I wish I had an Ivy League education

Posted on 07/21/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Then I could say genius things like this:

Requiring 60 votes rather than 50 to pass legislation in a body with 100 members is a terrible idea. It’s always been a terrible idea. Nobody would design a legislature that way. But lately, filibustering has been used for even newer and more terrible reasons, like simply slowing bills down to be annoying.

Because it’s not like, say, mathematically, you’d need 51 votes to pass legislation in a 100-member body. (You can’t always count on having the VP as tie-breaker, Matt.)

Matt Yglesias is so smart. No wonder he gets paid to blog, and I do it for free.

Posted in Bloggers, Juvenile Scorn | 12 Comments

The “idiot wind” blows back

Posted on 07/21/2010 by Soccerdad

Prior to the presidential election in 2008 the editors of the Washington Post objected to charges that there was something wrong with candidate Obama’s relationship with Rashid Khalidi.

It’s fair to question why Mr. Obama felt as comfortable as he apparently did during his Chicago days in the company of men whose views diverge sharply from what the presidential candidate espouses. Our sense is that Mr. Obama is a man of considerable intellectual curiosity who can hear out a smart, if militant, advocate for the Palestinians without compromising his own position. To suggest, as Mr. McCain has, that there is something reprehensible about associating with Mr. Khalidi is itself condemnable — especially during a campaign in which Arab ancestry has been the subject of insults. To further argue that the Times, which obtained the tape from a source in exchange for a promise not to publicly release it, is trying to hide something is simply ludicrous, as Mr. McCain surely knows.

The Post allowed one of the subjects of the editorial a last word:

Which reminds us: We did ask Mr. Khalidi whether he wanted to respond to the campaign charges against him. He answered, via e-mail, that “I will stick to my policy of letting this idiot wind blow over.” That’s good advice for anyone still listening to the McCain campaign’s increasingly reckless ad hominem attacks. Sadly, that wind is likely to keep blowing for four more days.

I wrote about the Post’s editorial here.

Now both Professor Khalidi and President Obama are back in the news. (A longer version appears here.)

A group calling itself U.S. Boat to Gaza is seeking $370,000 in the next month to send an aid ship to the Gaza Strip that would be named after President Obama’s best-selling book “The Audacity of Hope.”

Rashid Khalidi, a friend of Obama who is active in Palestinian causes, has signed the appeal, part of a broader effort to thwart the Israeli blockade of the Hamas-controlled Palestinian enclave.

Khalid doesn’t think that naming the boat after the President should be a problem:

The White House declined to comment. Khalidi said he was not aware the boat would be named after Obama’s book when he agreed to add his name to the list of sponsors.

“But if the name is a problem for the administration, it can simply insist publicly that Israel lift the siege: end of problem, end of embarrassment,” he wrote in an e-mail.

There’s a certain clarity in Khalidi’s position: he intends to help Hamas. The consequence of this writes Barry Rubin:

Helping Hamas is helping to plunge the Middle East, and perhaps the world, into a nightmare of bloodshed and horror.

So Khalidi isn’t now (and probably never was) a simple academic, but an activist with a radical anti-Israel agenda.

Robert Mackey of the New York Times, of course, perpetuates a number of falsehoods. He quotes from a woman who was on board the Mavi Marmara uncritically. (via memeorandum)

On Friday, Ms. Lee argued in the Huffington Post that the nine activists who were killed on board one of the ships as they resisted Israeli commandos were not, as Israel has claimed, “terrorists.” Ms. Lee used some of the video she shot on board the flotilla’s main ship, the Mavi Marmara, to produce a video report (embedded above) on the aid organization that helped sponsor it, the Humanitarian Relief Foundation, often called the I.H.H.

Except this ignores the video of the soldiers being beaten by the “activists.” (h/t Israel Matzav)

And it ignores that Germany and even Turkey tied IHH to terrorist groups. And Barry Rubin even provided a full accounting here.

Finally it’s clear that the IHH were not on a humanitarian mission, much like Prof. Khalidi, their goal was to help Hamas. (h/t Rubin Reports)

So here a few questions.
1) Now that the extent of Prof. Khalidi’s extremism is known – he supports Hamas – maybe those talks with candidate Obama deserve the scrutiny the Washington Post thinks we didn’t need. Maybe Obama was demonstrating more than simple “intellectual curiosity.”

2) A little while back while arguing against a recent Supreme Court ruling the editors of the Washington Post acknowledged that providing material support to terrorists should be illegal. Will they now criticize that the fellow they defended two years ago is boasting about providing such support to Hamas?

3) The other day, Thomas Friedman wrote:

A journalist should lose his or her job for misreporting, for misquoting, for fabricating, for plagiarizing, for systemic bias — but not for a message like this one.

Given that Robert Mackey ignored every bit of evidence that the IHH is a terror organization and effectively shilled for one of its defenders, would Friedman agree that Mackey should be fired? (This isn’t the first time that Mackey’s done this.)

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel, Media Bias | Tagged , | Comments Off on The “idiot wind” blows back

Abbas’ strategy: Preconditions, preconditions, preconditions

Posted on 07/21/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Benjamin Netanyahu has called for direct talks with the Palestinians, with no preconditions. Israel, he says, is ready to sit down right now and discuss all of the issues.

Mahmoud Abbas has said the Palestinians will not resume direct talks until… and now you get to fill in the blank, because he keeps on changing the rules. The latest? He wants Israel to set the borders before sitting down to discuss the borders. (This actually isn’t new. The Palestinians have used this before.)

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told his Fatah movement he wants a more specific US commitment on the borders of a future Palestinian state before agreeing to direct talks with Israel, an adviser said Wednesday.

And here’s the best part:

Abbas was quoted as saying the US president was less specific in defining what constitutes occupied Palestinian territory than the previous US administration.

So he’s basically accusing Obama of pushing for less of a state than Bush. Counting down the outrage for this “insult” in 3… 2… yeah, not really. You will hear nothing publicly from the Obama administration about how Abbas is holding up peace talks. You will hear nothing about preconditions being an obstacle to peace—which they are. Hell, the AP boilerplate passes along the Palestinian talking points:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he wants to move to direct talks immediately, but refuses to agree to a framework for the negotiations. Palestinians are reluctant to engage with Netanyahu, who has retreated from some of the positions of his predecessors.

They are talking about Olmert’s offer to the Palestinians, which included all of Jerusalem, and was turned down. One of the current preconditions is that negotiations must begin where Olmert left off. (It was also not a legal offer in any way as Olmert was leaving office and did not have a mandate to make the offer that he did.) Also, note the framing of Netanyahu as an obstructionist because he refuses to begin negotiations at that point—even while he’s perfectly willing to sit down without preconditions, which makes him the agreeable party and Abbas the reluctant one. But that’s not the narrative. And the narrative, you see, is paramount.

What time is it? That’s right, it’s Israeli Double Standard Time. But not to worry, because it only occurs on days that end with a “y.”

Posted in Israel, Israeli Double Standard Time, palestinian politics | Tagged | 1 Comment

J Street’s New Ad – The Community of Hypocrisy

Posted on 07/20/2010 by Rabbi Kaufman

J Street’s new 30 second TV ad begins with “While chaos and violence in the Middle East grow….” The ad then actually pretends to condemn “fear mongering.” This is a profoundly hypocritical path. I say “pretends” because clearly the opening statement accompanied by appropriate music is designed to scare progressive voters into the belief that only the J Street path could possibly avoid “Chaos and Violence.” I would call that “fear mongering.” It is much like an alarm company saying, “If you don’t have our alarm system, your family is in danger.” There is no difference.

From this ridiculously hypocritical beginning, J Street’s ad continues with images of violence: first an explosion at an Israeli gas station, then a video of Israeli troops landing on the Mavi Marmara (during the flotilla incident), followed by a scene of masked Palestinian gunmen and of stone throwing. Then J Street states that “America’s chorus of No ignores reality.” J Street quotes Sarah Palin as saying that “The Jewish settlements should be allowed to expand.”

J Street’s commercial acts as if J Street’s primary opponents are Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Joe Lieberman. Suddenly, this is not about Israel, but about American politics. Surely there are major Jewish figures both in America and in Israel who could have been quoted as saying something along the lines of “Israeli cities should be allowed to grow,” which is what Palin meant in context. In fact Palin said in 2008 that “A two state solution is the only solution” and Joe Lieberman, pictured next to her in this J Street hypocrisy, said in his official policy:

Advancing the Middle East Peace Process. Senator Lieberman believes that the United States should continue to take an active role in negotiating a peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Specifically, he maintains that a two-state solution – in which Israel lives side by side in peace with a democratic Palestinian state – ultimately provides the only appropriate framework for resolving this longstanding challenge.

J Street is attacking them as if they opposed peace, not simply as if they opposed J Street’s path to it. Rush Limbaugh is quoted out of any context at all as saying, “Who is imposing what on whom?” Which is interesting considering that it seems that J Street’s answer to that question is that the US should be imposing J Street’s solution on Israel. We have no idea what Limbaugh himself meant or even about what issue he was speaking. Limbaugh is simply being used as representative of someone whom J Street’s supporters will not like. His words are irrelevant, but his presence in the ad is an act of fear mongering by J Street saying in essence, “If you don’t vote for Obama, you’re going to get this guy instead.”

Then J Street quotes Mike Pence as saying, “There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza.” This is done because J Street believes it a laughable statement, but it is a serious one because the impact of calling something a “humanitarian crisis” is profound and calling the situation in Gaza a humanitarian crisis is profoundly negative propaganda against Israel. This is not to say that things are wonderful in Gaza. They are not and the average person faces hardship. However a humanitarian CRISIS it is not. Leaders of the Israeli government including Ehud Barak and Danny Ayalon have made this case rather convincingly and the opening of a brand spanking new Gaza Mall full of products for sale must make one question both the unavailability of products and construction materials, much less the absence of wealth and prosperity, in Gaza. Malls are closing in cities around the United States because of the recession, but a new mall opened this week in Gaza. That speaks to prosperity, not to humanitarian crisis.

For a moment, let us think of what a humanitarian crisis is. Haiti after the earthquake was a humanitarian crisis. The Tsunami in Southeast Asia was a humanitarian crisis. Sudan is amid a humanitarian crisis. What do these have in common? Thousands upon thousands of people dying or potentially dying from starvation and disease. How many die from starvation and disease in Gaza? From starvation, virtually none, if not none. In 2007, the last time figures were calculated, the life expectancy of someone born in Palestinian Territories was 73.46 years placing the Palestinian territories as a whole, 77th on the list of nations, better than Hungary, China, Saudi Arabia, Jamaica, Jordan, Brazil, Lebanon, Turkey, the Philippines and well 109 other nations!!! While Gaza’s specific figures are likely less favorable than for the West Bank, there are not tens of thousands in danger of dying of starvation or disease.

Finally comes the most important line in the ad, “Do they speak for you?” That is the real question. It doesn’t matter what was said. The crux of J Street’s ad is whether or not you feel represented by Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. It is an anti-Republican fear mongering ad that has little if anything to do with Israel. How do I know this? Because at its end President Obama is quoted as saying, “Two states living side-by-side in security,” something that Palin herself would say is important and has many times. J Street pretends that she and the others included in the ad seek the opposite, that this statement by the President distinguishes him from Palin and the others, as well as distinguishing J Street from its opponents. It does not. This is an extraordinarily disingenuous ad.

Posted in Israel, Media, Television | Tagged , , , , | 4 Comments

Briefly

Posted on 07/20/2010 by Meryl Yourish

If it’s Monday, it must be time for another AP Gaza sob story: (Yes, I know it’s Tuesday, but this came out yesterday.) This time, it’s all about the family that struggles to survive in a tent. That’s the headline. The facts are partly right: Their home was destroyed in Israel’s 2008 Gaza war—the one that stopped the daily rocket attacks. The story is about how—get this—225 families are still without permanent homes. What the story does not write about is how Hamas has made Palestinians homeless by declaring their land government land, throwing them out of their homes, and bulldozing them. Is this one of those families? Who knows? The AP never researches facts like that. Say, let’s bring up and oldie but goodie and ask Max what he thinks of the situation:

(Background)

The Turkish anti-Israel offensive continues:The Turkish foreign minister is in Syria, discussing ways to end the blockade of Gaza with the Dorktator. He also met with Khaled Meshaal, the exiled leader of Hamas. But wait, there’s more: The IHH is planning on sending more flotillas, and that Israel is in for some “surprises.” Expect more bloodshed ahead. And more world condemnation of Israel, of course. Here’s hoping Netanyahu’s PR people figured out that perhaps they might not want to wait a whole day before releasing video showing the IDF was attacked first. In the meantime, what goes mostly unnoticed by the world media? Erdogan’s government is accusing hundreds of Turks of plotting to overthrow the government. But there are a lot of people out there who think the Islamist government is framing its opponents. Gee, I wonder why they think the Islamists aren’t really interested in democracy?

Posted in Gaza, Hamas, Israel, Media Bias, Terrorism, Turkey | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Briefly

Could you please shut up?

Posted on 07/19/2010 by Soccerdad

Thomas Friedman, in Can We Talk? regrets the firing of Octavia Nasr.

I find Nasr’s firing troubling. Yes, she made a mistake. Reporters covering a beat should not be issuing condolences for any of the actors they cover. It undermines their credibility. But we also gain a great deal by having an Arabic-speaking, Lebanese-Christian female journalist covering the Middle East for CNN, and if her only sin in 20 years is a 140-character message about a complex figure like Fadlallah, she deserved some slack. She should have been suspended for a month, but not fired. It’s wrong on several counts.

To begin with, what has gotten into us? One misplaced verb now and within hours you can have a digital lynch mob chasing after you — and your bosses scrambling for cover. A journalist should lose his or her job for misreporting, for misquoting, for fabricating, for plagiarizing, for systemic bias — but not for a message like this one.

I’d argue that that Nasr’s tweet was indicative of a “systemic bias.” Still, as Lee Smith wrote:

The Western press delights in rattling the bourgeois sensibilities of its audience by showing the multifaceted aspects of Hezbollah–it’s not just a militia with an appetite for slaughtering Jews, it’s also a social welfare outfit that provides educational opportunities!–and even collaborates with the Party of God by publishing doctored photographs of Israeli “war crimes.” The op-ed pages of America’s dailies are replete with articles promoting Hezbollah’s “pragmatism” and “moderation” (which also happens to be the position of the president’s counter-terrorism czar John Brennan, and a recent CENTCOM analytical exercise), while reported pieces from Lebanon pass along Party of God press releases as objective analysis. If every U.S. journalist who quoted Hezbollah mouthpiece Amal Saad Ghorayeb as a respected “scholar” was fired, the bars of East Beirut would lose 25 percent of their business.

Rather than being unique, Nasr’s sympathy for Fadlallah was par for the course among Western journalists. (This is why I thought that Nasr was fired for some other reason. The tweet was a convenient excuse.)

At the end of his column, Friedman writes:

Of course, Fadlallah was not just a social worker. He had some dark side. People at CNN tell me Nasr knew both. But here’s what I know: The Middle East has to change in order to thrive, and that change has to come from within, from change agents who are seen as legitimate and rooted in their own cultures. They may not be America’s cup of tea. But we need to know about them, and understand where our interests converge — not just demonize them all.

That’s why I prefer to get my news from a CNN reporter who can actually explain why thousands of men and women are mourning an aged Shiite cleric — whom we consider nothing more than a terrorist — than a reporter who doesn’t know at all, or worse, doesn’t dare to say.

Michael Young, though, observes:

What the tributes to Fadlallah show us, against the backdrop of the relative silence surrounding Abu Zeid’s death throughout the Middle East, is that things are out of kilter when it comes to liberalism in the region. An essentially conservative cleric has been played up as the vanguard of progressiveness and dialogue, while a scholar who sought to introduce a freethinking outlook toward religion, who had to go into exile to escape possible assassination, departed from this world with little comment – certainly not from the British ambassador to Egypt, Dominic Asquith, who also hosts a personal embassy blog.

In other words, while Fadlallah’s views on certain social issues were different, his views on terror and Israel were pretty mainstream and unlike Nasr Hamed Abu Zeid (whom Young profiles) didn’t really challenge Islam. It’s almost as if the hatred of Israel and (at least philosophical) support for terror is what makes an Islamic cleric genuine in Friedman’s eyes.

Perhaps Fadlallah had been somewhat alienated from Hezbollah and Iran, but that didn’t stop a news agency of the latter from carrying praises from the former in his memory.

The revered cleric served as the resistance’s spiritual leader following its formation in 1982.

In a statement, Hezbollah said the passing was a loss weighing heavy upon both “Lebanon and the whole world,” Rizk, reported Press TV’s correspondent in the Lebanese capital.

“This is a big loss. He was symbol whom our arena is in dire need of,” the statement added.

Referring to Fadlallah’s impassioned criticism of Israel and the United States, the statement said, “He stood with courage in support of the resistance against the Zionist enemy. He also expressed his outright rejection of the conspiracies of the hegemonic powers.”

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Lebanon, Media Bias | Tagged | 2 Comments

Catherine Ashton: Still an ashhole

Posted on 07/19/2010 by Meryl Yourish

The EU head of something-or-other, Catherine Ashton, is back in Gaza and demanding that Israel open all crossings completely, and allow exports, too. Because the fact that Gaza is run by terrorists who are stockpiling weapons and rockets to use on Israel first chance they get? Irrelevant.

“The position of the EU is very clear. We want to see the opportunity for people to be able to move around freely, to see goods not only coming in to Gaza but exports coming out of Gaza,” Ashton said at her first stop, the Megapharm pharmaceuticals company.

Later, she told a news conference that “what needs to happen now is continued international pressure to move forward.”

Yes, because that’s what needs to happen now. Move forward. Hamas is still in charge and oppressing the populace in new and more misogynist ways, and the PA still refuses to sit down and talk peace with Israel. But sure, move forward. Speed for speed’s sake: That’s the way to do it.

The precious Gazans are, uh, wait—they’re not starving. They’re buying gold and cars and delicacies. So what, exactly, is the reason the Ashton is demanding that Israel open its border to a hostile entity? Because they “should”? Really? This is the same Catherine Ashton, mind you, who wrote in the New York Times that Gazans were starving, even though others pointed out that the smuggling industry was bringing tons of food and other items into the territory.

She’s not the only one with a plan. Let’s take a moment to examine Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s new plan for Gaza. He wants to completely seal Israel’s border with Gaza, lift the naval blockade and allow Gazans full access to their border with Egypt. He wants an international military force to guard the crossings, but not the blue helmets—he wants NATO and the French Foreign Legion. Then, he wants the EU to recognize Gaza as a separate entity and Israel can wash her hands of it completely.

The reaction from Hamas? Hell, no. Israel is the occupier and is stuck with Gaza as part of the whole Palestinian state deal. Of course that would be their opinion. They don’t want Israel to be able to show the world that an independent Gaza is nothing but a failed terror state, just as it is in the current Gaza.

As for the Eurocrats like Ashton, well, apparently, reality never manages to dim their eternal proclivity to blame Israel for all things wrong in the Middle East. I won’t be holding my breath that anything changes.

Posted in Gaza, Hamas, Israel, World | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

Israel makes Gazans shop until they drop

Posted on 07/18/2010 by Soccerdad

One of my proudest accomplishments in my blogging career was publicizing a photograph of Tony Blair’s repugnant sister-in-law (and British media celebrity) Lauren Booth shopping in a fully stocked store in Gaza. Others, such as Israelly Cool! and Elder of Ziyon picked it up immediately. Others followed. (How do I know I was the source, even when I wasn’t credited? Because I used Daylife not Yahoo! News as my source.) Eventually the photograph became something of a symbol of the deeply ingrained media bias against Israel.

Well history repeats.

Remember how a few weeks ago, President Obama said that the situation in Gaza was “unsustainable“?

President Obama said the situation in the Gaza Strip was “unsustainable” and that he would budget an additional $400 million to improve conditions there and in the West Bank.

Is this what was meant by unsustainable?

On Saturday night, the starving people of Gaza opened up a luxury mall.

At opening ceremonies attended by ministers and government officials, the Gaza Mall is a multi-story shopping center that includes food, clothing, perfumes, shoes, household appliances, office supplies and more.

The mall has a website, where we can see that it has air conditioning and parking, as well as delivery and other amenities that one would expect in any major mall.

So apparently Israel is now forcing Gazans to shop until they drop. The humanity!

More here. As noted above, I know how the Elder feels.

Crossposted on Yourish.

Posted in Gaza, Media Bias | Tagged | 3 Comments

Lies, damned lies, and Turkish lies

Posted on 07/18/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Apparently, lying runs in the Erdogan family. Mrs. Prime Minister Erdogan hosted a meeting with Palestinian businesswomen, and told them that Shimon Peres’ response to her husband at Davos in 2009 some of the things that Peres said that made her cry:

  • Hamas is anti-Democratic
  • The Hamas charter contains references to killing Jews
  • 1,167 Israelis died in terror attacks and over 8000 were wounded
  • 5,500 rockets and 4k mortars were fired by Hamas since they took over Gaza
  • Israel left Gaza completely
  • Israel supplies fuel and water to Gaza
  • Mubarak and Abbas accused Hamas, not Israel, for bringing on the Gaza war
  • Iran supplies rockets to Hamas and Hezbollah

Some of the “truths” that Erdogan said at Davos:

  • There were no rocket attacks after the cease-fire ended
  • The rocket attacks don’t kill anyone
  • Two former prime ministers told him that they felt happy when they entered the Palestinian territories in tanks

I swear, I’m starting to think that lying is absolutely ingrained in Israel’s enemies. I think they must be spoonfed lies about Israel from birth, and it just gets worse from there. It’s Orwellian in scope.

I hope you cry a lot more about Israel’s “lies,” Mrs. Erdogan. Because the truth, apparently, really does hurt you.

Posted in Gaza, Hamas, Israel, Turkey | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

What? No new posts?

Posted on 07/17/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Whoops. I was out having a life today.

I’ll be doing more of that tomorrow.

Posted in Site news | 6 Comments

Bazaar behavior

Posted on 07/16/2010 by Soccerdad

The New York Times reported earlier this week about protests against the Iranian government.

The Iranian government declared a sudden, two-day national holiday on Sunday and Monday, after a long-simmering dispute between President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Tehran bazaar erupted last week, leaving one prominent merchant dead, according to opposition Web sites.

Shopkeepers in Tehran’s traditional bazaar district called a strike last Tuesday to protest what was rumored to be a planned 70 percent rise in income taxes. The government denied the rumors, calling them a misunderstanding that resulted from a “mistake” in the way the plan was presented.

But a prominent textile trader was killed when pro-government militiamen and police officers raided the bazaar on Wednesday, demanding that shopkeepers reopen for business, opposition Web sites reported. One member of the textile merchant’s guild was said to have been arrested on Wednesday after addressing a crowd and calling for the strike to continue.

This is not the first time that the government of Iran has a afoul of the business class.

Now it appears that discontent has spread. The Times is now reporting:

Web sites reported that the bazaar in Isfahan was closed Thursday. In the northwestern city of Tabriz, the bazaar had been closed since Tuesday, a merchant said, and vendors said they would continue their strike to force the provincial authorities to retreat from the tax increase even if an agreement were reached in Tehran.

The traditional bazaars, a major economic institution in Iran, supported the 1979 revolution and have backed the Islamic government. Influential merchants are largely members of the conservative Islamic Coalition Party and have stood behind President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

But as Iran’s economic fortunes have sagged in recent years, Mr. Ahmadinejad has looked increasingly to the bazaar for new revenues. The strike and the senior merchants’ reluctance to intervene to end it are widely seen as signs of the bazaar’s increasing disenchantment with the president and his administration.

With everyone wondering about the possibility of an armed attack on Iran, not everyone’s paying attention to the forces inside the country that may be pressuring the government.

Additionally, there may be another external effort afoot going on to undermine the government.

Then, there was the odd case of the Tinners, a Swiss family of engineers long believed to be a cog in the network of nuclear proliferators organized by Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan. In 2008, Urs Tinner admitted that he had been a CIA asset. And it turns out that he may have played a crucial role in an effort to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program. According to The New York Times and other sources, the Tinners sold high-quality vacuum pumps to the Iranians and Libyans. The pumps are crucial for uranium enrichment because centrifuges must operate inside a vacuum seal. David Albright–the president of the Institute for Science and International Security and the author of a new history of Iran’s illicit procurement of nuclear technology, Peddling Peril — explains that, while the pumps that ended up in Iran and Libya were produced in Germany, they were also worked on by the Oak Ridge and Los Alamos laboratories. These labs, he says, modified the pumps “to bug them or to make them break down under operational conditions. If you can break the vacuum in a centrifuge cascade, you can destroy hundreds of centrifuges or thousands if you are really lucky.” (A senior intelligence official confirmed Albright’s information to me. It should be noted that not everyone agrees that the Tinners were the ones who sold these pumps to the Iranians and Libyans; Albright, for one, isn’t sure.)

Sometimes, these operations do not end well. Ali Ashtari, a high-tech electronics vendor, was hung by Iran in 2008 after he confessed to bugging the equipment of senior Revolutionary Guard figures with viruses and GPS units provided to him by Israel. Ronen Bergman, the top intelligence reporter for the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, believes that Ashtari was an “example of how someone–the Iranians claim it’s the Israeli Mossad — tried to sabotage the Iranian nuclear project by covert means, rather than an air strike.” Adds Bergman, “Ashtari was executed, but other entities continue to sabotage the project.”

But do sabotage efforts work? In late 2008 and early 2009, the IAEA began to see a drop in the amount of low-enriched uranium (LEU) being produced at Natanz, the facility that lies at the centre of Iran’s known nuclear weapons program. In the fall of 2008, its centrifuges were producing 90 kilograms a month of LEU. By the end of the year, however, the same centrifuges were producing 70 kilograms of LEU. To be sure, that number was back up to 85 kilograms per month at the close of 2009, and it has been climbing since, to around 120 kilograms a month; but those increases came after the installation of more centrifuges — all of which suggests that at least some of the machines were less efficient than they should be. (Ivan Oelrich, a nuclear scientist and the vice president of the strategic security program at the Federation of American Scientists, estimated in a study this year that the centrifuges are operating at 20% efficiency.)

It would be ironic – though apparently not likely – if the Iranian efforts to obtain nuclear weapons would be foiled by means other than military force.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Iran | Tagged | Comments Off on Bazaar behavior

The IHH and Erdogan: Partners in crime

Posted on 07/16/2010 by Meryl Yourish

The New York Times has investigated the IHH and discovered that it has deep ties to the Islamist Turkish government, including its Islamist Prime Minister—the one who has been working hard at ending Turkey’s relationship with Israel and cozying up to the Islamists in the Arab world.

The Turkish charity that led the flotilla involved in a deadly Israeli raid has extensive connections with Turkey’s political elite, and the group’s efforts to challenge Israel’s blockade of Gaza received support at the top levels of the governing party, Turkish diplomats and government officials said.

[…] When leaders of the charity returned home after nine Turks died in the Israeli raid, they were warmly embraced by top Turkish officials, said Huseyin Oruc, deputy director of the charity, who was aboard the flotilla.

“When we flew back to Turkey, I was afraid we would be in trouble for what happened, but the first thing we saw when the plane’s door opened in Istanbul was Bulent Arinc, the deputy prime minister, in tears,” he said in an interview. “We have good coordination with Mr. Erdogan,” he added. “But I am not sure he is happy with us now.”

The article substantiates the many ties between the Islamist AK party and the IHH, including the membership of IHH board members in the party, as well as an AK party candidate selling the Mavi Marmara to the IHH. This is something that was brought up long ago, that most of the news media chose not to investigate. So kudos to the Times for exposing the many government ties of the “peace activists” who attacked the IDF soldiers as they rappelled down to the ship. Turkish journalists have been writing about this for weeks.

“How can such a large country as Turkey, with interests in four continents, and with an export- and investment-driven economy requiring extra caution all around the globe, be dragged to the brink of war by a nongovernmental organization?” asked Semih Idiz, a columnist for the Hurriyet Daily News in Turkey, in a June 7 editorial. The answer, he added, is that the charity is a “GNGO” — a “governmental-nongovernmental-organization.”

The UN Human Rights Council is moving forward with its investigation on the flotilla incident. I will print out this post and eat it if they reveal that the Turkish government has ties to the IHH in their report.

Posted in Gaza, Israel, Turkey | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The IHH and Erdogan: Partners in crime

Anger management program dropouts

Posted on 07/15/2010 by Meryl Yourish

Language warning: It’s Christian Bale vs. Mel Gibson. Effing hilarious.

Posted in Movies | Comments Off on Anger management program dropouts

Do you believe in the Nobel Peace Prize, if Facebook tells you so?

Posted on 07/15/2010 by Soccerdad

A number of bloggers have noticed that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is campaigning for a Nobel Peace Prize.

I would have thought it was absurd, because
1) He is a doctor of Holocaust denial.
2) He provided the funding for the Munich Olympic massacre of Israeli athletes in 1972
3) He never took a position in opposition to Arafat’s orchestration of violence against Israel after Oslo.
4) He rejected an offer of peace from Israeli PM Ehud Olmert.
5) Even now he is “throwing a pie” at President Obama and refusing to engage in direct negotiations with Binyamin Netanyahu.

Since I first saw stories about this during the past week or so, I assumed this initiative was new. It isn’t. While I don’t know the provenance of this, there’s a Facebook page, Mr. Mahmoud Abbas ‘Abu Mazen’ for the Nobel Peace Prize.

There’s a message:

If Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin deserved this prize, how many of this prize do you think a REAL seeker of peace deserves?

To which Weasel Zipper would respond:

And why not? They gave one to Obama for doing nothing, one to Al Gore for creating a money-making hysteria and one to Yasser Arafat for killing Jews…

In order to promote his candidacy the Facebook page has an album showing Abbas with many world leaders. No, there is no picture of him with Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert or Binyamin Netanyahu. But there is a picture of him with an indicted war criminal.

Last year an editorial in the Washington Post observed:

“We must also take a decisive stance of solidarity alongside fraternal Sudan and President Omar al-Bashir,” said Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Mr. Abbas is hoping that the Obama administration will pressure Israel to stop building “illegal” settlements in the West Bank; the next time he utters the phrase “double standard” in the presence of a U.S. diplomat, we suggest a query about Mr. Bashir.

If you’re trying to make the case that your guy deserves the Nobel PEACE Prize, showing him cozying up to the Butcher of Darfur is probably not the best idea.

Really, I have no idea how official this Facebook page is. Still the message it promotes is at once absurd and revolting. On the other hand Yasser Arafat did win the Nobel Peace Prize so perhaps I shouldn’t dismiss it.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Posted in Israel | 3 Comments

Thursday briefs

Posted on 07/15/2010 by Meryl Yourish

And if they were Palestinian prisoners, this would be the number one news story in the world: Cuban political prisoners tell of horrible prison conditions, only 50 stories so far in the Google News aggregator. Because if it ain’t Jews, it ain’t news, or something.

Don’t be ridiculous, Israel can’t prosecute its own soldiers, that’s why the world wants to do it for her: Something that the world knows for a fact. No Israeli soldier will ever be held responsible for actions that are demonstrably wrong. Oh. Wait. Never mind, I guess Israel can police itself. Somebody notify the UN. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! I knew that would get a laugh.

The State Dept. toes the Palestinian line: Don’t worry, if Mahmoud Abbas runs out of excuses for direct talks with Israel, the State Department will help him find more. Destruction of illegal buildings? “Hurt chances for direct talks.” Palestinian incitement and intransigence? Business as usual.

Yeah, the blockade runners are pretty sure the IDF won’t be so nice next time around: I think the blockade runners may have gotten the point that the IDF won’t be allowing any ships into Gaza. The Libyan ship went to Egypt. I read somewhere that the captain said IDF missile boats had formed a “wall” blocking his entry. Well, duh. That’s what a blockade is supposed to be all about.

“Lone wolf” bomber pretty cozy with Taliban: Say, remember when the Times Square bombing first broke, and the Obama spokespeople told us that it was probably a one-off? A lone wolf? Not a coordinated attack by a terrorist organization? Shyeah, they were wrong. Guy’s in a video with the Taliban. Gee. Ya think maybe that schmuck who blamed his terrorism on losing his house might want to reconsider? By the way, this is old news. I saw it a few days ago and didn’t blog it. How many of you out there never saw this news? Uh-huh. I thought so.

Posted in Gaza, Israel, palestinian politics, Terrorism, World | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment