Archive for the ‘Israel’ Category

Here It Comes

17 March 2010

Veteran’s Today— “US Tells Israel: “You are undermining America, endangering troops.”

Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Clinton and Joint Chief’s Chairman Mike Mullen have all recently visited Israel on two issues, reliable information that Israel was planning an attack on Iran, a plan designed to push America into a war our leaders believe is both wrong and likely to risk a global nuclear confrontation with Russia and the building of a massive housing project on the Arab side of Jerusalem in violation of numerous agreements, a project that is likely to cause a spike in world terrorism and send thousands of new fighters to Afghanistan to face American forces there. This is the worst point in the history of the relationship between the U.S. and Israel since the founding of that nation in 1948 but these are not the only reasons, not these and the arrogant and intractable attitude of Israel’s leaders nor being caught in lie after lie, lies told to their financial backer and closest ally, the United States. … Unofficially, Israel has moved to the top of America’s “terrorist watch list” and is now drifting toward “evildoer” status, not only by the White House but, more broadly, through top defense officials who now perceive Israel as a threat to the United States.

We knew it was coming, we said it was coming, and we were called liars and racists. Well, there goes Israel, under Obama’s bus. Isn’t it about damned time for the Jewish love affair with the Democratic Party to end? (H/T: Buster Voodoo on the Outraged Spleen of Zion and New Class Traitor)

Hand Me the Dice, I’m Attacking Irkutsk

9 March 2010

According to FOX (H/T Nevergiveup), Vice President Joe Biden (in Jerusalem) just told Israel that the US is willing to stand by those who will “take risks for peace.” First of all, this comment denies the reality that Israel has always been the one to make concessions, and has always been the one strong-armed into making more. It also rests upon the completely unsubstantiated assumption that these concessions will, in any way, shape, or form; lead to “peace” – an assumption which is disproved by even the most casual glance at history. Finally, I take great umbrage at the use of the word “risk” in this context.

Risk noun – exposure to the chance of injury or loss; a hazard or dangerous chance.

That doesn’t even remotely describe what Biden is asking of Israel. To “take a risk” is to gamble, to take a chance, to face the possibility of failure. It also implies that success is an option. It’s not a “risk” when you know for sure, without a shadow of a doubt, that any overture you make to the Palestinians will (literally) blow up in your face. That’s not a “risk”. That’s an absolute certainty.

Face the Music

3 March 2010

Where I work, we’ve already been lectured about various “security issues” involved with social networking sites – threats involving viruses, espionage, risks to one’s security clearance, so forth – before the IT folks simply blocked some or all of those sites altogether. Apparently, the IDF has not been as pro-active, according to

The Israel Defense Forces called off a raid in Palestinian territory after a soldier posted details, including the time and place, on the social networking website Facebook, Army Radio reported on Wednesday. The soldier – since relieved of combat duty – described in a status update how his unit planned a “clean-up” arrest raid in a West Bank area, Army Radio said. … The Israeli military spokesman’s office had no immediate comment. …

We need a modern-day equivalent of the old “loose lips sink ships” warning – “Loose bytes end fights”? “Post your status and the enemy is at us”? In any event, I’m not even on Facebook anyway; and every story I read about them makes me less likely to ever join up.

Scientologists ‘Heal’ Haiti Quake Victims Using Touch

23 January 2010

It’s a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions. Send in the charlatans! — Amid the mass of aid agencies piling in to help Haiti quake victims is a batch of Church of Scientology “volunteer ministers”, claiming to use the power of touch to reconnect nervous systems. … “We’re trained as volunteer ministers, we use a process called ‘assist’ to follow the nervous system to reconnect the main points, to bring back communication,” she said. “When you get a sudden shock to a part of your body the energy gets stuck, so we re-establish communication within the body by touching people through their clothes, and asking people to feel the touch.” …

An “anonymous donor” paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to fly these flakes out to Haiti. Imagine how much actual help that much money could buy. (The article doesn’t say, and it would be churlish of me to speculate, whether or not these people acted with more speed and organization than President Obama.) Still, at least this cult is trying to help; for all the criticism and lies surrounding Israel’s presence in Haiti, one cannot help but notice the absence of any of her Middle East neighbors on the list of countries helping Haiti. But, back to the original article – how much “help” are these Scientologists providing?

…One US doctor, who asked not to be named, snorted: “I didn’t know touching could heal gangrene.” When asked what the Scientologists are doing here, another doctor said: “I don’t know.” Do you care? “Not really,” she said, wheeling an unconscious patient out of the operating room to join hundreds of others in the hospital’s sunny courtyard.

Scientology: It must be real science. They use beakers.

And Iran, Iran So Far Away

28 December 2009

For the first time ever, Israel has called ALL of its ambassadors and consuls home for meetings this week in Jerusalem. The meetings opened today. (H/T Gateway Pundit)

Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) — The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, headed by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Liberman, will host a conference next week (27-31 December) for Israeli Heads of Missions. At the conference, Israel’s ambassadors and consuls general serving throughout the world will discuss broad diplomatic and strategic issues. This is the first time a conference for all of Israel’s Heads of Missions has been held. The idea is to facilitate direct dialogue with the country’s leaders, mutual updates on major diplomatic issues, and a discussion of action plans to deal with the challenges awaiting the State of Israel in the international arena in the coming year, including the Iranian threat. … [emphasis added]

Oh please oh please oh please and about frickin’ time? Israel has known since before Bozo was inaugurated that he would protest strenuously any unilateral action on Israel’s part to impose bunker-busting “sanctions” on Obama’s buddies in Iran; perhaps by now Israel has realized how completely toothless any response Obama makes will be. He certainly hasn’t reacted with any decisiveness against the actions of any other country on Earth (apart from the one he’s trying to disassemble in North America); see his latest response to current events in Iran.

Foreign Minister Liberman will open the conference. Other officials invited to attend include Prime Minister Benyamin Natanyahu, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Minister of Intelligence and Atomic Energy Dan Meridor, Bank of Israel Governor Stanley Fischer, and senior officials of Israel’s diplomatic and security community.

You’d better not be getting our hopes up.

Pogroms in Jerusalem

2 December 2009

Thanks to a number of people up to and including Obama who refer to Jerusalem (the capital of Israel) as a “settlement” and try to limit any expansion there, Israelis are now facing actual violence for trying to move in there…

( A “welcoming” committee of Arabs and foreign anti-Israel activists, including those from the United States and Sweden, [emphasis added] attacked Jews with clubs and stones Tuesday as a new family moved into a home in eastern Jerusalem. Police stopped the attack but not before blood was streaming down the face of a Jewish guard at the site. The clash came as Sweden plans to present a proposal to the European Union that it recognize eastern Jerusalem as the capital of the Palestinian Authority, a step that would give the PA de facto status as a state and weaken Israeli sovereignty over the city.

Pardon me, but since when is the real country of Israel or the imaginary fairy-land of Palestine part of the European Union (or even the European continent)? Apparently, they were fooled by Israel’s entry a couple of years ago in the Eurovision song contest (which was also protested, both for their inclusion and for the politically incorrect content of their song):

Of course, we’re not surprised to see Americans involved in the stoning, given the current scorn of the current US government (which received the overwhelming majority of the Jewish vote) to Israel, nor are we surprised to see Swedish involved, given their media’s front page stories about ancient bullshit “blood libel”…

But what about the UN?

Following Tuesday’s addition of another Jew in the neighborhood, the United Nations issued a statement that the “secretary general has expressed his dismay at the continuation of demolitions, evictions and the installment of Israeli settlers in Palestinian neighborhoods in ‘occupied East Jerusalem.'”

But of course. As always, it’s the fault of the Jews for having the temerity to live and breathe. I would spit right now on all of the anti-semities and genocide-hopefuls, except that I’m waiting to catch H1N1 first so that my expectorations will really mean something. (H/T: Blogmocracy)

Latma on the PC Whitewash of the Hood Shooter

23 November 2009

A Modest Proposal

9 November 2009

Frequent topics of discussion are whether or not Israel should attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, and whether or not Israel could successfully cripple Iran’s nuclear industry (given the hardened and widely dispersed multiple sites. I’m going to take the “should” as read (of course somebody should, and it doesn’t look like anyone else is going to do it), and table the question of “could” – we won’t know whether or not Israel can successfully take out all or most of the sites until she tries. For many of us who believe as I do in the necessity and inevitably of these attacks, the only question is “When will Israel act?” (Which may also be phrased as “What the hell is Israel waiting for?” …But I digress.) If we agree that an attack by Israel is both necessary and inevitable, then the only point of discussion left (apart from the timing) is the nature of the attack. Will it be limited only to those known sites which are part of Iran’s nuclear program, or will there be other targets as well? This question is rarely addressed as everyone seems to assume that only the nuclear sites will be targeted. As a purely hypothetical thought exercise, however, I find myself wondering exactly why Israel should not have a broader agenda if and when she does attack; and what the repercussions would be.

First, on the matter of repercussions, I don’t believe that expanding the scope of attacks will result in a proportionate expansion of the repercussions against Israel. This is because the attacks against Israel are never reasoned or proportionate. If Israel takes any military action against Iran at all, she will be facing a new wave of Intifada from the Palestinians, another nave of attacks from Iran’s Hezbollah clients, further one-sided attacks by the United Nations and other left-leaning anti-Semitic transnational organizations, blood libel in European newspapers, calls for sanctions, calls fro boycotts of Israel products, etc. Most of this is already old news and business as usual for Israel; and since she is going to get this reaction regardless of what action she takes, there is absolutely no reason for her to show any restraint when that restraint will not in any way be noted or rewarded. It would most likely be seen as yet another sign of weakness. So, from the point of view of reprisals, there is no reason why Israel should not pursue a broader campaign against Iran than just her nuclear sites.

Please note that I am not talking about attacks on civilian targets. Israel tried harder than almost anybody to avoid civilian casualties; it is the Palestinians and Hezbollah who hide their rocket launchers behind the human shields of the populace who are committing war crimes, not the Israelis who go after the launchers. However, even if Israel manages to destroy the entirety of Iran’s nuclear program – all of the sites and equipment – that won’t do anything about their will to simply rebuild and reacquire the facilities to eventually obtain nuclear weapons, and there remain plenty of other nations (up to and including Russia) who are more than willing to assist them in this goal. So, in addition to removing the capability to acquire and use nuclear weapons, perhaps a second prong of the presumed Israeli attack ought to target Iran’s will to acquire and use nuclear weapons. This would involve additional attacks on Iranian military and government targets.

An attack on military targets would limit Iran’s ability to stage a reprisal against Israel with purely convention forces, and also leave it with (at the very least) the appearance of being weaker militarily to its neighbors (and internal dissenters). This would give the Iranian government far more things to deal with in the short range than to rebuild their nuclear program… Especially if any of the (surviving) high-ranking military personnel blank Iran’s nuclear program for the attack upon them in the first place, and see that any additional attempts by Iran’s government to acquire nuclear weapons could lead to additional attacks on the Iranian military. Other ways to distract the focus (and finances) of the Iranian government might include attacks upon the Iranian infrastructure, including oil wells, pipelines, major roads and rail lines, and so forth. All of these would take time and money to rebuild. It’s true that these attacks would be de facto acts of war against Iran; but then, simply attacking their nuclear facilities would also be an act of war. If you’re going to commit an act of war, you might as well go all the way.

Finally, there’s the issue of whether or not Iranian government figures and facilities would be viable targets. Israel has employed assassination against enemies before, so it would not be an unprecedented act on their part to target high-ranking members of the Iranian government. Even if they didn’t get Ahmadinejad, just the fact that they were willing to try once (and might be willing to try again) ought to “focus his mind.” After all, Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi got awfully quiet for a while after Reagan dropped a few bombs uncomfortably close to him; and he really got nervous when he saw what the US did to Saddam Hussein. Dictators couldn’t care less what you do to their citizens (odds are they’re killing far more of their own people already than you ever will) but they sure as hell care about their own skins. Ahmadinejad might not be overly frightened by the thought that Israel plans to bomb his reactors, but he’s bound to have an entirely different reaction to the thought that Israel plans to bomb him. Other dictators might also hesitate in their attempts to join the nuclear club if they knew that they, too, would be personally targeted.

So, as I said, just a “purely hypothetical thought exercise”. What do you think? If Israel’s going to attack Iran anyway (and isn’t it about damned time?) should they go for a broader range of targets? What do they have to lose that they won’t already face by going after a more limited set of targets?