washington Times suggests the Obama administration could seek linkage between Iran's nuclear ambitions and Israel's atomic arsenal and "expose and derail a 40-year-old secret U.S. agreement to shield Israel's nuclear weapons from international scrutiny," according to U.S. and Israeli officials.

On Tuesday, the administration's assistant secretary of state for verification and compliance, Rose Gottemoeller, called on Israel to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

The same Ms. Gottemoeller co-authored a paper in 2005 recommending an agreement in which Israel would move toward nuclear disarmament: Iran would abandon uranium enrichment, and other Mideast powers would scrap their chemical and biological warfare programs.

In pursuit of a "Mideast Nuclear-Free Zone" in which the world can live happily ever after, will the U.S. government now, in effect, echo the propaganda of Iranian officials — that no one should complain about Iran having nukes since Israel has them?

The open secret of Israel's nuclear deterrent has existed for more than 40 years. It has constituted a danger to no one — in fact, it has prevented full-scale conventional wars in the Middle East.

A nuclear-armed Iran, on the other hand, would mean weapons of mass destruction in the hands of jihadists who'd like to see a Tel Aviv, or a London, or a Washington, go up in a mushroom cloud.

Clearly, Israeli disarmament would only make such genocide likelier.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Obama indicates support for Iranian Nuclear Weapon - All things considered, he may as well make it official

Obama should hold one of his warm and fuzzy press conferences and officially announce his support for the Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program. He might as well, because everything he's said, including what's been said by those in his administration, indicates that he will do nothing to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Obama is now using the Iranian Nuclear Program as leverage to blackmail Israel to agree to his Middle East Peace Process. Obama is bound and determined to go down in history as THE American President that brings about the mythical "Peace in the Middle East." It's rooted in his narcissistic, always needing to be a hero mode. His narcissism will end up being his downfall. Middle East Peace is not going to happen under him or any future American President. The culture and the religions will not allow it to be.

It's unfortunate there are no adults in his administration, because it's time that one steps-forward and gives Obama a "good talking to."

Just when you think the Obama administration couldn't get anymore extreme, Obama decides to employ his attack dog Rahm on Israel and threaten them into submission. I have a feeling that Israel will remain outwardly cordial, but behind the scenes, they are going to make Obama pay dearly. I think they'll find a very clever way to embarass Obama on the national stage.
Rees

How Do You Spell Blackmail? E-M-A-N-U-E-L - He should resign immediately

He is a traitor to his religion, to Israel and to the United States of America. This guy doesn't deserve to remain at his job one more minute. I would hope that someone in a position of power raises hell about what he said.

So he thinks having a two state solution is more important that Israel surviving as a state? I'm literally stunned that he would say such a thing. He is an arrogant punk that's pretty much done and said whatever he wants. I hope it comes back to haunt him.
Rees

Emanuel: Thwarting Iran hinges on Israeli-Palestinian talks
By JPOST.COM STAFF
5-4-2009

Thwarting Iran's nuclear program is conditional on progress in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, according to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Israeli TV reports said Monday that Emanuel made the comments in a closed-door meeting the previous day with 300 major AIPAC donors.

Last month, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Israel that it risks losing Arab support for combating threats from Iran if it rejects peace negotiations with the Palestinians.

Clinton said Arab nations had conditioned helping Israel counter Iran on Jerusalem's commitment to the peace process.

Meanwhile, in an interview with the Jerusalem Post Sunday, former US House speaker Newt Gingrich blasted the Obama administration for setting itself on a collision course with Israel and endangering the Jewish state. He called US President Barack Obama's program of engagement on Iran a "fantasy," and his Middle East policies "very dangerous for Israel." He summed up Obama's approach as "the clearest adoption of weakness since Jimmy Carter."
Click to read the article and the comments

Hey Obama, Roxana Is Crying Out For Your Help!

Photo: AP

Hey Obama, just because you're ignoring the Obama "Iranian Hostage Situation," doesn't mean it's going to go away. Come on, at least ask Iran in your best "pretty please" way to release Roxana.

Honestly, just try for one minute to imagine yourself in an Iranian prision. If you could, don't you think you'd want your President to be doing a little more than you as President are doing? Does this concept even click? If not, you shouldn't be President, you should be the one in an Iranian prison. It's that simple, even for you.

And you profess to be against torture.
Rees

US journalist hospitalized in Teheran

The American journalist on a hunger strike for two weeks to protest her imprisonment in Iran was briefly hospitalized after she intensified her fast by refusing to drink water, Reporters Without Borders said Monday.

The press freedom group said 32-year-old Roxana Saberi was taken Friday to a clinic at Teheran's Evin prison, where she has been held since her arrest in January. She was released from the clinic within a day after again drinking water, the group said.

Saberi's Iranian-born father, who traveled to Iran to seek his daughter's release, said last month that she was drinking only sweetened water while refusing food to protest her eight-year jail sentence for allegedly spying for the US.

Reporters Without Borders said her father, Reza Saberi, told the group over the weekend that she stopped drinking water after Iranian authorities denied she was on a hunger strike.

"So following that, she decided to do a complete hunger strike," Soazig Dollet of the Paris-based group told The Associated Press. "So she was really weak and went to the clinic inside the prison for the day, but not more than a day."

Saberi's father did not answer phone calls seeking comment on Monday.

Saberi, a dual Iranian-American citizen, has lived in Iran for the last six years. She was born in the US and grew up in Fargo, North Dakota.

She was initially accused of working without press credentials, but authorities later made the more serious charge that she passed intelligence to the US She was convicted on the espionage charge after a one-day trial behind closed doors.

The Obama administration has called the allegations baseless and demanded her immediate release.

The case has been a source of tension between the US and Iran at a time when the Obama administration is reaching out to Tehran after decades of diplomatic stalemate.

Saberi was working as a freelance reporter for organizations including National Public Radio and the British Broadcasting Corp. before her arrest.

Iranian authorities have promised a fair review of her appeal, while calling for an end to what they consider outside interference from groups like Reporters Without Borders.

Four of the journalist group's members, including its secretary-general, began their own hunger strikes a week ago in support of Saberi, while urging her to end her own protest out of concern for her health.

In Teheran on Monday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hasan Qashqavi said the group's protest was not welcome.

"Iran's judiciary is an independent body and any foreign attempt to intervene in it goes against international measures," he told reporters in his weekly briefing.

"This is not a complicated issue. This Iranian lady has got a sentence and should wait and see what verdict the appeals court will issue," he said.
Click read the article and the comments

Obama's Iranian Hostage Situation: Has he already forgotten about Roxana Saberi?

Hey Obama, just because you're ignoring your "Iranian Hostage Situation," doesn't mean it's going to go away. Come on, at least ask Iran to "pretty please" release Roxana.

Honestly, just try for one minute to imagine yourself in an Iranian prision. If you could, don't you think you'd want your President to be doing a little more than you as President are doing? Does this concept even click? If not, you shouldn't be President, you should be the one in an Iranian prison. It's that simple, even for you.
Rees

North Korea Threatens More Nuclear & Missile Tests - Hey, I'm just as shocked as you are

He's crazy like a fox.

Kim Jong-il is demanding an apology and he'll probably receive one. Hey, Obama's never met an apology he didn't like.

Let's see, you don't think Kim Jong-il's demand for, and his expection to receive an apology, just might have been influenced by Obama's recent World Apology Tour?

The dictators of the world see his weakness and are ready to push the envelope until Obama finally pushes back. The don't expect that to ever happen.
Rees

from Closing Velocity
by John McKittrick

Essentially saying to the world, "If you don't immediately apologize for condemning our ICBM test, we are going to test more ICBM's!":

North Korea threatened Wednesday to conduct nuclear and missile tests and start an uranium-enrichment program in addition to its existing plutonium-based one, unless the U.N. apologizes for criticizing its recent rocket launch, dramatically raising its stake in the worsening standoff over its atomic programs.

Pyongyang's Foreign Ministry said in a statement the country "will be compelled to take additional self-defensive measures" unless the U.N. Security Council apologizes immediately. "The measures will include nuclear tests and test-firings of intercontinental ballistic missiles."

According to one analyst, missile preparations have already begun:

Yang Moo-jin, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies, said the North appears to have already begun preparations to conduct nuclear and missile tests, given it is demanding "an unrealistic, unprecedented" demand—a U.N. apology.

Click to read the article and the comments

Obama basically gave Turkey green light to insult Israel

from the Debkafile Special Report
April 30, 2009

Turkey's army chief Gen. Ilker Basburg brushed off the Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak's comment that the joint Turkish-Syrian military exercise was "disturbing."

Barak referred to the first exercise Turkey, Israel's longstanding military ally and NATO member, had ever staged with an Arab nation, Israel's avowed foe Syria. Gen. Basbug said it was only a border exercise, small-scale and "none of anybody's business."

NATO member Turkey and Syria hold first joint military exercise
DEBKAfile Special Report
April 30, 2009, 1:02 PM (GMT+02:00)

The joint Turkish-Syrian tank and armored infantry exercise backed by air power begins across the Turkish-Syrian border Monday, April 27, and lasts three days.

DEBKAfile's military sources stress that it is the first joint military maneuver any NATO member, including Turkey, has ever carried out with Syria. It appears to have received a nod from the Obama administration and another first: Never before has an important NATO power staged a joint exercise with any Arab army.

Ankara's decision to launch the drill on the day Israeli commemorates its war dead - in league with Iran's leading ally - is a measure of how far Turkey's longstanding strategic pact with the Jewish state has fallen by the wayside of recent changes.

Washington's approval underscores its new policy of boosting the strength of the Syrian army as partner in a strong a three-way military coalition with Turkey and Lebanon.

Ankara made its announcement while US secretary of state Hillary Clinton was on a short visit to Beirut.

It comes only four days after another first US step: Tuesday, April 22, DEBKAfile's exclusive sources reported that the Obama administration had just approved a large Turkish arms sale to the Lebanese army assigning Turkish military instructors to train Lebanese army units (half of whose personnel are Shiites sympathetic to Hizballah.)

Neither of the Obama administration's actions took into account Israel's vital security interests; nor was Jerusalem consulted about the strategic changes on its borders - or even informed.

DEBKAfile reports that both US drastic policy reverses are causing extreme consternation in Israel's top security echelons, which are criticizing the new Netanyahu government for taking too long to respond to the dire security setbacks piling up around its borders. The most troubling development confronting Israel in years is the grouping together of the Turkish, Syrian and Lebanese armies.

According to the statement from Ankara, the joint exercise "aims to boost friendship, cooperation and trust between Turkish and Syrian land forces and to increase the capability of border troops to train and work together."

In recent weeks, too many developments are closing in too fast and too dangerously for Binyamin Netanyahu to put the whole can of worms on hold until he has a chance to figure out his policies and talk to Barack Obama in the coming month. The dynamic on the ground will be in full flight by then. Too late, the Israeli prime minister will find the security situation running out of his control. Turning back the clock will be hopeless and he will find himself fed some unpalatable accomplished facts.
Click to read the entire article

Petraeus: Next Two Weeks Critical to Pakistan's Survival

Gen. David Petraeus said he is looking for concrete action by the Pakistani government to destroy the Taliban in the next two weeks before determining the United States' next course of action.

By James Rosen
FOXNews.com
Thursday, April 30, 2009

Gen. David Petraeus, commander of U.S. Central Command, has told U.S. officials the next two weeks are critical to determining whether the Pakistani government will survive, FOX News has learned.

"The Pakistanis have run out of excuses" and are "finally getting serious" about combating the threat from Taliban and Al Qaeda extremists operating out of Northwest Pakistan, the general added.

But Petraeus also said wearily that "we've heard it all before" from the Pakistanis and he is looking to see concrete action by the government to destroy the Taliban in the next two weeks before determining the United States' next course of action, which is presently set on propping up the Pakistani government and military with counterinsurgency training and foreign aid.

Petraeus made these assessment in talks with lawmakers and Obama administration officials this week, according to individuals familiar with the discussions.

They said Petraeus and senior administration officials believe the Pakistani army, led by Chief of Staff Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, is "superior" to the civilian government, led by President Ali Zardari, and could conceivably survive even if Zardari's government falls to the Taliban.

American officials have watched with anxiety as Taliban fighters advanced earlier this month to within 70 miles of the capital city of Islamabad. In recent days, the Pakistani army has sought to reverse that tide, retaking control over strategic points in the district of Buner even as the Taliban struck back by kidnapping scores of police and paramilitary troops.

The see-saw nature of the battles Wednesday demonstrated to U.S. officials that, as one put it to FOX News, "even with intent and superior technology, the capability may not be there" for the Pakistani army to defeat the extremists.

As for the security of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said last Saturday, in an interview with FOX News in Baghdad, that the U.S. believes the arsenal to be "safe" but only "given the current configuration of power in Pakistan."

She described as "the unthinkable" a situation in which the the Zardari government were to be toppled by the Taliban, adding "then they would have the keys to the nuclear arsenal of Pakistan, and we can't even contemplate that. We cannot let this go on any further..."

The officials who spoke with Petraeus, however, said he and they believe that even were Zardari's government to fall, it was still conceivable that Kayani's army could maintain control over the nuclear arsenal.

That is because the Pakistani arsenal is set up in such a way -- with the weapons stockpile and activation mechanisms separated -- so as to prevent easy access by invaders. Moreover, the Taliban is not believed at present to possess the sophisticated technical expertise necessary to exercise full "command and control" over a nuclear arsenal, and would probably require weeks if not months to develop it.

The anxiety with which U.S. officials are monitoring events in Pakistan is compounded by a battle here at home over how best to help the Pakistanis. Some members of Congress want to attach benchmarks to any aid provided to Islamabad -- a move opposed by the Obama administration -- while still others wish to transfer authority over key funding streams from the Defense Department to the State Department, also opposed by the administration.

At a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Wednesday, Chairman Ike Skelton,D-Mo. asserted that the existing funding mechanism, the Coalition Support Initiative, under which the U.S. reimburses Pakistan for military expenditures undertaken in support of the U.S. global war on terror, "is not serving the interests of either our country or Pakistan very well."

Michele Flournoy, U.S. under secretary of defense for policy, rejected that view, saying the initiative has proved "absolutely critical" to the missions in both Pakistan and Afghanistan.

At the same hearing, Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher, whose bureau oversees South and Central Asia, told lawmakers the Obama administration favors the Defense Department retaining control over the new funding mechanism for Pakistan being proposed, a Title X provision entitled the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capabilities Fund (PCCF).

The goal of PCCF is to provide funding for the immediate training and equipping of the Pakistani army to fight a counterinsurgency war against the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The Pakistani army, U.S. officials say, has historically been modeled to fight a conventional war against India, as opposed to unconventional warfare against non-state actors like terrorist groups.

A final problem, officials told FOX News, was that no one in the U.S. possesses "an understanding of the Taliban's true objective." It remains unclear to policymakers here whether the group truly seeks to overthrow the Zardari government or merely to carve out a territory within Pakistan in which it can establish safe haven, impose Sharia law, and plot attacks on external targets.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Israeli intel warns Netanyahu on Obama policy: 'We have become an obstacle'

from The World Tribune
April 30, 2009

TEL AVIV — A classified assessment relayed to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Obama and his senior advisers would incrementally diminish U.S. strategic cooperation with Israel developed over the last 20 years.

"Obama wants to make friends with our worst enemies and until now the worst enemies of the United States," an Israeli source familiar with the intelligence assessment said.

"Under this policy, we are more than irrelevant. We have become an obstacle."

[On April 21, Obama said he would meet Netanyahu in Washington as part of revived U.S.-led peace efforts in the Middle East, Middle East Newsline reported. The president said the summit would take place over the next few weeks.]

Israeli sources said the administration would reject Israel intelligence on such threats as Iran and Syria while advancing the Obama agenda to reconcile with the two states, both listed as state sponsor of terrorism by the U.S. State Dept.

On April 20, Israeli military intelligence commander Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin warned the Cabinet that Obama was prepared to allow Iran to retain its capability to assemble nuclear weapons and support Hamas and Hizbullah.

"Obama wants to advance the peace process in the direction of realistic discussions with extremist elements," Yadlin said.

The Israeli intelligence assessment envisioned that Obama would maintain his reconciliation policy with Iran and Syria through at least 2010. The sources said the assessment determined that Obama was convinced that such a policy would enable a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Obama will want to show Iran, Syria and radical Muslims that the United States could pressure Israel on a strategic level," the source said. "The pressure has already begun and will intensify throughout the next year or two."

The military intelligence chief said Obama was also courting the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad. Yadlin said both Damascus and Teheran have not significantly reduced their support for insurgency groups throughout the region.

"President Bashar Assad hopes to turn over a new leaf with U.S. President Barack Obama," Yadlin said. "However, while Western powers are being hosted at the palace in Damascus, Syria is continuing to be used as the back yard of the axis of evil. Assad is letting Hizbullah and Iranian forces freely conduct their affairs in Syria and use its territory for Hizbullah deployment."

Yadlin said Obama's policies have generated dismay among Arab allies of the United States. He said Arab countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia were concerned that U.S. reconciliation efforts would merely encourage Teheran and its proxies to intensify destabilization efforts. In April 2009, Egypt reported a Hizbullah network that operated in Cairo and the Sinai Peninsula.
"The Arab world is starting to understand that Iranian proxies are a threat to the region," Yadlin said. "The Hizbullah activity in Egypt is not an isolated incident. Iran has infrastructures across the world seeking to perpetrate terror attacks against Israel."

At the same time, the Obama administration was expected to restrict U.S. arms exports to Israel in an effort to deny systems that could be used in any attack against Iran or Syria. The intelligence sources said this policy was implemented during the last year of the Bush administration and would intensify under Obama.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Ahmadinejad Calls For Eradication of Israel

Would this be the same Ahmadinejad that Obama wants to have direct talks with? It is? Gee, Barry, do you still want to go through with it? I guess you probably do. Lately, you seem to be surrounding yourself with some fine individuals.
Rees

Delegates walk out on Ahmadinejad at Geneva

from The Jerusalem Post
By JPOST.COM STAFF, TOVAH LAZAROFF AND AP
April 20, 2009

As Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for the eradication of Israel in his address to the United Nations anti-racism conference whichopened its week long event in Geneva on Monday, delegates walked out, hecklers wearing clown-wigs shouted 'racist' towards him and were escorted uot by security personnel and his speech was continually interrupted.

"Governments must be encouraged and supported in their fights at eradicating this barbaric racism. Efforts must be made to put an end to Zionism," he said in the rambling speech he gave at the podium.

As he spoke, some 23 EU delegates were seen walking out the room when Ahmadinejad said Israel was created on the "pretext of Jewish suffering" from World War II.

Ahmadinejad began his speech by pointing the finger at the United States, Europe and Israel and said they were destabilizing the entire world. "Those in authority at the time set off two world wars," Ahmadinejad said, in an accusation directed at Western powers. He went on to accuse those powers of "killing hundred of millions of people and causing mass destruction" also in Africa and Asia.

"Those who won [the Second World War], considered that the world was with them," he said, and "set up laws that were oppressive and trampling."

A member of the United Union of Jewish Students shouts and holds up a sign saying 'This is a circus, a racist can't fight racism' during the speech of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the UN Racism conference at the United Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, Monday.

Ahmadinejad then went on to criticize the UN: "The Security Council set up after World War II, let's analyze it. The veto vote - is that equality? Is that justice? Is that equality amongst human beings?" he asked, "Or rather is it arrogance and humiliation? The Security Council must be the most important body for decision-making in order to promote peace. If a law is based on force, how can we secure peace and justice? The seeking of power and arrogance means racism, injustice and occupation."

At this point the Iranian president's speech moved to the subject of Israel and the Palestinians.

"As was the case after World War II, armies occupied other territories and people were transferred from territories. In reality, under the pretext of compensating for the evil done in the name of xenophobia, they in fact set up the most violent xenophobes, in Palestine."

"The Security Council made it possible for that illegitimate government to be set up. For 60 years, this government was supported by the world. Many Western countries say they are fighting racism; but in fact support it with occupation, bombings and crimes such as those committed in Gaza. These countries support the criminals," Ahmadinejad said.

Just as Ahmadinejad took the podium at the opening of the international anti-racism conference in Geneva on Monday, two men in multi-colored clown wigs stood up from both sides of the conference hall and tried to reach the podium. One of the men threw a soft red object at Ahmadinejad.

He was immediately escorted out of the hall by security personnel. In his opening remarks, Ahmadinejad called the man "ignorant."

Calls from the balcony were heard throughout the speech.

Still, the majority of the delegates greeted the Iranian president with a round of applause. [absolutely disgusting - my comments]

Ahmadinejad also blamed Israel for America's invasion of Iraq, which he said benefited Israeli arms sales.

He spoke to the UN assembly on the eve of Holocaust Memorial Day, which commemorates the slaughter of six million Jews by the Nazis during World War II.

Later, at a question-and-answer session with reporters, Ahmadinejad protected the views he presented in his speech.

The protesters wanted to prevent the crowd from hearing "all points of view," he said, and were hurting the "freedom of information" and "freedom of speech."

France's ambassador to the UN, Jean Baptiste Mattéi, told the France 24 TV network "We don't want to repeat what happened in Durban… it's not against the conference, but we cannot share the views expressed by Ahmadinejad. We wanted to make this clear."
Click to read the article and comments

Roxana Saberi sentenced to 8 years in Iranian Prison

Hey Obama,

Did that hurt when Iran stuck their thumb in your eye? Also, how's that "Mr. Roger's Neighborhood Diplomacy" working out for you? Just curious!
Rees

from The Wall Street Journal
an AP news article
April 18, 2009

TEHRAN, Iran -- An American journalist jailed in Iran has been convicted of spying and sentenced to eight years in prison, her lawyer said Saturday, dashing any hopes for her quick release.

The verdict was the first time Iran has found an American journalist guilty of spying, and it was unclear how the conviction would affect recent overtures by the Obama administration for better relations and engagement with Washington's longtime adversary.

Roxana Saberi, a 31-year-old dual American-Iranian citizen, was arrested in late January and initially accused of working without press credentials. But earlier this month, an Iranian judge leveled a far more serious allegation, charging her with spying for the U.S.

She appeared before an Iranian court behind closed doors on Monday in an unusually swift one-day trial. The Fargo, N.D., native had been living in Iran for six years and had worked as a free-lance reporter for several news organizations including National Public Radio and the British Broadcasting Corp.

"Saberi has been sentenced to eight years in jail. I'll definitely appeal the verdict," lawyer Abdolsamad Khorramshahi said. It wasn't immediately known when she was convicted.

The U.S. has called the charges against Ms. Saberi baseless and has demanded her release, and the conviction and prison sentence could put strains on efforts to improve ties.

President Barack Obama has said it wants to engage Iran in talks on its nuclear program and other issues -- a departure from the tough talk of the Bush administration. Iran has been mostly lukewarm to the idea, but on Thursday Iran's hard-line president gave the clearest signal yet that the Islamic Republic was also willing to start a new relationship with Washington.

In a speech Wednesday, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran was preparing new proposals aimed at breaking an impasse with the West over its nuclear program.

But it is uncertain how Washington will react to Ms. Saberi's conviction. On Thursday, the State Department said Ms. Saberi's jailing was not helpful and that Iran would gain U.S. goodwill if it "responded in a positive way" to the case.

The U.S. severed diplomatic relations with Iran after its 1979 Islamic revolution and takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.

Human-rights groups have repeatedly criticized Iran for arresting journalists and suppressing freedom of speech. The government has arrested several Iranian-Americans in the past few years, citing alleged attempts to overthrow its Islamic government through what it calls a "soft revolution." But they were never put on trial and were eventually released from prison.

Iran has released few details about the charges against Ms. Saberi. Iranian officials initially said she had been arrested for working in the Islamic Republic without press credentials and she had told her father in a phone conversation that she was arrested after buying a bottle of wine.

An Iranian investigative judge involved in the case charged that Ms. Saberi was passing classified information to U.S. intelligence services.

Her parents, who traveled to Iran from their home in Fargo in a bid to help win their daughter's release, could not immediately be reached for comment on Saturday.
Click to read the rest of the article and comments

Obama to Punish Israel if it Attacks Iran?

from Jihad Watch
April 17, 2009

Obama Administration drawing up contingency plans to punish Israel if it attacks Iran?

Unconscionable, but plausible in light of the steps Obama has already taken. "US Weighing Punishing Israel if it Attacks Iran," from China Confidential, April 17 (thanks to Banafsheh Zand-Bonazzi):

Having taken military action against Iran off the table, the Obama administration is considering ways of punishing Israel if it attacks Iran to end its nuclear arms program (and prevent a second Holocaust).

In other words, having failed to contain Iran, the United States is concentrating on restraining Israel.

Administration contingency plans include condemnation of Israel, support for a United Nations Security Council resolution that could include sanctions on Israel, and suspending or seriously cutting military aid to the Jewish State.

One of President Obama's closest foreign policy advisers, National Security Council member Samantha Power, is a proponent of ending military aid to Israel in order to force it to negotiate with Iran's Palestinian Islamist proxy, Hamas, and withdraw from all lands taken during the Six-Day War of June 1967. Power also advocates shifting aid to a Palestinian state. Overall, she views Israel as a liability and a historic mistake, in line with the European left position (and that of old-line, right-of-center, American isolationists and anti-Semites). Her antidemocratic admirers in the Democratic Party's (Hillary-hating) left wing agree and are eager for an opportunity to paint Israel as a Jewish North Korea (although they actually have more sympathy for North Korea than for Israel).

The big question is how the Obama administration would react if Iran retaliated against Israel indirectly as well as directly--by making good on its repeated threats to attack U.S. forces in the Middle East and shut down the strategic, 29 mile-wide Strait of Hormuz, through which an estimated 20% of the world's crude oil is transported by tanker ships. Would the U.S. fight back with real ferocity or respond in a limited way while blaming Israel for preemptively attacking Iran and appealing to "the Muslim world" for "understanding?"

One wonders how the Apologizer-in-Chief would react.

Indeed. Read it all.
Click to read the article and comments

US Signals It Will Appease Iran - At Israel's Expense

article from Joshua Pundit
photo from Joshua Pundit
Friday, April 17, 2009

The US Signals It Will Appease Iran - At Israel's Expense

The Obama Administration has sent a number of unmistakable signals recently to Israel that it considers them an obstruction rather than an ally...and that appeasing Iran and the Muslim world takes priority its relationship with Israel.

First, President Obama agreed on an important concession to Iran, reversing years of policy. They sent a message to the Mullahs that they would be willing to begin talks on Iran's nuclear weapons program without insisting that the Iranians at least temporarily cease enrichment - which means that the mullahs can run out the clock with endless negotiations while they continue to perfect their nukes and their delivery systems.

Second, the Israelis definitely took note of the North Korean fiasco, where Secretary of Defense Robert Gates went public before the Nork's recent missile launch to tell the world that the US couldn't or wouldn't do anything about it. As I mentioned at the time the Israelis, if they're paying attention, should realize that if the US either couldn't or wouldn't do anything to stop North Korea, they're not going to stop an Iranian missile strike on Israel either. And that any guarantees the Israelis get on that score are pretty much worthless.

Just to underline that message, it recently came out that SecDef Gates refused Japan's request to allow the US Navy to utilize America's most advanced radar, a seaborne X-band unit during the North Korean launch:

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates denied permission for the U.S. Northern Command to use the Pentagon's most powerful sea-based radar to monitor North Korea's recent missile launch, precluding officials from collecting finely detailed launch data or testing the radar in a real-time crisis, current and former defense officials said.

To say that the Japanese were upset about this is an understatement.

The Israelis also have an X-Band unit, stationed in the Negev Desert as part of the well-publicized link up of the Israeli and US missile defense systems designed to ease Israel's concerns about Iran's nukes.The US has insisted that the unit remain completely under US control without any Israeli oversight or involvement..which wasn't a huge problem because the Israelis felt confident that the Americans would never allow a missile attack against a long time ally of the US.

After seeing how Japan, another log-time US ally was left hanging, I doubt the Israelis have that confidence.

Finally, Israel was the recipient of two high level blunt warnings from the US in the space of about a week against taking any action to stop the Iranians from getting nukes, one from Vice President Joe Biden and the other from Secretary of Def Robert Gates.

Gates statement was reminiscent of his remarks on North Korea, saying that the US can't do anything about Iran's quest for nukes and that an Iranian nuclear bomb can be prevented only if "Iranians themselves decide it's too costly."

He also said that a strike on Iran's nukes would unify Iran, "cement their determination to have a nuclear program, and also build into the whole country an undying hatred of whoever hits them."

Of course that ignores both the Iranian regime's determination to obtain nukes that's already cemented in place and its genocidal desire to use them on Israel, whether on it's own or by providing them its proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas. As for the hatred, that's pretty much a given already. Referring to a country as a cancer and threatening to wipe it off the map reflects sentiments that aren't going to change no matter what Israel does or doesn't do.

Not only does Gate's statement effectively signal the Mullahs that the US is not going to do anything effective to stop them, it tells the Israelis that the US is not to be depended on as an ally and that they're supposed to cringe, depend on Ahmadinejad and Khamenei's good graces and hope it all works out.

Gates, of course is speaking with Obama's voice. The Israelis would be fools to accept this, and I doubt they will.

As for the US, if things continue as they are we're set to learn a very hard lesson on why appeasing a regime like Iran's is a no guarantee of our own security.

We will pay in blood and treasure and treasure for that lesson, and the longer we try to delay the inevitable the higher the bill will be.
Click to read the article and comments

Iran complains to UN about Israeli "threats"

Would this be the same Iran whose President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatened to wipe Israel of the map? Yes, it would be.
Rees

from Reuters
By Louis Charbonneau
14 Apr 2009

* Iran demands U.N. respond to Israeli "threats"
* Israeli officials hint Israel could attack nuclear sites
* Mexico says no plans now for U.N. council response (Adds Mexican spokesman, paragraph 10, details)

UNITED NATIONS, April 14 (Reuters) - Iran demanded on Tuesday that the U.N. Security Council respond firmly to what it described as Israel's "unlawful and insolent threats" to launch an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres, have suggested the Jewish state could use military force to prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons, as the West suspects it is doing.

Iran insists it is only interested in building reactors that peacefully generate electricity. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has said Israel should be "wiped off the map," has vowed to continue his country's nuclear program.

Iran's U.N. ambassador, in a letter to Mexican U.N. Ambassador Claude Heller, said Israel was violating the U.N. charter and urged the international body to respond clearly and resolutely. Mexico holds the rotating presidency of the Security Council.

"These outrageous threats of resorting to criminal and terrorist acts against a sovereign country and a member of the United Nations not only display the aggressive and warmongering nature of the Zionist regime, but also constitute blatant violations of international law," Iranian Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee wrote.

The letter came two days after Peres told Israel's Kol Hai radio that Israel would respond with force if U.S. offers of dialogue failed to persuade Ahmadinejad to halt Tehran's uranium enrichment program.

"We'll strike him," Peres said in the interview.

Netanyahu and several of his military aides made clear in an interview with Atlantic magazine last month that the government was weighing the military option in dealing with Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Khazaee said the remarks were "unlawful and insolent threats" based on "fabricated pretexts."

U.S. officials, diplomats and analysts say Obama opposes the use of military force against Iran's nuclear sites but is worried that Israel, which bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osiraq in 1981, might bomb Iranian sites if engagement fails.

If Tehran continues to enrich uranium, analysts say, Obama will have no choice but to support a push for a new round of U.N. sanctions against the Islamic Republic later this year. (Editing by Peter Cooney)
Click to read the rest of the article

Iran keeps pace with North Korea, plans a second, bigger satellite launch

DEBKAfile Special Report
April 14, 2009

As North Korea reactivated its nuclear weapons facilities in defiance of UN resolutions, Tuesday, April 14, Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinjad announced plans to send a second satellite into space, this one on a rocket with a range of 1,500 km.

The launch of its first home-made satellite Omid in February, ostensibly for "peaceful telecommunications," demonstrated Tehran's acquisition of long-range ballistic technology usable for delivering nuclear warheads. Addressing students, Ahmadinejad said that the next satellite would be bigger than Omid and have a longer range.

Tuesday, the International Atomic Energy Agency said North Korea was expelling its inspectors and reactivating all its nuclear facilities in retaliation for the unanimous UN Security Council's unanimous condemnation Monday of its long-range Taepodong 2 missile launch last week. Pyongyang also announced its withdrawal from the six-power talks on its nuclear program. The White House again called on North Korea to cease "its provocative threats."

Adopting a more lenient stance, the Obama administration and European powers were disclosed by DEBKAfile last week as considering dropping their longstanding demand for Tehran to shut down uranium enrichment as a pre-condition for negotiations on its nuclear program.

Clearly, both North Korea and Iran are moving ahead on parallel courses with their military nuclear programs, impervious to Western condemnation (of North Korea) or concessions (to Tehran) for the sake of diplomatic engagement.

Their courses undoubtedly intersect. Of late, several Western intelligence organizations are investigating whether a ship that travelled from North Korea to Iran last December had several dozen tons of enriched uranium hidden in its cargo. Some intelligence officials suspect an effort to hide traces of the highly enriched uranium (HEU) program to develop nuclear weapons, which the US believes North Korea is secretly pursuing.

If confirmed, North Korea's transfer of the materials to Iran would only add to rising proliferation concerns stirred by the country's long-range missile launch last week.

Iran is conducting low-level enrichment for use in nuclear power plants under the surveillance of the International Atomic Energy Agency. "The bulk of the (transferred) materials appears to be medium-level enriched uranium," the source said. "It could be further enriched to weapons grade in Iranian facilities."
Click to read the article

Iran says US Journalist Roxana Saberi trial over - awaiting verdict

Let's see: They have a 1 day trial, but it might be weeks before a verdict is reached. You don't think that Iran might use this pending verdict for political purposes do you? Iran? No, of course not. The Mullahs are concerned about Roxana and want to ensure that they deliver a fair and just verdict. /sarc
Rees

from Yahoo News
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI
Associated Press Writer

TEHRAN, Iran – An American journalist jailed in Iran and charged with espionage faced a court in a one-day trial behind closed doors and a verdict is expected within weeks, the country's judiciary spokesman said Tuesday.

The unusually swift trial in Iran's Revolutionary Court comes as the United States has publicly pressed for Roxana Saberi's release.

The 31-year-old dual American-Iranian citizen was arrested in late January and initially accused of working without press credentials. But an Iranian judge leveled a far more serious allegation against her last week, charging her with spying for the United States.

"Yesterday, the first trial session was held. She presented her final defense," judiciary spokesman Ali Reza Jamshidi told reporters. "The court will issue its verdict within the next two to three weeks."

The U.S. government has repeatedly called for Saberi's release and the charges against her and news of her trial were a setback — especially at a time when President Barack Obama has expressed a willingness to talk with Iran after many years of rocky relations under the former Bush administration.

It was unclear why the trial was moving at such a fast pace — especially because the charges leveled against Saberi were so serious. Under Iranian law, those convicted of spying normally face up to 10 years in prison.

Saberi's lawyer, Abdolsamad Khorramshahi, said he was not authorized to speak to the media about the trial, which he was permitted to attend. "I will comment only after the verdict is issued," he told The Associated Press.

Her parents, who traveled to Iran in a bid to help win their daughter's release, could not immediately be reached for comment.

Saberi, who grew up in Fargo, North Dakota, has been living in Iran for the last six years, working as a freelance reporter for organizations including National Public Radio and the British Broadcasting Corp.

An Iranian investigative judge involved in the case has alleged Saberi passed classified information to U.S. intelligence services but did not provide further details.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said last week the United States was "deeply concerned" about the espionage charges, which the department described as "baseless."

Jamshidi criticized the U.S. on Tuesday for saying Saberi was innocent and calling for her release.

"That a government expresses an opinion without seeing the indictment is laughable," he told a news conference.

Saberi's parents, who live in Fargo, visited their daughter last week in Evin prison, a facility north of Tehran that is well-known for holding political prisoners. The couple met Saberi for 30 minutes — the first time they had spoken to her since she called them on Feb. 10 to say she had been arrested.

Her father, Iranian-born Reza Saberi, said he would stay in Iran until his daughter was freed. He has said his daughter was finishing a book on Iran and had planned to return to the United States this year.

Human rights groups have repeatedly criticized Iran for arresting journalists and suppressing freedom of speech. The government has arrested several Iranian-Americans in the past few years, citing alleged attempts to overthrow its Islamic government through what it calls a "soft revolution."

Associated Press Writer Nasser Karimi contributed to this report.
Click to read the rest of the article

Obama: STOP the U.S. attendance at Durbin 2

from The Lid
Monday, April 13, 2009

Obama Leaning Towards US Attending Anti-Jewish Hatefest on Hitler's Birthday

President Obama is on the verge of finding another way to screw the Jewish Community. Despite assurances to the contrary, the United States is leaning toward attending the UN Sponsored Durban II conference which begins next Monday, which appropriately is the birthday of Adolf Hitler:

Senior U.S. officials in Washington and New York are leaning in favor of participating in the "Durban 2" UN-sponsored anti-racism conference scheduled to take place on April 20 in Geneva, diplomatic sources said on Sunday.

The diplomats, who share a close working relationship with the American delegation to the United Nations, informed leading Jewish officials in New York that Washington has increasingly become convinced of the need to dispatch representatives to the conference...A senior Jewish activist who took part in some of the discussions with Western diplomats told Ha'aretz that he would not be the least surprised if the U.S. indeed decides to send an official delegation. The official said that while the U.S. pledged it would not participate, it was not an adamant opposition.

Dozens of human rights groups and activists in the United States have petitioned President Barack Obama to rethink his decision to boycott the conference, expected by many countries to be used as a forum for criticizing Israel. Ha'aretz

Today Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who seeks to annihilate Israel, had formally announced his intention to attend the anti-racism conference only fed those fears that Durban II would be a repeat of the 2001 event. And now it looks as if the President of the United States is looking to give that hatred legitimacy.
Click to read the rest of the article and comments