Suicide Bomber in Tehran - The Mullahs should be getting a little nervous...

image by alligator

Saturday, June 20, 2009
from The Corner
by Jonah Goldberg

A blast at a Khomeini shrine, according to Reuters:

TEHRAN (Reuters) - A suicide bomber blew himself up near the shrine of Iran's revolutionary founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, in Tehran on Saturday, Iran's semi-official Mehr news agency reported.

"A few minutes ago a suicide bomber blew himself up at the shrine," Mehr quoted a police official, Hossein Sajedinia, as saying.

Two other people were wounded in the incident in the northern wing of the shrine, another news agency, Fars, said.

I think some skepticism is in order about who's behind this incident.

Obama's 3 AM Phone Call - Best Cartoon of the Year!

from Joshua Pundit
June 18, 2009

Response To Netanyahu's Speech? - Intifada - Why of course!

The following comment summarized the entire situation in basically one paragraph:

Palestinian response to speech? VIOLENCE. That's all they know. Notice that the response of the "peace loving" Palestinians is the threat of another intifada, more violence and bloodshed. They live by the sword, teach hatred, and are a society built on nothing but violence. They deserve nothing.
Daniel - USA (06/14/2009 23:04)

PA: Netanyahu has buried peace process
by Khaled Abu Toameh
June 15, 2009

Palestinian Authority officials in Ramallah expressed outrage and shock on Sunday over Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's call for the establishment of a demilitarized Palestinian state and his demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

The officials said that the speech that Netanyahu delivered at Bar-Ilan University was much worse than they had expected.

They also warned that Netanyahu's policies would trigger a new intifada.

Some of PA President Mahmoud Abbas's top advisers accused Netanyahu of "burying the peace process" and said the ball was now in the court of US President Barack Obama.

"Netanyahu's speech is a blow to Obama before it's a blow to the Palestinians and Arabs," an Abbas aide said. "It's obvious, in the aftermath of this speech, that we are headed toward another round of violence and bloodshed."

Abbas's office issued a terse statement in which it accused Netanyahu of destroying efforts to achieve peace in the region.



"The speech has destroyed all initiatives and expectations," the statement said. "It has also placed restrictions on all efforts to achieve peace and constitutes a clear challenge to the Palestinian, Arab and American positions."

Nabil Abu Rudaineh, a spokesman for Abbas, also lambasted Netanyahu for refusing to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the future Palestinian state and his call for solving the issue of Palestinian refugees outside Israel.

"Netanyahu's remarks won't lead to a just and comprehensive peace based on United Nations resolutions," Abu Rudaineh added.

Yasser Abed Rabbo, a senior PLO official closely associated with Abbas, launched a scathing attack on Netanyahu, calling him a "swindler and liar."

Netanyahu wanted the Palestinians to join the Zionist movement by offering them a state under the protectorate of Israel, Abed Rabbo said. He also rejected Netanyahu's demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

The speech, Abed Rabbo said, was worthless and meaningless and hampered efforts to move forward toward a fair solution to the Israeli-Arab conflict.

"Netanyahu is creating tricks to sabotage the peace process," he said. "The response to Netanyahu must be firm."

Chief PA negotiator Saeb Erekat called on the Arab countries to suspend the Arab peace initiative in protest against Netanyahu's statements. "We were not surprised by this speech," he said. "It didn't come as a surprise to all those who are familiar with the Israeli mentality. It's time for the Arab world to announce a clear position toward Netanyahu's speech."
Click to read the rest of the article and the great comments

Netanyahu endorses Palestinian State IF...

from Yahoo News
by Josef Federman
Associated Press Writer

JERUSALEM – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu endorsed a Palestinian state beside Israel for the first time on Sunday, reversing himself in the face of U.S. pressure but attaching conditions like demilitarization that the Palestinians swiftly rejected.

A week after President Barack Obama's address to the Muslim world, Netanyahu said the Palestinian state would have to be unarmed and recognize Israel as the Jewish state — a condition amounting to Palestinian refugees giving up the goal of returning to Israel.

With those conditions, he said, he could accept "a demilitarized Palestinian state alongside the Jewish state."

The West Bank-based Palestinian government dismissed the proposal as an attempt to determine the outcome of negotiations while maintaining Israeli settlements, refusing compromise over Jerusalem and ignoring the issue of borders. They also said that demilitarization would solidify Israeli control over them.

Netanyahu, in an address seen as his response to Obama, refused to heed the U.S. call for an immediate freeze of construction on lands Palestinians claim for their future state. He also said the holy city of Jerusalem must remain under Israeli sovereignty.

"Netanyahu's speech closed the door to permanent status negotiations," senior Palestinian official Saeb Erekat said. "We ask the world not to be fooled by his use of the term Palestinian state because he qualified it. He declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel, said refugees would not be negotiated and that settlements would remain."

But in Washington, the White House said Obama welcomed the speech as an "important step forward."

Netanyahu's address had been eagerly anticipated in the wake of Obama's landmark speech to the Muslim world.

His speech was a dramatic transformation for a man who was raised on a fiercely nationalistic ideology and has spent a two-decade political career criticizing peace efforts.

Many Israeli commentators speculated that after the re-election of Iran's hardline president, Netanyahu would focus the address on the threat of Iran's suspect nuclear program. While reiterating his belief that a nuclear-armed Iran is a grave threat, Netanyahu spent little time on the issue.

"I call on you, our Palestinian neighbors, and to the leadership of the Palestinian Authority: Let us begin peace negotiations immediately, without preconditions," he said, calling on the wider Arab world to work with him. "Let's make peace. I am willing to meet with you any time any place — in Damascus, Riyadh, Beirut and in Jerusalem."

Since assuming office in March, Netanyahu has been caught between American demands to begin peace talks with the Palestinians and the constraints of a hardline coalition. With his speech, he appeared to favor Israel's all-important relationship with the U.S. at the risk of destabilizing his government.

Netanyahu laid out his vision in a half-hour speech broadcast nationwide during prime time. He spoke at Bar-Ilan University, known as a bastion of the Israeli right-wing establishment, and his call for establishing a Palestinian state was greeted with lukewarm applause.

As Netanyahu spoke, two small groups of protesters demonstrated at the entrance to the university.

Several dozen hard-liners held up posters showing Obama wearing an Arab headdress and shouted slogans against giving up West Bank territory. Across from them, a few dozen dovish Israelis and foreign backers chanted slogans including "two states for two peoples" and "stop the occupation."

Police kept the two groups apart.

The Palestinians demand all of the West Bank as part of a future state, with east Jerusalem as their capital. Israel captured both areas in the 1967 Mideast war.

Netanyahu, leader of the hardline Likud Party, has always resisted withdrawing from these lands, for both security and ideological reasons. In his speech, he repeatedly made references to Judaism's connection to the biblical Land of Israel.

"Our right to form our sovereign state here in the land of Israel stems from one simple fact. The Land of Israel is the birthplace of the Jewish people," he said.

But Netanyahu also said that Israel must recognize that millions of Palestinians live in the West Bank, and continued control over these people is undesirable. "In my vision, there are two free peoples living side by side each with each other, each with its own flag and national anthem," he said.

Netanyahu has said he fears the West Bank could follow the path of the Gaza Strip — which the Palestinians also claim for their future state. Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, and Hamas militants now control the area, often firing rockets into southern Israel.

"In any peace agreement, the territory under Palestinian control must be disarmed, with solid security guarantees for Israel," he said.

"If we get this guarantee for demilitarization and necessary security arrangements for Israel, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people, we will be willing in a real peace agreement to reach a solution of a demilitarized Palestinian state alongside the Jewish state," he said.

Netanyahu became the latest in a series of Israeli hard-liners to soften their positions after assuming office. Earlier this decade, then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon led Israel out of Gaza before suffering a debilitating stroke. His successor, Ehud Olmert, spoke eloquently of the need to withdraw from the West Bank, though a corruption scandal a disastrous war in Lebanon prevented him from carrying out that vision.

Netanyahu gave no indication as to how much captured land he would be willing to relinquish. However, he ruled out a division of Jerusalem, saying, "Israel's capital will remain united."

Netanyahu also made no mention of uprooting Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Nearly 300,000 Israelis live in the West Bank, in addition to 180,000 Israelis living in Jewish neighborhoods built in east Jerusalem. He also said that existing settlements should be allowed to grow — a position opposed by the U.S.

"We have no intention to build new settlements or expropriate land for expanding existing settlements. But there is a need to allow residents to lead a normal life. Settlers are not the enemy of the nation and are not the enemy of peace — they are our brothers and sisters," he said.

Netanyahu also said the Palestinians must recognize Israel as a Jewish state. The Palestinians have refused to do so, fearing it would amount to giving up the rights of millions of refugees and their descendants and be discriminatory to Israel's own Arab minority.

Erekat said Netanyahu's plan was unacceptable since it effectively imposes a solution on the core issues of the conflict.

"Netanyahu's speech closed the door to permanent status negotiations," he said. "We ask the world not to be fooled by his use of the term Palestinian state because he qualified it. He declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel, said refugees would not be negotiated and that settlements would remain."

Although the Palestinians have agreed to demilitarization under past peace proposals, Erekat rejected it, saying it would cement Israeli rule over them.

Nabil Abu Rdeneh, another Palestinian official, called on the U.S. to challenge Netanyahu "to prevent more deterioration in the region."

"What he has said today is not enough to start a serious peace process," he added.

In Gaza, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri called the speech "racist" and called on Arab nations "form stronger opposition" toward Israel. Hamas ideology does not recognize a Jewish state in an Islamic Middle East and has sent dozens of suicide bombers into Israel.

Netanyahu also came under criticism from within his own government — a coalition of religious and nationalistic parties that oppose Palestinian independence.

Zevulun Orlev, a member of the Jewish Home Party, which represents Jewish settlers and other hard-liners, said Netanyahu's speech violated agreements struck when the government was formed. "I think the coalition needs to hold a serious discussion to see where this is headed," he told Israel Radio.

Israeli media speculated that Netanyahu might turn to the centrist Kadima Party, which heads the parliamentary opposition, to shore up his government if the coalition falls apart.

Kadima, the largest party in parliament, denied a report that there were secret talks with Netanyahu over the matter ahead of the speech.

Israel's ceremonial president, Nobel peace laureate Shimon Peres, called the speech "real and brave."

Israel No Longer Under U.S. Nuclear Umbrella Per Clinton

Clinton Reverses: Israel on its Own With Iran
from Israel National News
June 14, 2009

(IsraelNN.com) In a reversal of her stated position as a presidential candidate, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revealed last week that an Iranian attack on Israel would no longer be considered as an attack on America. Speaking during an interview on ABC TV she said that the Iranians could expect “retaliation” but America was not committing itself to come to Israel's defense. Interviewer and White House Correspondent George Stephanopoulos reminded Clinton of her previous position by playing a 2008 video recording in which she states: "I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States.”

When asked if her new statement was official U.S. policy, Clinton dodged the question, "I think it is U.S. policy to the extent that we have alliances and understandings with a number of nations. I don't think there is any doubt in anyone's mind that, were Israel to suffer a nuclear attack by Iran, there would be retaliation." Stephanopoulos pressed her: "By the United States?" But Clinton declined to commit: "Well, I think there would be retaliation.”
Click to read the article and the comments

Criminally Useful Idiocy - with more on the way...

image by rees

article from Power Line Blog
June 14, 2009
by Paul

On Friday, President Obama had this to say about the election in Iran:

We are excited to see what appears to be a robust debate taking place in Iran. Whoever ends up winning the election in Iran, the fact there has been a robust debate hopefully will advance our ability to engage them in new ways.

This was an extremely foolish comment for at least two reasons. First, the debate in Iran was circumscribed. The candidates were screened by the mullahs. Four were permitted to run; hundreds were deemed insufficiently in tune with the "Revolution." And there appars to have little or no debate on the issue of primary concern to the U.S. -- Iran's nuclear program. Ahmadinejad's main rival, Mir-Hossein Moussavi, was in full agreement with the regime on this matter.

Second, there was always a strong possibility of election fraud. Robust debate, even had it existed, would be meaningless in the face of a fraudulent election. Thus, Obama should not have lauded the election, much less characterized it as advancing our ability to engage Iran in new ways, until he was satisfied that the election was honest. A fraudulent election in which the existing, intransigent regime claims a landslide victory will not advance our ability to engage in Iran in new ways.

A day later, it seems clear that the election was fraudulent. U.S. officials have said as much off-the-record. They find it "not credible" that Mousavi would have lost the balloting in his hometown or that a third candidate, Mehdi Karoubi, would have received less than 1 percent of the total vote.

So Obama has praised an election that appears to have been a travesty. It's difficult to see how either Iran's rulers or its dissidents can view him as other than a fool -- usefully so in the case of the rulers; criminally so in the case of the dissidents.

Hey Obama: That "Robust" Iranian Election Debate That "Excited" You Turned Into Violent Riots!

In a Reuters news article on Friday, June 12th, the headline was "Obama excited by Iran's robust election debate." Hey Barry, how do you feel now about the "robust" riots that are taking place and the protestors that are being beaten by the Revolutionary Guards?
Rees

Ahmadinejad's victory greeted by Tehran protests

from Reuters
June 13, 2009
By Parisa Hafezi and Fredrik Dahl

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Thousands of protesters clashed with police after President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won an election which his reformist challenger called a "dangerous charade."

The protests were a rare direct challenge to Iranian authorities. The result and its violent aftermath raised fresh questions about the direction of Iranian policies at a time when U.S. President Barack Obama wants to improve relations with Iran.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told Iranians to respect Ahmadinejad's victory, which upset expectations that reformist candidate Mirhossein Mousavi might win the race.

Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli, an Ahmadinejad ally, declared the president had been re-elected with 62.6 percent of the vote, against 33.7 percent for Mousavi.

Mousavi complained of violations and vote-rigging -- allegations rejected by Interior Ministry officials.

"I'm warning I will not surrender to this dangerous charade. The result of such performance by some officials will jeopardize the pillars of the Islamic Republic and will establish tyranny," Mousavi said in a statement made available to Reuters.

After the result was announced, thousands of his supporters took to the streets, some chanting, "What happened to our vote?." Others shouted anti-Ahmadinejad slogans. "We are Iranians too," and "Mousavi is our president," they shouted.

Police beat protesters with batons as they spread out across the capital. Small fires burned at roadsides.

Though the protests were small compared to the mass demonstrations that led to the 1979 Islamic revolution, they were the most widespread in the city since then.

Khamenei, Iran's top authority, told defeated candidates and their supporters to avoid "provocative behavior."

"The chosen and respected president is the president of all the Iranian nation and everyone, including yesterday's competitors, must unanimously support and help him," Khamenei said in a statement read on state television.

Ahmadinejad, in a televised address to the nation, said the election had been "free and healthy."

Iranian and Western analysts said Ahmadinejad's re-election would disappoint Western powers aiming to convince Iran to halt a nuclear program they suspect is aimed at making bombs.

Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

AhmadiCorn Takes Credit For Ahmadinejad's Victory!

image by rees

from MSNBC.com
June 13, 2009

TEHRAN, Iran - Opponents of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad clashed with police in the heart of Iran's capital Saturday, pelting them with rocks and setting fires in the worst unrest in Tehran in a decade. They accused the hard-line president of using fraud to steal election victory from his reformist rival.

The brazen and angry confrontations — including stunning scenes of masked rioters tangling with black-clad police — pushed the self-styled reformist movement closer to a possible moment of truth: Whether to continue defying Iran's powerful security forces or, as they often have before, retreat into quiet dismay and frustration over losing more ground to the Islamic establishment.

But for at least one day, the tone and tactics were more combative than at any time since authorities put down student-led protests in 1999. Young men hurled stones and bottles at anti-riot units and mocked Ahmadinejad as an illegitimate leader. The reformists' new hero, Mir Hossein Mousavi, declared himself the true winner of Friday's presidential race and urged backers to resist a government based on "lies and dictatorship."

Authorities, too, pushed back with ominous measures apparently seeking to undercut liberal voices: jamming text messages, blocking pro-Mousavi Web sites and Facebook and cutting off mobile phones in Tehran.

Reformist leaders arrested
The extent of possible casualties and detentions was not immediately clear. Police stormed the headquarters of Iran's largest reformist party, the Islamic Iran Participation Front, and arrested several top reformist leaders, said political activists close to the party.The activists spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

Mousavi did not appear in public, but warned in a Web message: "People won't respect those who take power through fraud."

Many backers took this call to the streets. Thousands of protesters — mostly young men — roamed through Tehran looking for a fight with police and setting trash bins and tires ablaze. Pillars of black smoke rose among the mustard-colored apartment blocks and office buildings in central Tehran. In one side road, an empty bus was engulfed in flames.

Police fought back with clubs, including mobile squads on motorcycles swinging truncheons.

The scuffles began when protesters gathered hours outside the Interior Ministry around the time officials announced the final election results showing a nearly 2-to-1 landslide for Ahmadinejad. Demonstrators chanted "the government lied" and waved the ribbons of Mousavi's "green" movement — the signature color of his youth-driven campaign.

"I won't surrender to this manipulation," said a statement on Mousavi's Web site. "The outcome of what we've seen from the performance of officials ... is nothing but shaking the pillars of the Islamic Republic of Iran's sacred system and governance of lies and dictatorship."

No compromise
The door for possible compromise was closed by Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. He could have used his near-limitless powers to intervene in the election dispute. But, in a message on state TV, he urged the nation to unite behind Ahmadinejad, calling the result a "divine assessment."

There are no independent election monitors in Iran. Mousavi's claims, however, point to some noticeable breaks with past election counting.

The tallies from previous elections — time-consuming paper ballots — began to trickle in hours after polls closed. This time, huge chunks of results — millions at a time — poured in almost immediately from a huge turnout of about 85 percent of Iran's 46.2 million voters. The final outcome: 62.6 percent of the vote to Ahmadinejad and 33.75 for Mousavi, a former prime minister from the 1980s.

The U.S. refused to accept Ahmadinejad's claim of a landslide re-election victory said it was looking into allegations of election fraud.

U.S. watching outcome
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said she hoped the outcome reflects the "genuine will and desire" of Iranian voters. At a joint appearance with Clinton, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said his country was "deeply concerned" by reports of irregularities in the election.

Past Iranian elections were considered generally fair. In 2005, when Ahmadinejad was first elected, the losing candidates claimed irregularities at the polls, but the charges were never investigated.

"The majority of Iranians are certain that the fraud is widespread," said Tehran-based analyst Saeed Leilaz. "It's like taking 10 million votes away from Mousavi and giving them to Ahmadinejad."

Much depends on how much they are willing to risk. The heartland of Iran's liberal ranks is the educated and relatively affluent districts of north Tehran. It's also the showcase for the gains in social freedoms that began with the election of President Mohammad Khatami in 1997: makeup, Internet cafes, head scarves that barely cover hair and satellite dishes that are technically illegal but common.

The ruling clerics tolerate all that to a point — part of a tacit arrangement that the liberties stay as long as reformists remain politically meek. A real protest movement could threaten their coveted Western-looking lifestyle and risk a brutal response from groups vowing to defend the Islamic system.

The political chief of the powerful Revolutionary Guard has warned it would crush any "revolution" against the Islamic regime by Mousavi's "green movement" — drawing parallels to the "velvet revolution" of 1989 in then-Czechoslovakia.

Foreign media blamed
Ahmadinejad accused the foreign media of producing coverage that harmed the Iranian people, saying "a large number of foreign media ... organized a full-fledged fight against our people."

Authorities also called foreign journalists with visas to cover the elections, including members of The Associated Press, and told them they should prepare to leave the country. Italian state TV RAI said one of its crews was caught in the clashes in front Mousavi's headquarters. Their Iranian interpreter was beaten with clubs by riot police and officers confiscated the cameraman's tapes, the station said.

"The massive demonstrations of police and army presence on the streets was designed to show that they were quite ready to kill protesters if they had to in order to impose order," said Patrick Clawson, deputy director at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "On the whole, these guys in north Tehran who are terribly upset about what is happening are not ready to die."

Hadi Ghaemi, spokesman for the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, denounced the outcome as "a Tehran Tiananmen" — a reference to China's brutal 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy activists — and urged the international community not to recognize the result.

There were also protests by Mousavi supporters in the southern city of Ahvaz in the oil-rich province of Khuzestan who shouted, "Mousavi, take our votes back!" witnesses said.

Talking tough
Mousavi called on his backers to avoid violence, but he is still talking tough about pressing his claims of election fraud. He charges the polls closed early but has not fully outlined all of his fraud allegations.

Unlike his ally Khatami, Mousavi is a hardened political veteran who led the country during the grim years of the 1980-88 war with Iraq. He also could join forces with the powerful political patriarch Heshemi Rafsanjani, who strongly opposed Ahmadinejad's re-election during the intense monthlong campaign.

Amjad Atallah, a Washington-based regional analyst, called it "one of the most existential moments" in Iran since 1979 Islamic Revolution.

"You can't overstate how important what is happening now is for Iran," he said.

In Tehran, several Ahmadinejad supporters cruised the streets at dawn waving Iranian flags out of car windows and shouting "Mousavi is dead!"

They were quickly overwhelmed by the Mousavi backers.

The protesters — some hiding their faces with masks — still wandered the streets after nightfall

as some fires still burned. The pungent smell of burning rubber and smoldering trash lingered in some parts of the city.

Hundreds of anti-riot police blocked the streets leading to Tehran University's dormitory, home to thousands of students and the site of the 1999 student riots that marked the biggest disturbances in post-revolution Iran. University exams nationwide were postponed until next month.

Normal life amid clashes
Oddly, normal life was interspersed with the anger. People continued shopping and stores remained open.

With the Internet and mobile texting down, some Iranians turned to Twitter to voice their views.

"Very disappointed with Iran elections," said one entry."Apparently still a backward regressive nation."

Another: "Elections in Iran: stayed tuned as it gets interesting (& maybe scary)."

Ahmadinejad addressed a crowd in Tehran, but did not mention the unrest, saying only "a new era has begun in the history of the Iranian nation."

But there were no hints of any new policy shifts on key international issues such as Iran's standoff over its nuclear program and the offer by President Barack Obama to open dialogue after a nearly 30-year diplomatic estrangement. All high-level decisions are controlled by the ruling theocracy.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Riots In Iran Over Election Results - Riot like it's 1999

image from AP - modified by rees

I didn't think they would even allow riots to happen. I thought they would be shooting people in the street. Well, I guess this is the new modern Iran. (Actually, they'll arrest them, take them out of sight of the press and then shoot them.)
Rees

Clashes erupt in Iran over disputed election

from KSL.com
June 13th, 2009
By Ali Akbar Dareini and Anna Johnson
Associated Press Writers


TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Supporters of the main election challenger to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad clashed with police and set up barricades of burning tires Saturday as authorities claimed the hard-line president was re-elected in a landslide. The rival candidate said the vote was tainted by widespread fraud and his followers responded with the most serious unrest in the capital in a decade.

Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, closed the door on any chance he could use his limitless powers to intervene in the disputes from Friday's election. In a message on state TV, he urged the nation to unite behind Ahmadinejad, calling the result a "divine assessment."

Several hundred demonstrators, many wearing the trademark green colors of pro-reform candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi's campaign chanted "the government lied to the people" and gathered near the Interior Ministry as the final count from Friday's presidential election was announced.

It gave 62.6 percent of the vote to Ahmadinejad and 33.75 to Mousavi _ a former prime minister who has become the hero of a youth-driven movement seeking greater liberties and a gentler face for Iran abroad.

Mousavi rejected the result as rigged and urged his supporters to resist a government of "lies and dictatorship."

"I'm warning that I won't surrender to this manipulation," said a statement on Mousavi's Web site. "The outcome of what we've seen from the performance of officials ... is nothing but shaking the pillars of the Islamic Republic of Iran's sacred system and governance of lies and dictatorship," it added.

Mousavi warned "people won't respect those who take power through fraud." The headline on one of his Web sites read: "I won't give in to this dangerous manipulation."

Mousavi appealed directly to Khamenei to intervene and stop what he said were violations of the law. Khamenei, who is not elected, holds ultimate political authority in Iran and controls all major policy decisions.

Mousavi and key aides could not be reached by phone.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the U.S. hopes the outcome of the election reflects the "genuine will and desire" of the Iranian people. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the U.S. administration is paying close attention to reports of alleged election irregularities.

At a joint appearance with Clinton, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon said his country was "deeply concerned" by reports of irregularities in the election.

The clashes in central Tehran were the more serious disturbances in the capital since student-led protests in 1999. They showed the potential for the showdown to spill over into further violence and challenges to the Islamic establishment.

The demonstrations began Saturday morning shortly before the government announced the final results.

Protesters set fire to tires outside the Interior Ministry and anti-riot police fought back with clubs and smashed cars. Helmeted police on foot and others on buzzing motorcycles chased bands of protesters roaming the streets pumping their fists in the air. Officers beat protesters with swift blows from their truncheons and kicks with their boots. Some of the demonstrators grouped together to charge back at police, hurling stones.

Plumes of dark smoke streaked over the city, as burning barricades of tires and garbage bins glowed orange in the streets. Protesters also torched an empty bus, engulfing it in flames on a Tehran street.

An Associated Press photographer saw a plainclothes security official beating a woman with his truncheon. Italian state TV RAI said one of its crews was caught in the clashes in front Mousavi's headquarters. Their Iranian interpreter was beaten with clubs by riot police and officers confiscated the cameraman's tapes, the station said.

In another main street of Tehran, some 300 young people blocked the avenue by forming a human chain and chanted "Ahmadi, shame on you. Leave the government alone." There was no word on any casualties from the unrest.

It was not clear how many Iranians were even aware of Mousavi's claims of fraud. Communications disruptions began in the later hours of voting Friday _ suggesting an information clampdown. State television and radio only broadcast the Interior Ministry's vote count and not Mousavi's midnight news conference.

Nationwide, the text messaging system remained down Saturday and several pro-Mousavi Web sites were blocked or difficult to access. Text messaging is frequently used by many Iranians _ especially young Mousavi supporters _ to spread election news.

Mousavi's campaign headquarters urged people to show restraint.

Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli, who supervised the elections and heads the nation's police forces, warned people not to join any "unauthorized gatherings."

The powerful Revolutionary Guard cautioned Wednesday it would crush any "revolution" against the Islamic regime by Mousavi's "green movement." The Revolutionary Guard is directly under the control of the ruling clerics and has vast influence in every corner of the country through a network of volunteer militias.

Even before the vote counting began, Mousavi declared himself "definitely the winner" based on "all indications from all over Iran." He accused the government of "manipulating the people's vote" to keep Ahmadinejad in power and suggested the reformist camp would stand up to challenge the results.

"It is our duty to defend people's votes. There is no turning back," he said, alleging widespread irregularities.

Mousavi's backers were stunned at the Interior Ministry's claim that Ahmadinejad won after widespread predictions of a close race _ or even a slight edge for the reformist candidate.

Turnout was a record 85 percent of the 46.2 million eligible voters.

"Many Iranians went to the people because they wanted to bring change," said Mousavi supporter Nasser Amiri, a hospital clerk in Tehran. "Almost everybody I know voted for Mousavi but Ahmadinejad is being declared the winner. The government announcement is nothing but widespread fraud. It is very, very disappointing. I'll never ever again vote in Iran."

At Tehran University _ the site of the last major anti-regime unrest in Tehran in 1999 _ the academic year was winding down and there was no sign of pro-Mousavi crowds. But university exams, scheduled to begin Saturday, were postponed until next month around the country.

Ahmadinejad planned a public address later Saturday in Tehran.

In the capital, several Ahmadinejad supporters cruised the streets waving Iranian flags out of car windows and shouting "Mousavi is dead!"

The election outcome will not sharply alter Iran's main policies or sway major decisions, such as possible talks with Washington or nuclear policies. Those crucial issues rest with the ruling clerics headed by Khamenei.

But the election focused on what the office can influence: boosting Iran's sinking economy, pressing for greater media and political freedoms, and being Iran's main envoy to the world.

Iran does not allow international election monitors. During the 2005 election, when Ahmadinejad won the presidency, there were some allegations of vote rigging from losers, but the claims were never investigated.

Associated Press reporter Nasser Karimi contributed to this report from Tehran.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Obama: America's first Muslim president? - and it's last?

image from rees

from The Jewish World Review
By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/


During his White House years, William Jefferson Clinton — someone Judge Sonia Sotomayor might call a "white male" — was dubbed "America's first black president" by a black admirer. Applying the standard of identity politics and pandering to a special interest that earned Mr. Clinton that distinction, Barack Hussein Obama would have to be considered America's first Muslim president.

This is not to say, necessarily, that Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim any more than Mr. Clinton actually is black. After his five months in office, and most especially after his just-concluded visit to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, however, a stunning conclusion seems increasingly plausible: The man now happy to have his Islamic-rooted middle name featured prominently has engaged in the most consequential bait-and-switch since Adolf Hitler duped Neville Chamberlain over Czechoslovakia at Munich.

What little we know about Mr. Obama's youth certainly suggests that he not only had a Kenyan father who was Muslim, but spent his early, formative years as one in Indonesia. As the president likes to say, "much has been made" — in this case by him and his campaign handlers — of the fact that he became a Christian as an adult in Chicago, under the now-notorious Pastor Jeremiah A. Wright.

With Mr. Obama's unbelievably ballyhooed address in Cairo Thursday to what he calls "the Muslim world" (hereafter known as "the Speech"), there is mounting evidence that the president not only identifies with Muslims, but actually may still be one himself. Consider the following indicators:

Mr. Obama referred four times in his speech to "the Holy Koran." Non-Muslims — even pandering ones — generally don't use that Islamic formulation.

Mr. Obama established his firsthand knowledge of Islam (albeit without mentioning his reported upbringing in the faith) with the statement, "I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed." Again, "revealed" is a depiction Muslims use to reflect their conviction that the Koran is the word of G-d, as dictated to Muhammad.

Then the president made a statement no believing Christian — certainly not one versed, as he professes to be, in the ways of Islam — would ever make. In the context of what he euphemistically called the "situation between Israelis, Palestinians and Arabs," Mr. Obama said he looked forward to the day "…when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them) joined in prayer."

Now, the term "peace be upon them" is invoked by Muslims as a way of blessing deceased holy men. According to Islam, that is what all three were — dead prophets. Of course, for Christians, Jesus is the living and immortal Son of G0d.

In the final analysis, it may be beside the point whether Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim. In the Speech and elsewhere, he has aligned himself with adherents to what authoritative Islam calls Shariah — notably, the dangerous global movement known as the Muslim Brotherhood — to a degree that makes Mr. Clinton's fabled affinity for blacks pale by comparison.

For example, Mr. Obama has — from literally his inaugural address onward — inflated the numbers and, in that way and others, exaggerated the contemporary and historical importance of Muslim-Americans in the United States. In the Speech, he used the Brotherhood's estimates of "nearly 7 million Muslims" in this country, at least twice the estimates from other, more reputable sources. (Who knows? By the time Mr. Obama's friends in the radical Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) perpetrate their trademark books-cooking as deputy 2010 census takers, the official count may well claim considerably more than 7 million Muslims are living here.)

Even more troubling were the commitments the president made in Cairo to promote Islam in America. For instance, he declared: "I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear." He vowed to ensure that women can cover their heads, including, presumably, when having their photographs taken for passports, driver's licenses or other identification purposes. He also pledged to enable Muslims to engage in zakat, their faith's requirement for tithing, even though four of the eight types of charity called for by Shariah can be associated with terrorism. Not surprisingly, a number of Islamic "charities" in this country have been convicted of providing material support for terrorism.

Particularly worrying is the realignment Mr. Obama has announced in U.S. policy toward Israel. While he pays lip service to the "unbreakable" bond between America and the Jewish state, the president has unmistakably signaled that he intends to compel the Israelis to make territorial and other strategic concessions to Palestinians to achieve the hallowed two-state solution. In doing so, he ignores the inconvenient fact that both the Brotherhood's Hamas and Abu Mazen's Fatah remain determined to achieve a one-state solution, whereby the Jews will be driven "into the sea."

Whether Mr. Obama actually is a Muslim or simply plays one in the presidency may, in the end, be irrelevant. What is alarming is that in aligning himself and his policies with those of Shariah-adherents such as the Muslim Brotherhood, the president will greatly intensify the already enormous pressure on peaceful, tolerant American Muslims to submit to such forces — and heighten expectations, here and abroad, that the rest of us will do so as well.

Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

PALS can't govern Gaza, let alone their own state - what a joke!

image by rees

Gaza has become a cesspool since Israel vacated it for the peace process. Gaza is a gigantic welfare state supported by the United Nations. The only products the Palestinians export are terrorists and their state-of-the-art suicide bombers, which they now offer in the female versions.

They destroyed the infrastructure that Israel left them. Their mosques, schools and media preach nothing but hate for Western Civilization and Jews in particular. This won't and can't be reversed by this wonderful "peace process" that Obama is trying to shove down everyone's throat. Obama shows his ignorance by believing it can all be just that simple. What a moron!
Rees

from The Jerusalem Post
June 13, 2009
by the Associated Press in Beirut

President Barack Obama's special Mideast envoy George Mitchell said Friday that Washington supports the creation of a Palestinian state "as soon as possible."

Mitchell also sought to reassure Lebanon that US efforts toward a comprehensive peace in the Middle East - including reaching out to Syria and Iran - would not come at Lebanon's expense.

Some Lebanese are wary of Washington's outreach to Syria, which dominated the politically fractured country for decades and continues to maintain some influence through its support of the powerful Hizbullah terror group.

"President Obama remains committed to actively and aggressively seeking comprehensive peace in the Middle East. This includes supporting the establishment of a Palestinian state as a homeland for the Palestinian people as soon as possible," Mitchell told reporters in Beirut.

Mitchell spoke after talks with President Michel Suleiman and Prime Minister Fuad Saniora in Lebanon, his latest stop on a Mideast tour that will also take him to Syria.

The tour follows the Obama administration's new efforts to revive the stalled peace process. It comes just a week after Obama's landmark speech to the Muslim world in Cairo in which he promised to work aggressively to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Obama specifically demanded Israel freeze all settlement construction on land Palestinians claim for their future state and endorse the concept of such a state - something Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has so far refused to do, leading to the most public US-Israel disagreement in a decade.

Mitchell is the first high-ranking US official to visit Lebanon since a pro-Western coalition defeated the Iranian-backed Hizbullah in Sunday's parliamentary election.

Mitchell stressed that "there can be no lasting solution reached at Lebanon's expense."

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other US officials have said before that Beirut does not have to fear that Washington's efforts to engage Syria could hurt Lebanon.

Lebanese factions have long been concerned that an improvement of US-Syrian relations might help restore Syria's influence in Lebanon.

Syria caved to international pressure and withdrew its troops from Lebanon after the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, a killing many Lebanese blamed on Damascus. Syria has denied the claim.

The Lebanese also worry an Arab-Israeli settlement could prompt many of the 400,000 Palestinian refugees that live in the country to stay permanently, altering Lebanon's delicate sectarian demographic balance.

Lebanese officials stressed their opposition to such an outcome in meetings with the US envoy.

Before leaving for Syria, Mitchell also held talks with Saad Hariri, the billionaire businessman and son of the slain former prime minister, who is emerging as the favorite to lead Lebanon's government after the election. Hariri, 39, is leader of the largest parliamentary bloc in the winning coalition.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Hey Obama: Ahmadinejad won! The debate is still a go...

image by rees

Tehran: Ahmadinejad wins second presidential term up to 2013
DEBKAfile Special Report
June 13, 2009

Tehran rules: Ahmadinejad is the winner. Mousavi claims election irregularities

With most of the votes counted, the election committee chairman in Tehran awarded president Mahound Ahmadinejad a 66 percent victory over his main reformist challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi's 33 percent with the remainder divided among the two last contestants in Iran's highly-charged presidential election. .

Earlier, Mousavi claimed to have toppled the president with 65 percent of the record-breaking turnout and alleged widespread irregularities. His disappointed supporters clashed with police in Tehran when the apparent results unfolded.

Turnout is estimated to top 80 percent of Iran's 46 million eligible voters. If the official results are confirmed, no run-off will be necessary.

DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report that the Islamic Republic's authorities appear to have swung into action to ensure the hard-line president's re-election and try and stop Moussavi, whose promise of change attracted many of the under-30s who make up three-quarters of the electorate.

The apparent freedom of debate permitted in the election campaign was held up in the West as denoting a certain easing in the regime's autocratic rule and a pointer to Mousavi's election which was heavily staked by the US administration, Western and Israeli media. DEBKAfile's Iranian sources report that in Tehran, the winner is preparing to raise the ante for consenting to dialogue with the parties who backed his rival.

While improving its image abroad, the authorities were accused by Mousavi's supporters of quietly preparing mechanisms to rig the results to make sure Ahmadinejad won the election in the first round.

DEBKA-Net-Weekly 400 published June 11 disclosed some of the alleged ruses:

Interior minister Sadeqh Mahsooli was accused of planting "mirror ballot boxes" at voting stations, pre-stuffed with mostly Ahmadinejad ballots ready to switch with the real ballots in precincts where opposition support was preponderant. [Sounds like ACORN at work - my comment]

By not requiring voters to present photo IDs and running off more than a million fake IDs in Qatar for use by the hundreds of thousands of loyal "bassij" (voluntary militiamen), the Tehran establishment made it possible for a huge number of voters to cast ballots in more than one polling station and substantially pad Ahmadinejad's support.

The Iranian government also set up a vast number of mobile ballots where voters were not required to provide their addresses. In former elections, bogus votes were uncovered by comparing the numbers cast with the number of registered voters in a given precinct. This kind of supervision is ruled out by mobile stations.

Crucial policies are not determined by the president but by the clerical establishment headed by the supreme ruler and the president of Iran

And Obama Comes A Crumblin' Down

image modified by rees

from Dick Morris.com
By Dick Morris And Eileen McGann
Published in the New York Post on June 11, 2009

It’s increasingly looking like President Obama may be sunk by his own deficit.

Yes, the recession started under George W. Bush — and voters will still blame him for unemployment and related woes. But rising interest rates and inflation are the coming fears — and Americans will increasingly see Obama’s big-spending ways as the cause.

Deficit spending has always been Americans’ bete noir; the gospel of balanced budgets is deeply ingrained in our political and economic psyche. Through all the Keynesian experiments of the ’60s and ’70s, voters remained committed to a balanced budget. They worried as deficits rose in the Reagan years — then calmed as the economy turned up.

But when the news turned bad under the first President George Bush, they blamed the deficit — the issue was a major source of Ross Perot’s appeal in the 1992 election. And when President Bill Clinton (and a Republican Congress) finally balanced the budget, the economy bloomed — reinforcing public beliefs about the dangers of deficits.

Still in shock over the financial collapse, voters tolerated the massive government stimulus package in January. But now they’re starting to turn on the deficit-makers.

In the latest Gallup Poll, Obama’s favorability remains high (67 percent), as does his job-approval rating (61 percent). But only 55 percent approve of his handling of the economy, just 45 percent approve of his handling of federal spending and only 46 percent approve of his treatment of the budget deficit.

Meanwhile, the Rasmussen poll finds that the public now trusts Republicans over Democrats in managing the economy (for the first time in two years) by 42 percent to 36 percent.

There lies the president’s vulnerability. As the consensus among economists and journalists grows that the deficit is pushing up interest rates and weakening the dollar, Obama’s weakest link will come under strain. If, say, the falling dollar pushes up gasoline prices and rising interest rates kill off any revival in the construction industry, the deficit will cause a perfect economic storm for the president.

The United States has to borrow a net $3 trillion to $4 trillion over the next two years — far more than the $1 trillion a year average of the last three years. Obama may well face a tough choice: Print more money (monetizing the debt), triggering a run on the dollar — or let interest rates skyrocket, killing off the recovery.

Alternately, he could raise taxes to try to fund his programs (particularly his health-care proposals). But even tax hikes confined to the upper brackets will undermine his popularity — and slow the economy.

Plus, voters will fear that the added government spending will just grow the deficit further. They won’t believe Obama’s claims that he can save by spending, worrying instead that he’s just on another big spending spree.

Indeed, deficit fears — rather than concerns about whether the program will work, or even opposition to the needed tax hikes — may prove to be the telling argument against Obama’s health-care plans.

The one thing Obama should do is the one thing he won’t do: cut spending.

The public has begun to realize that the stimulus package is doing little to help the economy. Obama’s answer is to ramp up spending — but voters in the Rasmussen poll believe, 45-36, that he should cancel the rest of the stimulus outlays.

Stoked by ongoing bad economic news, the firm public conviction that new deficit spending will do more harm than good will increasingly wear on Obama’s popularity — and may bring him down.

Obama Insults Israel With Oval Office Picture

image modified by rees

Some Israelis Insulted By Obama Picture
from CBS News
Posted by Howard Arenstein

Israeli TV newscasters Tuesday night interpreted a photo taken Monday in the Oval Office of President Obama talking on the phone with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an "insult" to Israel.

They saw the incident as somewhat akin to an incident last year, when the Iraqi reporter threw a shoe at President Bush in Baghdad.

It is considered an insult in the Arab world to show the sole of your shoe to someone. It is not a Jewish custom necessarily, but Israel feels enough a part of the Middle East after 60 years to be insulted too.

Was there a subliminal message intended from the White House to Netanyahu in Jerusalem, who is publicly resisting attempts by Mr. Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to force Israel to stop any kind of settlement activity in occupied territories once and forever?

Whether or not it is true, it shows the mood in Israel. They feel cornered. The reactions out of Israel reflect that feeling.

Netanyahu is making a speech Sunday, in part as a response to Mr. Obama's address to the Arab world last week in Cairo.

Israel's Channel One TV reported that Netanyahu was told Tuesday by an "American official" in Jerusalem that, "We are going to change the world. Please, don't interfere." The report said Netanyahu's aides interpreted this as a "threat."

Netanyahu met with George Mitchell today for four hours in Jerusalem. The State Department announced this afternoon that Mitchell will be stopping in Beirut and Damascus when he finishes his visits to Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

Click to read the more than 500 comments

Israel politely tells Mitchell to "Take A Hike"

Israel tells Mitchell it won't halt natural growth in settlements

from The Jerusalem Post
By Herb Keinon
June 10, 2009

While outwardly US envoy George Mitchell tried to downplay tensions between Washington and Jerusalem, the settlement construction issue continued to be a central source of contention when Mitchell met with Israel's leaders on Tuesday.

Mitchell, during a day of meetings that included four hours with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, was told that Israel would not bring all settlement construction to a complete halt, even though this continues to be the US's stated position.

One senior official said that there appeared to be some "convergence" between the sides, and they were moving toward a definition of the issues.

Following the evening meeting with Mitchell, which included a two-hour one-on-one conversation, Netanyahu's office issued a statement that the meeting was "friendly and positive and encompassed the whole range of issues on the agenda."

Netanyahu, according to the statement, said that "Israel is working to promote peace and security with our Palestinian neighbors and the wider Arab world."

In front of the cameras, Mitchell took pains to stress the importance of the US-Israeli relationship, and Washington's commitment to Israel's security.

Mitchell, after a meeting earlier in the day with President Shimon Peres, said he wanted to state again "clearly and emphatically, beyond any doubt, that the United States' commitment to the security of Israel remains unshakeable."

He stressed that the current disagreements "are not disagreements among adversaries. The United States and Israel are and will remain close allies and friends. My meetings today with the president and other Israeli officials are discussions among friends who share a common set of objectives: Peace, security and prosperity to all the people of this region."

Mitchell said the objective of the Obama administration was a "comprehensive peace in the Middle East," including "a Palestinian state side by side in peace and security with the Jewish State of Israel. The president and the secretary of state have made our policy clear. Israelis and Palestinians have a responsibility to meet their obligations under the road map. It's not just their responsibility. We believe it's in their security interest as well."

Giving voice to the Obama administration's focus on the regional element of the diplomatic process, Mitchell said the US was engaged in "serious discussions" with Israel, the Palestinians and regional partners in the hopes of creating the conditions "for the prompt resumption and early conclusion of negotiations."

Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Hey Obama: Israel can politically and financially respond to your strong-armed tactics

Peled proposes Israeli sanctions on U.S.

from The Jerusalem Post
By Gil Hoffman and Hilary Leila Krieger
June 9, 2009

In a sign of growing concern in Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's government over US President Barack Obama's Middle East policies, Minister-without-Portfolio Yossi Peled proposed Israeli sanctions on the US in a letter to cabinet ministers on Sunday.

In the 11-page letter, obtained by The Jerusalem Post from a minister on Monday, Peled recommends steps Israel can take to compensate for the shift in American policy, which he believes has become hostile to Israel.

"Obama's ascendance represents a turning point in America's approach to the region, especially to Israel," he wrote in the letter. "The new administration believes that in order to fight terror, guarantee stability and withdraw from Iraq, a new diplomatic slant is needed involving drastic steps to pacify the Muslim world and the adoption of a more balanced approach to Israel, including intensive pressure to stop building in settlements, remove outposts and advance the formation of a Palestinian state."

Peled added that faced with an American government with an activist agenda that does not mesh with Israel's, traditional reactions are no longer relevant. He said he expected that Obama would eventually realize that appeasement and dialogue with countries that support terror would not have positive results.

But in the interim, the minister suggests reconsidering military and civilian purchases from the US, selling sensitive equipment that the Washington opposes distributing internationally, and allowing other countries that compete with the US to get involved with the peace process and be given a foothold for their military forces and intelligence agencies.

Peled said that shifting military acquisition to America's competition would make Israel less dependent on the US. For instance, he suggested buying planes from the France-based Airbus firm instead of the American Boeing.

In what may be his most controversial suggestion, Peled recommends intervening in American congressional races to weaken Obama and asking American Jewish donors not to contribute to Democratic congressional candidates. He predicted that this would result in Democratic candidates pressuring Obama to become more pro-Israel.

Peled called for the formation of a new body intended to influence American public opinion. The groups he suggests courting include Hispanic Americans and Labor unions in industries that benefit from Israeli military acquisitions.

A former OC Northern Command, Peled is considered part of the left flank of the Likud that includes ministers Dan Meridor and Michael Eitan. Unlike Environment Minister Gilad Erdan, he does not have a history of openly criticizing American policies and unlike Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz, he does not have personal ties to the Republican Party.

Peled told the Post on Monday that he still hoped common ground could be found with the Obama administration, but just in case that did not happen, Israel must be ready.

"We must make every effort to maintain our relationship with the US and I respect Obama, but Israel has its own interests and we have to know what our alternatives are," Peled said. "I don't think what I suggest is vengeful. I just think that even a superpower must behave like a partner."

Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

MUST WATCH! - Rush Limbaugh: "Obama's Got Something Against Israel..."

from Joshua Pundit
Monday, June 08, 2009

Rush Limbaugh did an amazing interview on Sean Hannity last night that's a must see, and I'll try to post the rest later.But this nugget popped out and I think it merits some clarification, especially in view of the recent Lap Dance of the Seven Veils in Cairo.

I think Limbaugh's entirely correct. Obama does indeed have something against Israel and possibly against Jews as well, and I think it stems from his background and history.

Barack Hussein Obama was the product of a marriage between a third world Muslim diplomat an anthropologist whom her friends described as fairly left wing. She had likely swallowed the line common in those circles about the evils of American society, western colonialism and imperialism, of which Israel was considered an outpost.

He then spent his formative years as a Muslim, something he was caught lying about during his campaign until the evidence came to light. And it's uncertain exactly how long he remained a Muslim, if a sporadic one. As he recently revealed to Jake Tapper, he took a trip to Pakistan during his college days when there was a travel advisory in effect and very few people travelled to the country unless they had official government business or were Muslims.

The Muslim connection is important, because of the wide spread Jew hatred throughout the Qu'ran and Hadiths, the account of the life, times and deeds of Islam's prophet Mohammed. It's not impossible for a practitioner of Islam to avoid the virus, but anyone who looks at the Muslim world today knows that it's quite common to catch it.

During the period in college when, by his own admission Barry Sowerto was changing himself into Barack Hussein Obama, his hero and role model was the arch anti-Semite Malcolm X. It's largely forgotten today, but while Malcolm X eventually eased up on his hatred for the White Devils provided they embraced Islam after he returned from making the hadj to Mecca, he remained a Jew hater until he died.

We also know that Barack Obama had extensive and documented links with Israel basher, terrorism apologist and academic fraud Edward Said when he was at Columbia, as well as major connections with the Saudis and the Nation of Islam through Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal and his advisor, Khalid al-Mansour AKA Don Warden, a well known American Islamist with ties to both the Black Panther Party and the Nation of Islam.

Al-Waleed, some of you might remember, is one of the prime movers behind the Wahabi takeover of America's mosques and madrassahs through his funding of the Islamic Society Of North America(ISNA), was a major funder of the Al Qaeda charity al-Haramain and was the Saudi prince who's $10 million dollar donation to New York City after 9/11 was spurned by then mayor Rudy Giuliani after after the prince made a public comment suggesting that the U.S. relationship with Israel were responsible for the attack.

He also has donated millions to establishing Saudi controlled Middle East Studies departments - including at Harvard, Obama's alma mater, where he ponied up a mere $20million.

After college, Obama attended Louis Farakhan's foul anti-Semitic orgy in Washington DC, the Million Man March.

And as we all know, as part of establishing himself in Chicago Barack Hussein Obama spent two decades sitting in Trinity United Church with the anti-semitic Jeremiah Wright ( an ex-member of the Nation of Islam and a close friend of Louis Farakhan's) as his pastor and spiritual mentor.

In the world view of the major figures Barack Hussein Obama chose to associate himself with and many of his foreign policy cabinet appointments, Israel is a white colonialist state oppressing 'people of color' and stealing land that rightfully belongs to Muslims. Israel itself is an illegitimate state that was created and imposed by Europeans on the Muslim world out of guilt over the Holocaust - which of course, the peaceful Arab world had nothing whatsoever to do with. So it's time to force the Israelis into a political settlement to the Arab's liking, for peace and justice.

That's the mindset exactly. So is it any wonder during his speech in Cairo that Obama equated the Palestinian nakba with the Holocaust and compared the Israelis with slavemeasters in the old South and the apartheid of South Africa?

Barack Obama does indeed have something against Israel, and it stems from his deepest beliefs. And now that he's in the White House, it's obvious he's prepared to act on it.
Click to read the comments and other great articles at Joshua Pundit

Eric Cantor: Obama damages chance for peace

from Power Line
June 8, 2009
Posted by Scott

House Republican Whip Eric Cantor has forwarded his comments on President Obama's address to the Muslim world last week. Rep. Cantor writes:

In his long-awaited address to the Muslim world in Cairo on Thursday, President Obama spoke hopefully about "A world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own." Ironically, the speech is likely to prolong - not hasten - the arrival date for this new world order.

It was heartening to hear the President describe America as a place where all are equal under the law, and where all, including Muslims, can prosper in freedom and work to achieve their dreams. Republicans should credit him for reaching out to Arabs and Muslims around the world. But on the topic of fostering Mideast peace, we wish he hadn't tried to ingratiate himself with the Arabs at our democratic ally Israel's expense.

Once again, President Obama painted the "natural growth" of Israeli "settlements" in the West Bank as a main stumbling block that "undermines efforts to achieve peace." This for the most part is a gratuitous fight. The natural growth in question takes place in confined Jewish population blocks that will undoubtedly be a part of Israel once a two-state solution is implemented (based on the precedents set in the peace offering at Camp David in 2000 and later by the Bush Administration). Should the Israelis not be allowed to maintain an adequate infrastructure to accommodate their growing population within those communities? Why the outrage?

President Obama's comments on such building activity may sound innocuous to the casual observer. In reality, they are anything but.

With the whole world watching, President Obama confirmed that he is willing to squeeze the Israelis without getting anything in return from the Palestinians. This is devastating for peace prospects. It gives the Palestinian Authority incentive to double down on their strategy to wait on the sidelines rather than step up and honor their obligations under the Road Map.

Entertaining illusions that the natural growth of Israeli West Bank communities bears significant responsibility for the conflict is an exercise in self-deception. The root of the problem is the recalcitrance of the Arab people, whether in Gaza or in the West Bank or in Cairo, to accept that the Jews have a right to live in their historical homeland. Israeli governments have always proven ready to make the necessary sacrifices assuming there is a reasonable chance for peace.

Unfortunately, since 1948 Israel has never had that peace partner. A sustainable peace will only come when a Palestinian leadership steps forward that recognizes Israel's right to exist, moves forcefully against the terrorist infrastructure in its midst and builds a functioning civil society.

This was the lesson of the Gaza "disengagement" four years ago. In an effort to kick-start the peace process, Israel unilaterally withdrew its military and all of its citizens from the Gaza Strip. The move didn't engender any of the good will the international community had hoped for, largely because ineffective Palestinian leadership squandered the opportunity.

Instead, terrorists used the evacuated Jewish communities to fire thousands of deadly rockets and mortars into southern Israel. In July 2007, the terrorist group Hamas ruthlessly expelled Fatah from the territory and stepped up its cross-border attacks on Israel. The attacks continue to this day.

If the administration truly wants to bring about Mideast peace, it should be doing everything in its power to goad responsible Palestinian leadership along. Far too often the Fatah Party in control of the West Bank has shown itself to be corrupt and unable to police its own territory. With President Obama turning the world's gaze back onto Israel, don't expect that to change.

The President tried to make history by taking his message to Muslims into the heart of the Arab world. We can only hope it will have a positive impact. But on the issue of Mideast peace, his dance around the true source of the problem will only make genuine peace more elusive.
Click to read the comments and other great articles at Power Line

Obama Sends Another Hatchet Man To Israel

from The Jerusalem Post
June 8, 2009
By Khaled Abu Toameh and JPost.com Staff

US envoy calls for 'immediate' talks

US President Barack Obama wants "immediate" talks between the Palestinians and Israel to forge a comprehensive Middle East peace agreement, US envoy George Mitchell was quoted by Reuters as saying on Monday.

En route to the Middle East, Mitchell said such talks were aimed at reaching "a comprehensive peace and normalization of relations" between Israel and its neighbors, which would also serve "the security interests of the United States."

"The president has told me to exert all efforts to create the circumstance when the parties can begin immediate discussions," Mitchell told reporters at the start of a Palestinian donors' conference in the Norwegian capital.

Mitchell said the purpose of the donors' meeting was to "provide support for the Palestinian Authority" and pave the way for a two-state solution with Israel.

"It's important that there is a building of institutions and governmental capacity so that at an early time there can be an independent and viable Palestinian state," Mitchell said.

Norway's Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere said at the conference that recent political uncertainty regarding any Middle East peace deal had hurt fund-raising efforts for the Palestinians.

"We, the donor community, are not into this as a humanitarian project but a political project," said Stoere, who chairs the donors' group for Norway.

A World Bank report on the Palestinian economy issued at the donors' meeting said foreign support remained "indispensable" to allow the Palestinian Authority to "provide basic services" and praised "good" budget management by PA President Mahmoud Abbas and his team.

But on Sunday, PA officials said the Palestinian Authority will not return to the negotiating table with Israel unless Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu endorses the two-state solution and freezes construction in the West Bank settlements.

The officials said Abbas had relayed this position to the US during his recent visit to Washington, where he held talks with Obama.

One of the officials expressed hope that the looming crisis between the Obama administration and Netanyahu over the future of the peace process would lead to the collapse of the Israeli government.

"Netanyahu's government is bad for the peace process," the official told The Jerusalem Post.

"This is a radical government that does not accept the two-state solution and insists on building settlements," he said.

Another official said that "Netanyahu was mistaken if he thinks he would find any Palestinian who would accept anything less than a sovereign Palestinian state on all the territories that were occupied by Israel in 1967."

The PA official added, "We're not in a rush. Let's see if Obama is serious and whether he's going to force Netanyahu to accept the two-state solution and halt settlement construction. If Obama succeeds, we will resume the peace talks tomorrow morning."

Commenting on the announcement by Netanyahu that he intends to spell out his government's peace strategy soon, Abbas spokesman Nabil Abu Rudaineh said that as far as the Palestinians were concerned, the principles of peace were very clear.

If Netanyahu wants peace, then he must abide by the two-state solution, stop settlement construction and honor the road map plan for peace in the Middle East, Abu Rudaineh said.

"These are the principles of a just peace," Abu Rudaineh added.

"Peace must be based on international resolutions pertaining to the conflict. This requires immediate steps on the ground so as to create the proper atmosphere for the resumption of the peace talks."

Tayeb Abdel Rahim, a senior aide to Abbas, said that in any case the talks with Israel should be resumed from the point where they ended and not from zero.

Abdel Rahim said that there would never be real peace in the region unless Israel released all the Palestinian prisoners.

He said that during his talks with Obama, Abbas had stressed that all the prisoners should be released unconditionally as a prerequisite for peace.
Click to read the rest of the article and the comments

Coup Likely in Beirut after Hizballah election defeat?

Fears in Beirut of Hizballah coup after its election defeat
from the DEBKAfile Special Report
June 8, 2009

Early Monday, June 8, Saad Hariri announced his 14 March bloc had retained its parliamentary majority of 70 out of 128 seats in Sunday's Lebanese election. A politician close to the Hizballah-led March 8 coalition, which is supported by Syria and Iran, admitted defeat. Both spoke as the votes were still being counted.

DEBKAfile's Middle East sources report Hizballah, although tipped to win, prepared a backup plan ready to seize power in Beirut if it failed at the ballot. If confirmed, the results are a victory for US influence against an Iranian and Syrian takeover of Lebanon.

These elections bear heavily on Iran's presidential vote Friday, June 12, since the incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threw all his personal weight and an estimated $100 million behind the pro-Iranian alliance's bid to gain control of Lebanon through the ballot-box, our Middle East sources report. He badly needed a win to prove his rivals wrong, especially Mir Hossein Mousavi, in denouncing his external policies as wildly adventurous. Losing Lebanon to the pro-US bloc presents a major setback for Ahmadinejad's chances of reelection. He may not take it lying down.

Sources in Beirut have spoken openly in the past of Hizballah's Plan B to reverse its unexpected defeat by the bullet. Hassan Nasrallah is confident that his militia can swing a coup after working hard in recent weeks to persuade Shiite troops which form around half of the 75,000-strong national army to join forces with Hizballah in this event.

He believes the Iranian and Syrian military officers attached to his campaign headquarters will make sure the seizure of power is fast, smooth and virtually bloodless.

There is no organized military force in Beirut capable of resisting Hizballah, unless president Michel Suleiman orders the army to stand up to the pro-Iranian militia, which he refrained from doing against its assault on the government last year.

Alive to the real danger of their country being converted to a second Iran, Lebanese Christian and Sunni Muslim voters turned out in force – app. 54 percent, which is 20 percent more than in 2005. This may have tipped the scales and preserved the country's multi-confessional Western character under the camp led by Saad Hariri and prime minister Fuad Siniora and backed by Washington.