Rotten to …

In “The Mideast Core” The editors of the Washington Post argue

Ms. Rice should also discourage Israel from intensifying the ongoing conflict with Hamas-ruled Gaza by shutting off its electricity and fuel supplies. It’s hardly possible that Mr. Olmert will be able to negotiate peace with one set of Palestinians while waging war against another. Instead, Israel should be open to striking a cease-fire with Hamas and opening peace talks with Syria.

The logic here is, in a word, rotten. At the beginning of the editorial the editors were joyfully proclaiming “serious” talks between PM Olmert and President Abbas, then they show exactly how “serious” they truly are. A country’s first priority is to defend its citizens. If “highly inaccurate” Qassams are continually fired into Israeli territory, Israel ought to be defending itself regardless of who it’s negotiating peace with. After all wouldn’t it be a measure of the seriousness of the peace if Abbas would say, “We understand why you are doing this you must defend your people.” That, of course, is the rub. The Post knows how unserious these talks are. They aren’t about peace but about what Israel can do for the Palestinians – and get nothing in return. And they know that the moderate Abbas will never countenance Israel defending itself – even against Hamas who was throwing Fatah people off tall buildings a few months ago. But if Abbas can’t accept the how serious can the peace be? If the Post were serious about peace, it would be encouraging a real Palestinian (and Arab) change of heart. Instead, it just continually asks for Israel to do more and more with ever lessening (positive) returns.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

, .

Posted in Hamas, Israel, Israeli Double Standard Time, palestinian politics | 2 Comments

Live from the BBC today at 1:30 p.m.

I’ll be a guest on the World Have Your Say BBC radio programme (using BBC spelling in honour of BBC programme, must stop now). The topic: Should Ahmadinejad be allowed to lay a wreath at Ground Zero. The show starts at 1 p.m. EST, but I probably won’t be on until about 1:30.

Just got off the phone with a chap who asked me many background questions, including “Are you Jewish?”

“Is that relevant?” I asked.

“No.”

I don’t think an American radio backgrounder would ask me that. But it’s not like I hide it or anything.

He says the debate should be lively, but civil. Here’s hoping.

Think I’ll be the only one holding the opinion that Ahmadinejad shouldn’t even be let into the country?

Posted in Iran | 11 Comments

Terrorist reneges on pledge: Try not to be shocked

Gee, here’s a shock. One of the 180 terrorists who signed an agreement swearing that if Israel took him off a most-wanted list, he’d stop trying to murder Jews, was captured with—weapons and explosives.

Border Police special forces Sunday arrested a Fatah militant that had been pardoned by Israel some two months ago, on suspicion that he had resumed militant activity.

Fares Mansour, a member Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, was found in possession of explosives and weapons. He was one of around 180 Fatah militants granted amnesty by Israel two months ago in a deal with the Palestinian Authority.

Mansour, like all prisoners pardoned in the July deal, had signed an affidavit renouncing terror acts, however he was suspected of involvement in shooting attacks on Israel Defense Forces troops. Explosives, a rifle and a handgun were found in his home.

Way to go Ehud Olmert! Keep on pulling back on the policing, definitely release 91 Palestinian prisoners as a goodwill gesture, and oh yeah, while you’re at it, make sure you allow the Palestinians to police Nablus themselves. Because it’s not like Nablus is a hotbed of terrorists or anything.

Oh, wait. It is.

On Saturday, militants fired at an Israeli hitchhiker from a moving car on Road 60 in Israel’s South. The hitchhiker was not injured in the shooting, and the IDF began searching the area for the perpetrators.

During the search operation, troops entered a home where one of the militants, a Hamas chief in Nablus, was hiding under a bed upon which a pregnant woman was sitting, saying she did not feel well.

The troops looked under the bed and found the militant.

Posted in Israel | 3 Comments

Is Scott Adams antisemitic?

In a word, “no.”

I received an e-mail from a reader asking me to respond to a recent item in Scott Adams’ blog. (I have to admit that the foul language of the item is very offputting. Adams has talent, why he can’t express himself without an excess of 4 letter words is beyond me.)

It appears that this is the offending sentence:

Aren’t there any Iranian words for saying a set of historical facts has achieved an unhealthy level
of influence on a specific set of decisions in the present?

I’m sorry but I didn’t read this the way my correspondent did. Here was the previous sentence:

Furthermore, why does an Iranian guy give a speech in his own language except for using the English word “myth”?

Adams’ complaint wasn’t about the Holocaust. It was about Ahmadinejad’s use of the term “myth” to describe the Holocaust. Adams was noting that is was convenient for Ahmadinejad to use the English word myth, but not very convincing. So he mocked him, in the next sentence with his “historical facts” line. (I’m not sure when Ahmadinejad actually said “myth” in English, asAdams said.) But that’s Adams’s point, Ahmadinejad says myth; Adams, in his rant, says “historical fact” and then uses the phrase “unhealthy level of influence” to describe Ahmadinejad’s beliefs, not his own.

The construction is awkward, but I can’t make the inference that my correspondent made.

In a follow-up post Adams – mercifully free of expletives – wrote

With your indulgence, allow me to clarify.1. I am not happy that Hitler killed your relatives.
2. I do not support the killing of Americans
3. I do not support nuclear annihilation of Israel
4. I do not support the stoning of virgins in Iran
5. I believe the holocaust happened

I also don’t argue there’s a moral equivalence between Iran and the United States, or Israel and the Palestinians, or anyone and anyone else. Groups pursue their own perceived self interest. Arguing relative morality is an idiot’s game. Pointing out similarities in policies, and shaking the box, is good clean fun.

The tone is snarky and non-apologetic, and the politics are muddled. There’s a lot to disagree with. But I just don’t see him providing the comics version of Walt and Mearsheimer?

Am I being too generous? Let me know in the comments and if you blog and wish to comment on it, e-mail me and hopefully, I’ll link to you.

I see a couple of bloggers (at least) have registered their views what Adams wrote. Ranting to /dev/null seems to agree with me. Dossy’s blog OTOH, agrees with my correspondent, but unlike my corresponent, finds those views admirable.

UPDATE: via memeorandum
Daimnation reads Adams the same way my correspondent (Balashon – see below) does:

Yeah, Syria would be the new Singapore if it wasn’t for these pesky Zionists keeping them poor. And Israel’s need to control as much territory as possible explains why they gave the Sinai Peninsula back to Egypt. Reverse psychology, you see.As for a Palestinian “Gandhi,” I’d like to think Adams is saying he’s come under fire from Hamas or the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. But I have my doubts.

UPDATE II: Treppenwitz weighs in with his own thumbs down.

The post is such a well written bit of irony / sarcasm, and so disarmingly charming (despite the gratuitous swearing) in its mock rage, that one doesn’t immediately ‘get’ that his deadly serious intent is to criticize Israel and Jews.Reading the piece through the first time was like being a lone American at a dinner party amidst a bunch of Brits… grinning along with the well-bred banter for ten or fifteen minutes before realizing with dawning horror that the ‘colonial’ they’ve been making jokes about all evening is you.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Israel | 4 Comments

Uzi Mahnaimi and his misinformation

The stories about Israel hitting a Syrian/Korean nuclear facility have been coming fast and furious, and the most sensational are the ones in the London Times, penned by our old pal Uzi Mahnaimi. I would like to refresh your memory on some of the more spurious of his claims (the ethnic bomb that was supposed to target only Arab genes is the first and worst of his claims and, in fact, won me my title of “Master of Juvenile Scorn” during a blogwar several years ago).

There’s actually a very recent article by our man Mahnaimi that can be used to illustrate, well, how wrong he is. This is from June 17th:

ISRAEL’s new defence minister Ehud Barak is planning an attack on Gaza within weeks to crush the Hamas militants who have seized power there.

According to senior Israeli military sources, the plan calls for 20,000 troops to destroy much of Hamas’s military capability in days.

The raid would be triggered by Hamas rocket attacks against Israel or a resumption of suicide bombings.

Barak, who is expected to become defence minister tomorrow, has already demanded detailed plans to deploy two armoured divisions and an infantry division, accompanied by assault drones and F-16 jets, against Hamas.

And if that wasn’t breathless enough, there’s this conclusion:

A source close to Barak said that Israel could not tolerate an aggressive “Hamastan” on its border and an attack seemed unavoidable.

“The question is not if but how and when,” he said.

Let’s see, June 17th to September 24th, carry the one, um—suffice to say, more than three months have passed since Uzi Mahnaimi assured us in the Sunday Times that an attack on Hamastan was practically imminent, and definitely unavoidable.

Three months. Heading towards four.

When you read anything by Uzi Mahnaimi, add about three shakers of salt. And I have no confidence that his co-author, Sarah Baxter, has any legitimate sources in the Israeli Defense Forces, either. She co-authored one of the Mahnaimi pieces that purported Israel was about to attack Iran. As Allison Kaplan Sommers wrote about that article:

One thing is clear: Mahnaimi makes a regular habit of reporting that Israel is about to attack Iran. If his reporting was accurate, Iranian nuclear facilities would already be a smoking ruin – not once, but multiple times.

If you click the link to Allison’s PJM piece, you will find out exactly how many times Mahnaimi has claimed this. And Sarah Baxter is right there along with him for the ride on the last article. And just in case you’re not tired of the “Israel is going to bomb Iran” articles, they also wrote one about how America is planning to bomb Iran.

Read their words about Israel at your own risk. The truth is out there, but I don’t think it’s in the Sunday Times, no matter how many co-authors they give our man Mahnaimi. Once a liar, always a liar.

Posted in Iran, Israel, Syria | 4 Comments

Ahmadinejad: “Israel is not a nation”

I think this puts paid the deniers who say that Mad Mahmoud doesn’t want Israel destroyed.

PELLEY: Mr. President, you say you love all nations. I have to assume that includes the Nation of Israel.

AHMADINEJAD: Israel is not a nation. Well, we like the people, yes, because they are victims as well. They used to live in their own countries, in their own cities. They were given empty promises, false promises. They said that we are going to give you jobs, we are going to give you security. And they pushed the local Palestinian people out and made them refugees and also made refugees of another community. In other words, from thousands of miles away, people have been emigrating to this country and they are living in fear every day. And we feel for them. Last year in my speech I said that the Zionist entity should open the borders and the gates. Let the people decide where they want to go and settle. They are good people as well. We have no bones to pick with them. We are against terrorism. We are against wrong policies. We are friends with all people, Jewish people, Christians, different people of different faiths. We are, well, we’re in contact with them. Here in Iran there are Jewish communities; there are Christian communities; we’re all friends. Also, non-Muslim countries, we help them when a natural, let’s say, calamity breaks. We love all people. We are opposed to Zionism, occupation, terrorism, dropping bombs on behalf of people when they are inside their own homes, killing men, women, and children. Very openly I have said time and again that I oppose these.

PELLEY: If the Palestinians reach an agreement with Israel for a two-state solution, will you then recognize Israel as well?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, the decision rests with the Palestinian people. This is exactly what I’m saying.

PELLEY: What would you do, sir?

AHMADINEJAD: What I’m saying is that you should allow — oh, please, let me finish my thought. What we are saying, our solution for Palestine is a humane one. We are saying that you should allow the Palestinian people to participate in a fair and free election and determine their own fate. Whatever decision they take, everyone should go with that.

PELLEY: And if that decision . . .

AHMADINEJAD: No other party must interfere. We are not telling the Palestinian people what decisions they should take. Let them make their own decision. Whatever decision they take, we will go for that.

PELLEY: And if that decision is a two-state solution, you’re good with that? You could support a two-state solution?

AHMADINEJAD: Well, why are you prejudging what will happen? Let’s pave the ground first for a free and fair choice. And once they make their choice, we must respect that. All the people, all the Palestinian people must be given this opportunity, allow them to make their own decisions. Let us not tell them what course of action they need to take.

Notice that he never once commits himself to accepting Israel as a state. No shock there to me, but still—more proof of his genocidal intentions. Gee, tomorrow’s address to the UN is going to be interesting.

Posted in Iran, Israel | 2 Comments

Free speech for me, but not for thee

On the even of the Iranian president’s visit to America, where he intends to take full advantage of our freedom of speech, an Iranian news website that criticizes Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been shut down.

Tehran – The Iranian judiciary has closed down the news website Baztab which is critical of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s administration, ISNA news agency reported Sunday. Baztab manager Mohammad-Javad Barbarian told ISNA that the prosecutor office sealed the Baztab office last Wednesday upon a request by the Ahmadinejad government which had argued that a legally filtered website should not be allowed to work.

And gee, look who’s pulling Baztab’s strings:

Baztab is said to be actually run by Mohsen Rezaie, former commander of the paramilitary Revolutionary Guards and spokesman of the Expediency Council, a body meddling in legislative disputes and chaired by ex-president Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani, who currently leads the opposition to Ahmadinejad.

But hey, watch for Ahmadinejad to make some jabs at the people who tried to get his speech at Columbia cancelled. In fact, watch for Ahmadinejad to not answer a single question asked of him at that speech, in spite of Lee Bollinger’s insistence that there will be a “tough” question-and-answer session.

If Mike Wallace couldn’t get him to give a straight answer to the tough questions, you can bet no one in Columbia’s going to manage it, either.

Posted in Iran | 1 Comment

N or c?

The Times of London purports to report on the details of the Israeli raid into Syria including a new “detail” that Israel seized some nuclear material.
But as Hot Air and Israel Matzav point out, the reporter has been known for flights of fancy. (via memeorandum)

I wrote on Friday that there seemed to be more evidence to suggest that the target was chemical not nuclear weaponry and news reports are ignoring that angle.

The New York Times does suggest that the suggestion of nuclear material comes from Israel.

Even though the Israelis are whispering that there was a nuclear connection to the Sept. 6 attack, so far there has been no hard evidence that the North has ever tried to sell elements of its two nuclear programs. One of those programs, involving plutonium, is quite advanced, enough to produce six to a dozen nuclear weapons. But selling that fuel would be enormously risky, and perhaps easily detectable.

I guess, that “whispering” might mean off the record. I still haven’t seen a report that explicitly tied the nuclear charge to Israel. The Times does provide some interesting background though.

American officials are also studying at least two technology trade agreements between Syria and North Korea that were signed over the summer, trying to determine whether the arrangements may be designed for nascent nuclear cooperation between the two countries.“One has to balance the skepticism that the Syrians can build an indigenous nuclear program with the very sobering assessment that North Korea is the world’s No. 1 proliferator and a country willing to sell whatever it possesses,” said a former senior Bush administration official who once had full access to the intelligence about both countries, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was discussing intelligence assessments.

Though it has long sold its missile technology — to Syria, Iran, Pakistan and other customers — North Korea has never been known to export nuclear technology or material. Last Oct. 9, hours after the North tested its first nuclear device, Mr. Bush went in front of cameras in the White House to issue the North a specific warning that “the transfer of nuclear weapons or material by North Korea to states or nonstate entities would be considered a grave threat to the United States, and we would hold North Korea fully accountable of the consequences of such action.”

The problem with this story is that there are a lot of dogs not barking. And the one dog who did bark, was Bibi Netanyahu. Netanyahu spoke up to credit the government and (cynically) grab some of the credit himself. But why would he speak up if the raid wasn’t significant? Or was the significance simply that Israel was demonstrating its capabilities regarding Syria to forestall any more mischief to the north? Given the seeming complexity of the operation, I’d have to think that this was more than just a show of force. Which is why I have to believe that there was something more than missile parts involved.

Blue Crab Boulevard has a nice summary:

So, is it true? I have no idea. Neither, I suspect, do the reporters. What we do know is this: the Israeli government is not saying much of anything. In a country where leaking to the press is considered an art form – nothing. What is even more important: Syria, after a brief bit of whining, has shut up completely. They are silent about this whole incident. If they were innocent, they would be screaming from the rooftops. But, no, they are quiet.Logically, the conclusion then is that something very, very important was hit by the Israelis. Syria does NOT want the world to hear about what exactly got pounded. So this could be the real deal. Maybe yes, maybe no. But it is – completely – plausible.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

, .

Posted in Israel, Syria | 2 Comments

Israel vs. the terrorists

The IDF foiled what would have been a major terror attack in the heart of Tel Aviv, on the holiest day of the year.

A suicide attack in Tel Aviv was thwarted on Saturday when security forces found an explosives belt in an apartment in the city, designated to be used in an attack over the Yom Kippur holiday.

The belt was found Saturday morning in an apartment near the southern end of Allenby Street by the Shin Bet security service, operating with Yarkon District Police.

The apartment was occupied by Palestinians residing there illegally. It was apparently smuggled in parts from the West Bank City of Nablus.

The reason they foiled the attack is because the IDF has been working overtime to stop the ticking bombs, something that the Palestinian Authority is supposed to do, and yet, keeps failing.

The belt was intended to be used in an attack to be carried out by a suicide bomber who was arrested in Nablus late Thursday, after a three-day operation by the Israel Defense Forces and Shin Bet officers.

The IDF had deployed large forces in the Beit Ilma refugee camp in Nablus, in an effort to capture a cell of militants that included members of Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

The security services had received intelligence information that the cell was planning to carry out a suicide bombing attack in central Israel during the holidays.

The captured terrorists gave up their safe house. But there was damage: A young Israeli soldier lost his life to stop this attack from happening.

As I said yesterday, this is the time of year that terrorists most want to murder Jews, knowing it is the holiest day of our year, and thinking to catch the IDF napping like they did during the 1973 Yom Kippur War. There is a different name for that war in the Arab and Muslim world. Keep reading to find out.

Now, let’s look how Israel respects Muslims’ holy days.

The release of some 100 Palestinian prisoners is expected to be approved by the government Sunday, as a goodwill gesture for the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

Let’s compare: Muslim gestures to Jews for the holiest time of the year: Trying to murder mass amounts of Jews with bombs. Jewish gesture to Muslims during their holiest time of the year: Forgiveness and freedom.

These gestures are wholly ignored the by likes of Jimmy Carter, who insist that Israel is the problem here.

Oh, that other name for the Yom Kippur War? The Ramadan War.

Posted in Religion, Terrorism | 6 Comments

G’mar hatima tova

An easy and meaningful fast to all my Jewish readers.

This blog will be going dark until after my Saturday night break-fast.

You wouldn’t want me blogging on an empty stomach, anyway. You have no idea how crabby I get by sundown.

As Jews all over the world fast and pray on this Day of Atonement, I would like to point out that Israel is forced to enact a full closure on the West Bank, and set her armed forces to the highest alerts—because today is the day that terrorists most crave murdering Jews.

And now is the time of year for me to say: If I offended any of you, I ask your forgiveness. It wasn’t intentional. (Unless you’re a Jew-hater. Then it was.) Yeah, I know, that’s probably not how it’s supposed to work. But I have a problem with forgiveness. I’m working on it.

If you’re not Jewish, and want to help out this Yom Kippur, donate food to your local food bank. They tend to always need peanut butter, canned fish, canned soups, vegetables, and pasta.

Posted in Holidays, Religion | 1 Comment

More on the Gaza “hostile territory” designation

The Jerusalem Post says the designation of Gaza as a hostile entity is a prelude towards dumping responsibility for Gaza back to Egypt—who, I’m sure, doesn’t want the responsibility. I wonder how that’s going to go over.

A day after the cabinet defined the Gaza Strip as “hostile territory,” The Jerusalem Post learned Thursday that the IDF is working on a proposal that calls for a “complete disengagement” from the Gaza Strip – involving the closure of all border crossings with Israel and the transfer of all responsibility over the Palestinian territory to Egypt.

[…] While Israel removed its military positions and settlements from the Gaza Strip in 2005, it has maintained a certain level of responsibility for the Palestinian population there, including coordinating the Gaza-based activities of humanitarian organizations such as UNRWA, the World Bank and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

According to the proposal, which officials stressed was in its early stages, Israel would completely disconnect from Gaza by closing off the Erez, Karni, Sufa and Kerem Shalom crossings and instead directing humanitarian organizations to work with Egypt.

“The idea is to finalize what was started with the 2005 ‘disengagement,'” explained a senior defense official. “No matter how much we try and what we do, the humanitarian organizations consistently blame us for the humanitarian situation in Gaza. This way they will no longer have a case against us, since we won’t be involved.”

[…] The parallel being suggested is southern Lebanon, which is home to Hizbullah guerrillas and their weapons but, following Israel’s withdrawal from its security zone there to the international border in 2000, is plainly no longer under Israel’s responsibility.

Could they have picked a worse example? Granted, Lebanon is no longer Israel’s responsibility, but gee, look at all the rockets in southern Lebanon aimed at Israel.

I think that it’s a good idea to completely disengage from Gaza in one respect—in that the world would no longer be able to blame Israel for the events within Gaza. Except for the fact that they will always blame Israel. The world will never let Israel take anything but the blame for the plight of the Palestinians. The world will never place the blame on the Palestinians, being stuck forever on the “oppressed” and “oppressor” roles. The world will never stop using this as a club to beat Israel.

And I’m sure the world will rise up as one and try to prevent Israel from shedding any responsibility for the Gaza Strip. They’re already freaking out at the prospect of Israel shutting off the fuel and power. Funny how you don’t see anyone considering ways to help Gaza create its own fuel and power sources. But then, you heard nothing about the destruction of the Gaza greenhouses after the disengagement, either. It doesn’t fit the narrative of helpless Pals vs. oppressing Israelis.

Posted in Gaza, Israel | 2 Comments

Star Trek statistics: The Red-Shirt Phenomenon

File this under: Never underestimate the power of a Trekkie to write yet another treatise on an aspect of Star Trek (TOS) that you never really thought about. This guy has analyzed the statistics on the Red-Shirt Phenomenon in Star Trek.

The basic stats:
The Enterprise has a crew of 430 (startrek.com) in its five-year mission. (Now, I know that the show was only on the air for 3 years, but bear with me. 80 episodes were produced, which gives us the data to build from.) 59 crewmembers were killed during the mission, which comes out to 13.7% of the crew. So, that will be our overall conversion rate, 13.7%.

Data Segmentation:
However, we need to segment the overall mortality (conversion) rate in order to gain the specific information that we need:

  • Yellow-shirt crewperson deaths: 6 (10%)
  • Blue-Shirt crewperson deaths: 5 (8 %)
  • Engineering smock crewperson deaths: 4
  • Red-Shirt crewperson deaths: 43 (73%)

So, the basic segmentation of factors allows us to confirm that red-shirted crewmembers died more than any other crewmembers on the original Star Trek series.

Please do follow the link. It’s funny, entertaining, and informative.

Hat tip: Janet P.

Posted in Humor, Pop Culture | 1 Comment

A big hole in the desert (and in the story)

It’s been a bit disquieting to read the newspapers lately. Something big is possibly happening and little if any reporting is being done about it. Until yesterday.

Yesterday’s Washington Post ran an editorial Shock Waves from Syria:

Media accounts are beginning to converge on a report that Israel bombed a facility where it believed Syria was attempting to hatch its own nuclear weapons program with North Korea’s assistance. The Post’s Glenn Kessler reported that the strike came three days after a ship carrying material from North Korea docked at a Syrian port and delivered containers that Israel believes held nuclear materials. It’s not clear whether U.S. intelligence agencies concur with Israel’s conclusion, and independent experts have said that Syria lacks the resources for a credible nuclear weapons program.

The previous Glenn Kessler articles are here and here. The independent expert is apparently Joseph Cirincione who told Foreign Policy Passport

This story is nonsense. The Washington Post story should have been headlined “White House Officials Try to Push North Korea-Syria Connection.”

This is a political story, not a threat story. The mainstream media seems to have learned nothing from the run-up to war in Iraq. It is a sad commentary on how selective leaks from administration officials who have repeatedly misled the press are still treated as if they were absolute truth.Once again, this appears to be the work of a small group of officials leaking cherry-picked, unvetted “intelligence” to key reporters in order to promote a preexisting political agenda. If this sounds like the run-up to the war in Iraq, it should. This time it appears aimed at derailing the U.S.-North Korean agreement that administration hardliners think is appeasement. Some Israelis want to thwart any dialogue between the U.S. and Syria.

To which Kessler responded

All I can say in response is that I (and a number of uncredited colleagues) spent more than week knocking on doors of many agencies, seeking answers. No one tried to wave us off the story, including people who normally I thought would have tried their best to prevent us from printing it. I did note a number of caveats and explained that Syria never had much of a nuclear program. There appears to be a connection to the Israeli raid, which is now the subject of some of the tightest censorship in years.

To many “independent experts” the Bush administration is a bunch of out of control psychopaths looking for any excuse to go to war, whereas Kessler notes that even the more levelheaded members of the government believe that there’s something there. (Yes, there’s something missing in all this reporting, which I’ll get to later.)

Today there’s been a proliferation of American reporting on the topic. The Washington Post reported Israel, U.S. Shared Data On Suspected Nuclear Site and secrecy seems to be affecting every part of the story

The target of Israel’s attack was said to be in northern Syria, near the Turkish border. A Middle East expert who interviewed one of the pilots involved said they operated under such strict operational security that the airmen flying air cover for the attack aircraft did not know the details of the mission. The pilots who conducted the attack were briefed only after they were in the air, he said. Syrian authorities said there were no casualties.U.S. sources would discuss the Israeli intelligence, which included satellite imagery, only on condition of anonymity, and many details about the North Korean-Syrian connection remain unknown. The quality of the Israeli intelligence, the extent of North Korean assistance and the seriousness of the Syrian effort are uncertain, raising the possibility that North Korea was merely unloading items it no longer needed. Syria has actively pursued chemical weapons in the past but not nuclear arms — leaving some proliferation experts skeptical of the intelligence that prompted Israel’s attack.

The secrecy leads to this conclusion

“There is no question it was a major raid. It was an extremely important target,” said Bruce Riedel, a former intelligence officer at Brookings Institution’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy. “It came at a time the Israelis were very concerned about war with Syria and wanted to dampen down the prospects of war. The decision was taken despite their concerns it could produce a war. That decision reflects how important this target was to Israeli military planners.”

(Bruce Riedel, whom you might recall from yesterday’s news apparently wears many hats. Yesterday he “… was a negotiator in the 2000 Camp David effort.”)

The NY Times finally does a little more reporting on the topic with Bush Declines to Lift Veil of Secrecy Over Israeli Airstrike on Syria.

One former diplomat who has spoken to Israelis involved in the decision to attack said the airstrike was aimed at what Israel believed to be a Syrian nuclear program in cooperation with North Korea. The two countries already have a relationship that has concentrated on missile technology, which North Korea has long exported.The former diplomat, along with current and former American and Israeli officials, said a shipment of North Korean material labeled as cement arrived by ship three days before the attack. That material was transferred to a facility, which Israel bombed.

Current and former American and Israeli officials have said the Israelis gave the Bush administration advance notice of the attack.

While the article also finds plenty of sources skeptical about the nuclear angle, there is an acknowledgment that Israel did something out of the ordinary.

Charles Krauthammer has valiantly tried to tie all the loose ends together, in Middle East Volcano (or here).

Tensions are already extremely high because of Iran’s headlong rush to go nuclear. In fending off sanctions and possible military action, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has chosen a radically aggressive campaign to assemble, deploy, flaunt and partially activate Iran’s proxies in the Arab Middle East:

(1) Hamas launching rockets into Israeli towns and villages across the border from the Gaza Strip. Its intention is to invite an Israeli reaction, preferably a bloody and telegenic ground assault.

(2) Hezbollah heavily rearmed with Iranian rockets transshipped through Syria and preparing for the next round of fighting with Israel. The third Lebanon war, now inevitable, awaits only Tehran‘s order.

(3) Syria, Iran’s only Arab client state, building up forces across the Golan Heights frontier with Israel. And on Wednesday, yet another anti-Syrian member of Lebanon’s parliament was killed in a massive car bombing.

(4) The al-Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard training and equipping Shiite extremist militias in the use of the deadliest IEDs and rocketry against American and Iraqi troops. Iran is similarly helping the Taliban attack NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Why is Iran doing this? Because it has its eye on a single prize: the bomb. It needs a bit more time, knowing that once it goes nuclear, it becomes the regional superpower and Persian Gulf hegemon.

Krauthammer earlier in his essay wrote

Second, there are ominous implications for the Middle East. Syria has long had chemical weapons — on Monday, Jane’s Defence Weekly reported on an accident that killed dozens of Syrians and Iranians loading a nerve-gas warhead onto a Syrian missile — but Israel will not tolerate a nuclear Syria.

All the MSM reporting and speculation has centered around a Syrian nuclear program. But what if the raid is somehow related to that chemical explosion a few weeks ago? Maybe the latest shipment wasn’t a new type of weapon but the expansion of Syria’s existing chemical program?

Meryl Yourish had already noted that the summer’s explosion probably involved Iran. Israel Matzav provides reasons why he believes that the Israeli target was chemical not nuclear. The Hashmonean doesn’t rule out the nuclear angle but concludes

Channel 10 reports local area hospitals had to treat many of the injured from the event, among them over a dozen Iranian technicians.. Makes further mention of the Iranian Syrian defense pact signed last year, stipulating one of the key areas of cooperation? The adapting / arming of Syrian Scud arsenals with chemical weapons.

(Emphasis mine.)

Could it be then that Krauthammer’s overall analysis is correct even is one detail is wrong? Iran is ratcheting up tensions in order to be able to complete its nuclear program. However, the WMD in the picture are not nuclear but chemical. I realize that neither Israeli nor American officials need to disabuse journalists of their mistaken speculations. However, why aren’t these reporters tying the Israeli strike to the chemical explosion?

And was PM Olmert’s expression of admiration for Syria meant as a taunt?

UPDATE: More at Memeorandum.

UPDATE II: via Small Wars JournalCon Coughlin’s reading of the situation is alarming.

But judging from the small scraps of information that have emerged, it would be fair to conclude that a new axis of evil is under construction, with Syria assuming Iraq’s place. But unlike Iraq, Syria has well-documented links to the pariah regimes in North Korea and Teheran, and is cooperating with them on a range of projects, from the acquisition of long-range ballistic missiles to the development of chemical and nuclear weapons. The failure to find ready-to-use stockpiles of WMD in Iraq following Saddam’s overthrow may have seriously undermined the coalition’s justification for invading Iraq, but no such doubts exist about Syria’s capability. Even before the Israeli raid, Syria had been identified by a number of intelligence and government agencies as possessing the largest and most advanced chemical weapons capability in the Middle East. Moreover, unlike Saddam’s Iraq, Syria has the delivery systems to make them a palpable threat.

UPDATE III: Buzztracker 1, 2, 3.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

, , , .

Posted in Iran, Israel, Media, Syria | 4 Comments

Talking to Mahmoud: Waste of time

Columbia University’s president, Lee Bollinger, says that we should allow Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a chance to speak. He’s going to ask the tough questions, he says, and force Ahmadinejad to answer them.

The event will be part of the annual World Leaders Forum, the University-wide initiative intended to further Columbia’s longstanding tradition of serving as a major forum for robust debate, especially on global issues.

In order to have such a University-wide forum, we have insisted that a number of conditions be met, first and foremost that President Ahmadinejad agree to divide his time evenly between delivering remarks and responding to audience questions. I also wanted to be sure the Iranians understood that I would myself introduce the event with a series of sharp challenges to the president….

There will be no robust debate. One thing you have to hand to Ahmadinejad is that he’s superb at avoiding questions he doesn’t want to answer, turning the issues around on the questioner, and refusing to answer the tough questions like the ones Bollinger thinks are going to be asked.

Case in point: Ahmadinejad’s 60 Minutes interview with Mike Wallace last year.

Wallace tried to ask him about Hezbollah’s use of missiles, rockets furnished by Iran, but he wanted to talk about Israel’s attacks with American bombs.

“The laser-guided bombs that have been given to the Zionists and they’re targeting the shelter of defenseless children and women,” the president said.

“Who supports Hezbollah?” Wallace asked. “Who has given Hezbollah hundreds of millions of dollars for years? Who has given Hezbollah Iranian-made missiles and rockets that is making — that are making all kinds …” he continued as he was interrupted.

“Are you the representative of the Zionist regime? Or a journalist?” Ahmadinejad asked Wallace.

Note how easy he accuses someone who contradicts him of being a Zionist. This is typical of Ahmadinejad’s style. He tries to put the spotlight on the person asking the question he won’t answer. It’s easier to dodge and accuse than to stick to the facts of the question, which was Iran’s multi-million dollar investment in Hezbollah over the decades. The question remained unanswered.

Ahmadinejad also likes to play a game where he refuses to acknowledge even obvious facts. Look what he does in his latest 60 Minutes interview, as excerpted by Matt Drudge:

PELLEY: Sir, what were you thinking? The World Trade Center site is the most sensitive place in the American heart, and you must have known that visiting there would be insulting to many, many Americans.

AHMADINEJAD: Why should it be insulting?

PELLEY: But the American people, sir, believe that your country is a terrorist nation, exporting terrorism in the world. You must have known that visiting the World Trade Center site would infuriate many Americans.

AHMADINEJAD: Well, I’m amazed. How can you speak for the whole of the American nation?

PELLEY: Well, the American nation–

AHMADINEJAD: You are representing a media and you’re a reporter. The American nation is made up of 300 million people. There are different points of view over there.

In fact, the reporter is not representing either the media, or the American people. He is asking Ahmadinejad a simple question, and pointing out the nationwide outrage that was sparked by news of his visit to Ground Zero. This is not a difficult thing to have picked up—it was on the internet, in the news, and in the blogosphere at the speed of light. And what’s more, Ahmadinejad knew this. But it serves his purpose to prevaricate, to turn the issue around on a journalist who quite frankly does have a damned good idea of what 300 million Americans think of the president of Iran. He’d have to be an utter moron not to be able to make that connection. But once again, Ahmadinejad is avoiding the question. It’s what he does.

He did the same thing with the Council on Foreign Relations last year:

Martin S. Indyk, who has served twice as the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, and a tour as assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, noted he had endeavored during the Clinton administration to work out a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, but that Iranian-supported terrorists “did everything possible” to prevent it. The Iranian president again repeated what he has said before, namely that all Palestinians should “decide” their future.

[…] Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, said “Iranian journalists are imprisoned and newspapers are closed” and that “elections are not free.” He added: “You speak of the rights of Palestinians but Iran provided rockets to Hezbollah that killed Palestinians in Israel. Would you be willing to change your policies at home?” This led Ahmadinejad to claim that his country was freer than the United States.

“Please don’t allow yourself to be involved in the domestic politics of other countries or there is much more we can all say. If you think you can affect our people with your statements you are wrong. We had free elections—I spoke with people and they chose me. This is a unique, pure democracy, which is impossible in your country. Which country is freer and more democratic? I am ready for an independent discussion on this. Let people decide for themselves. By creating a wind now you are creating a bigger storm,” Ahmadinejad said.

The man prevaricates, dodges, shifts the focus, does not answer the question, and flat-out lies. There is nothing positive that can come from his speaking at Columbia, other than yet another public relations victory for the man from Tehran. I’d love to see him go up against someone like, say, Michelle Malkin, but I know how it would turn out: He would refuse to answer the questions, accuse Michelle of being a Zionist stooge, tell her she doesn’t speak for Americans, and get yet another soapbox for his venom and lies.

There is no value in an Ahmadinejad soapbox at an American university, except, apparently, for the prestige that university thinks the visit brings. I’m of the opinion that the prestige of having an Ahmadinejad visit is right down there in the dirt with a visit from the likes of David Duke—whom Ahmadinejad invited to speak at the Tehran Holocaust denial conference last year. They’re two of a kind on at least one issue: That of Israel, and the Jews.

Bollinger should be ashamed of himself. There are some people who don’t deserve a platform. Ahmadinejad is one of them.

Posted in Iran | 3 Comments

Explaining the “enemy entity” framing of Gaza

Herb Keinon tells us why the Israeli Cabinet termed Gaza an enemy entity:

A source who spoke on condition of anonymity explained that the term “hostile territory” was not a legal concept but rather the description of a practical fact. The government is saying that Gaza has been hijacked by terrorists. Hamas is not the lawful government of a sovereign state but it is effectively in charge. In these circumstances, the Gaza Strip is a “hostile territory.”

Why did the government decide to declare it so even though the term has no basis in international law? It was essentially a warning notice to the world that Israel intends to treat the Gaza Strip differently than it has until now and to apply measures it has not used before.

The announcement put out by the security cabinet after the decision was unanimously approved on Wednesday gives some inkling of what these measures will include. According to the statement, “Additional sanctions will be placed on the Hamas regime to restrict the passage of various goods to the Gaza Strip and to reduce the supply of fuel and electricity. Restrictions will also be placed on the movement of people to and from the Gaza Strip. The sanctions will be enacted following a legal examination, while taking into account both the humanitarian aspects relevant to the Gaza Strip and the intention to avoid a humanitarian crisis.”

I guess the main question now is: Will the Cabinet follow through?

No matter what Israel does, the world will condemn her.

Posted in Gaza | 4 Comments