Iran elects moderate?

Please don't be taken in by this "New Iran President is a moderate" bs. What else do you need to know about the new Iranian president

In his first interview, "The 64-year-old has said there will be "no surrender" to Western demands in talks on Iran's controversial nuclear program

Its a brilliant stalling technique, electing a so called Moderate. Does that mean he's in favor of cutting off just one hand of a thief instead of 2? Lull us into thinking we can, as our foolish president thinks, talk them out of nuks. While Rome burns, Obama fiddles. Jonathan Tobin and Fred Barnes were in Chicago this week and said that Obama still thinks he can talk them out of nuks.
With this nightmare President and a complicit world, Iran will get nuks, and that is a game changer for the world. Our Joint Chiefs of Staff chair said this week Iran is a national security threat to us. Obama is the only one who can really stop them, and despite his rhetoric, there is no way this guy has the guts to do it. But the hear no evil see no evil crowd will jump on this election in Iran as hopeful, while they add centrifuges each day and get closer and closer.

Don't think Iran won't use them

Iran's Apocalyptic Policy Makers - Saeed Ghasseminejad
Ayatollah Khamenei's closest advisors and followers are obsessed with the idea of Mahdi's reappearance. The Mahdi is the "hidden Imam" prophesied to dominate the world and cleanse it of sin and sinners. Khamenei's appointee at the Iranian Revolution Guard Corp, Ayatollah Ali Saeedi, regularly mentions this notion in his speeches to IRGC officers.
  While many experts tell us Iran is a rational, pragmatic regime like any other in the world, all the facts shout that it is not. A large number of Iranian officials and decision makers have deeply rooted apocalyptic beliefs. Underestimating this radical ideology even as the Iranian regime is on its way to building a nuclear bomb can lead to dangerously wrong conclusions. The suggestion taking hold of late that a nuclear armed Iran is not the end of the world may unfortunately be dead wrong. (Times of Israel)

Palestinians interfere in kotel controversy

Contentions

Why Palestinians Block Wall Changes

Jonathan S. Tobin | @tobincommentary 06.13.2013 - 1:55 PM

As I predicted two months ago, the prospects that Jewish Agency Chair Natan Sharansky’s fair-minded plan for changes at Jerusalem’s Western Wall will be implemented have run into an impassable obstacle. Sharansky’s plan was to create a third section of the Kotel that would create a space for egalitarian services that would remove a source of conflict between Orthodox and non-Orthodox worshipers. It has been met with generally good reviews among both Israelis and Diaspora Jews who don’t like the way this sacred place has become for all intents and purposes an open-air Orthodox synagogue rather than a place of pilgrimage for all Jews. But as nasty and as bitter as the infighting between Jewish factions may be, the real conflict in the city remains the one between Israelis and Palestinians.
The Jerusalem Post reports today that the Palestinian Authority’s religious affairs minister has said it will not permit Israel to change the entrance to the Temple Mount—which adjoins and looks down on the Wall Plaza—in order to expand the area where Jews may worship at the remnant of their ancient holy place. But the motivation of this veto isn’t pure spite. Just as they have used their power to set off violence and riots to protest even the most harmless alterations to the area in the last 20 years, Palestinian leaders are determined to stop Sharansky’s scheme in its tracks because they regard all of the Old City as not only theirs by right but a place that will be theirs in the event of any peace deal. Rather than this issue being a purely internecine conflict between women who wish to wear prayer shawls and read Torah and those Orthodox adherents who want to prevent them from doing so, the question of who is in charge at the Kotel still shrinks in significance when placed in the context of the Palestinian struggle to return to a period of history when Jews had no rights in Jerusalem.

The problem is that in order for Sharansky’s plan to be implemented, alterations must be made to the Mugrabi Bridge that provides access to the Temple Mount from the Wall Plaza. Israel has sought to renovate the bridge in recent years, a move that would only benefit Muslims and the foreign tourists who visit the mosques on the hill (Jews are forbidden to pray there), but it has been prevented from doing so by the demands of the Muslim Wakf which administers the Temple Mount.
The issue here isn’t just preservation of an ancient site in pristine condition since the Temple Mount has already been the scene of massive vandalism committed by the Wakf, which is determined to ignore or bury the evidence of the Jewish origins of the place. The Wakf claims the Kotel is theirs and rejects Jewish sovereignty over any part of it or the city that surrounds it as well as any association with Judaism or the history of the Jewish people. Palestinian Authority leaders and their media have repeatedly claimed that the ancient temples were not built on the Mount where Muslim conquerors subsequently built mosques, just as they deny the associations of the Jews with the rest of their ancient homeland. The rejection of the Sharansky plan is a function of the desire of the PA to exercise control over the entire Old City.
The PA and the Wakf don’t want to stop the expansion of the areas where people can pray at the Wall only because they wish to discomfit the Jews but because they envision administering it themselves in the future.
The dispute between the Women of the Wall and Orthodox authorities is a significant issue that can poison the relationship between Israel and the vast majority of American Jews who affiliate with non-Orthodox denominations. But the PA’s pronouncement is a reminder that the real fight in Jerusalem is not between Jews. So long as Palestinians are determined to reverse the verdict of history and return Jews to a subordinate status in their ancient capital, the spat between Jewish factions will have to wait.

Understanding Syria the Sunni Shiite battle

The Shi'ite crescent holds its ground

by Yaakov Lappin
Special to IPT News
June 13, 2013

http://www.investigativeproject.org/4045/the-shiite-crescent-holds-its-ground

Print

Send

Comment

RSS

Share:

Be the first of your friends to like this.

Developments in Syria are unfolding quickly, as the country's civil war takes new twists and turns every week, and the impact of the conflict on the Middle East (and beyond) is growing.

After two years of fighting and at least 80,000 casualties, it is possible to conclude that the Syrian civil war has degenerated into a long-term, regional, sectarian Sunni-Shi'ite conflict which has crossed into neighboring Lebanon and Iraq and threatens to spill over into Turkey, Jordan and Israel. No resolution to this feud is in sight.

Inside Syria, Syrian President Basher Assad's Allawite regime defied the predictions of many observers and held firm against the Sunni rebels seeking his overthrow.

In fact, Assad has begun to make gains against the rebels.

This is possible due to the growing presence of highly trained Shi'ite Hizballah battalions that, under Iranian orders, have mobilized from their bases in Lebanon and crossed into Syria to offer vital battlefield assistance to the Syrian regime's strained army.

This situation has sparked outrage across the Sunni world, and prompted Sunni religious and political figures to issue call for jihad against Hizballah, on behalf of the beleaguered Syrian rebels.

Assad hails from Syria's Allawite minority, and the Allawite sect is an offshoot of Shia Islam, the center of which is Iran.

For Iran, Assad remains its only state ally and strategic partner in the Middle East. Syria's strategic value for Iran is paramount, especially at a time when the region is awash with Sunni Islamist elements who view Iran and its Shi'ite satellites as threats and heretics.

Hizballah's deep involvement in Syria is stretching sectarian tensions in neighboring Lebanon to breaking point. Non-Shi'ite Lebanese leaders are openly describing Hizballah as a foreign Iranian entity. Such direct, public criticism was rare before the outbreak of the Syrian civil war, and indicates the collapse of Hizballah's credibility and image among Sunnis.

In retaliation, Syrian rebels have begun firing rockets from Syria at Shi'te areas in northern Lebanon that are Hizballah strongholds.

Additionally, Lebanese Sunni gunmen fired rockets at Hizballah's Dahiya district in south Beirut.
The northern Lebanese city of Tripoli is racked with gun battles between Sunni militias and armed Allawite elements loyal to Assad. The potential for a further spillover of Syria's civil war into Lebanon has risen.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar continue to fund and arm the rebels, while Turkey is providing them with territory to establish safe bases outside of the fighting zones in Syria.
Turkey and Qatar are keeping supply lines open to the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated rebels in Syria, while Saudi Arabia is providing support for the Salafi-jihadi fighters there.

Israel wants to avoid being dragged into the volatile events developing north of its borders.

From a strategic perspective, because of its role as a backbone in the Tehran-Damascus-Hizballah axis, the Syrian regime poses a far greater threat to Israel than the Sunni rebels.
The Sunni Islamist elements fighting against Assad are lightly armed and poorly organized. The more radical rebel elements could create limited security problems, which the Israel Defense Forces should be able to contain.
Assad's fall would weaken Iran, Israel's foremost foe, and damage Hizballah, the largest terror entity in the Middle East, which has 80,000 rockets and missiles pointed at Israeli civilians. Hence, from an Israeli perspective, the threats stemming from Assad's survival outweigh those posed by extremist groups among Sunni rebels, like Jabhat Al-Nusra.
Either way, the turmoil in Syria has made it more likely that pinpoint security incidents will end up setting off larger confrontations that could drag Israel into the picture.
One such threat is the transit of Iranian and Syrian weapons to Hizballah, a development Israel has made clear it would not accept.
Israel Observes as Sunnis Rage
Iran is supplying Syria with weapons and military advisers from its Revolutionary Guards Corps to help Assad gain victories over the rebels.
For the time being, Iran has successfully safeguarded its 'Shi'ite crescent,' a continuous chain of territories under its influence.
The crescent begins in Iran, stretches over Iraq (which has a majority Shi'ite population, an Iran-friendly government, and pro-Iranian militias), and passes through Syria. It ends on Israel's border, in southern Lebanon, where Hizballah maintains a heavily armed Iran-sponsored state-within-a-state among the Shi'ite population there.
According to Israeli intelligence estimates, Assad's regime controls roughly 40 percent of Syrian territory. That number is set to grow following the retaking of the strategic town of Qusayr, which occurred due to Hizballah's assistance.
Qusayr is a strategic location for both sides in the civil war. For the Syrian regime, it links Damascus to the Allawite heartland on Syria's Mediterranean coast. The Allawite population center is Assad's main base of support, and could one day form an Allawite enclave if Syria splits into mini-states. For the rebels, the Qusayr area, close to Lebanon, served as a transit point for arms and fighters.
Buoyed by the victory at Qusayr, the Syrian regime is now turning its sights to retaking the northern city of Aleppo. The reinvigorated regime also took the bold step of sending its tanks to the Syrian Golan, near the Israeli border, to retake the region from the rebels, and seizing the border town of Quneitra.
This is a dangerous move, as it violates the ceasefire agreement with Israel, and places heavy Syrian armor a stone's throw from the IDF. Israel reportedly warned Syria against this move, and Damascus replied by saying that the tanks were only there to fight rebels. Israel will be watching that development closely.
Iran's decision to send Hizballah into Syria was a key factor in turning the civil war back to Assad's favor.
With its forces now spreading out over Syria, Hizballah's influence – and potential confrontation zone with Israel – has grown.
"People have to understand that Hizballah is now a regional party," one of its fighters said in an interview with Lebanese news site NOW.
Israel has monitored these developments closely from the sidelines. Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon recently formulated the causes that would force Jerusalem to end its observer status and become involved in Syria.
"We are not getting involved in the civil war so long as our interests are not harmed, and so long as there is no attempt to transfer precise weapons, mainly by Hizballah, or an attempt to take control of chemical weapons or heating up the border and firing on our territory," Ya'alon said, in comments made public by the Defense Ministry.
Ya'alon noted that there were instances of attacks by the Syrian army on IDF positions on the Golan Heights, but added that the policy on returning fire was crystal clear: "As soon as our forces are fired on they are supposed to silence the source of fire." The IDF did this last month, and has since not been challenged by the Syrian army.
By contrast, the Sunni Muslim world has reacted largely with fury to the Shi'ite crescent's recent moves.
"How could 100 million Shiites (worldwide) defeat 1.7 billion (Sunnis)? Only because (Sunni) Muslims are weak," said leading Muslim Brotherhood cleric Sheikh Yussuf al-Qaradawi.
Describing Hizballah as "the party of Satan," Qaradawi called on able-bodied Sunnis to flood Syria and fight a jihad against it and the Syrian regime. "Every Muslim trained to fight and capable of doing that (must) make himself available," he said. .
"Iran is pushing forward arms and men (to back the Syrian regime), so why do we stand idle?"
An Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood member said his organization can send 12,000 men to fight Hizballah in Syria, according to a report by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). The Institute also cited religious scholars attending a Doha conference as calling for the "gates of jihad" to be opened "to liberate Syria from the Assad regime."
Hamas is in a particularly uncomfortable bind. Originally an ally of Assad, and once the proud recipient of Iranian aid, Hamas has abandoned the Syrian regime and fallen in line with its Muslim Brotherhood colleagues in Egypt in supporting the Sunni rebels.
This has cost Hamas dearly in Iranian financial support, with Iran cutting its aid program for Hamas in Gaza by $23 million a month.
East of Syria, the sectarian conflict has spilled over into Iraq. Nearly 2,000 Iraqis were killed in April and May in sectarian bombings and shootings alone. The upsurge in violence in Iraq – the worst since the 2006-07 sectarian strife – is a result of fresh Iraqi wounds being reopened by events in Syria. Sunnis in Iraq are feeling discriminated against and resentful of the Shi'ite Al-Maliki government in Baghdad, and are emboldened by the uprising launched by their fellow Sunnis in Syria. Al-Qaida-affiliated Sunni groups in Iraq, most notably the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), has set up fighting cells in Syria too, and is carrying out active combat and jihad missions in both states.
The Sunni and Shi'ite nature of the Syrian conflict is likely to keep the main players and their backers engaged with one another for years to come.
Unpredictability
As the conflict draws on, its most defining features are volatility and unpredictability. The battle has turned in Assad's favor now, but the rebels could rebound later.
And Western intervention remains possible if localized use of chemical weapons by the regime reoccurs. Russia, an Assad supporter, virulently opposes such an escalation, meaning this regional conflict could turn into a global showdown between Washington and Moscow.
In addition, Syria has what is probably the world's largest arsenal of Sarin mustard gas compounds and VX nerve agents, making the situation even more volatile.
Some 1.6 million Syrian refugees have fled their homeland, resettling in neighboring countries which are unequipped to care for them, and upsetting the demographic balance in places such as Lebanon.
Just south of the chaos, Israel is preparing itself for all scenarios, based on the understanding that a flexible military is best suited for dealing with an environment which is changing faster than ever before.
The Shi'ite crescent has proven its willingness and ability to safeguard Assad's regime, and those who were quick to eulogize the Syrian leader now know that when it comes to the Syrian civil war, prophecies are worthless.

Yaakov Lappin is the Jerusalem Post's military and national security affairs correspondent, and author of The Virtual Caliphate (Potomac Books), which proposes that jihadis on the internet have established a virtual Islamist state.

Phones

Israel and phones

First an old joke. In 1948 AT&T offered Israel to set up phone system.  Socialist Hisdatrut and labor who ran the country did not like capitalistic company coming in and said no thanks we can do it ourselves. So of course no one could get a phone in Israel, it took a year. One business man Shlomo went into complain and said he desperately needed one. Avner the bureaucrat  said no way. Shlomo said you mean I have no hope? Avner replied "shame on you. of course you have hope. our national anthem hatikvah means hope. We were given no chance and we are here. there is always hope. You have no CHANCE, but hope, always.

Then capitalism took Israel over. Now.
Waze Sale to Google One of Israel's Largest
Jewish state confirms its 'start-up nation' status with $1.03 billion deal
and


In 2012, the market penetration of smartphones in Israel stood at 35 percent, while so far in 2013 it has already gone up to 57%, a significant 22% rise. In Germany, only 40% of the population have smartphones and in France 42%, while Spain is closer to Israel at 55%.

Egypt and anti Semitism

- Egypt's Summer of Jew-Hatred Sohrab Ahmari
One element of Egyptian culture has remained constant since a popular revolt swept away Hosni Mubarak's pharaonic dictatorship: its virulent anti-Semitism.
  "Khaybar," a serial drama set to air during Ramadan (starting on July 8), is Egyptian TV's latest piece of hate melodrama. It depicts the Prophet Muhammad's conquest, in A.D. 629, of a Jewish community on the Arabian Peninsula. Ahmed Maher, a popular actor playing one of the Jewish villains said "Khaybar" sets out to depict Jews as "the ugliest slice of humans." "The show will be on when most Egyptian families are staying at home for Ramadan doing nothing but watching TV," Mina Rezkalla, a U.S.-based Egyptian activist noted. "The goal is completely outward anti-Semitism." (Wall Street Journal

First he nominates hagel for state and now this

Obama nominates viciously anti Israel Samantha powers to UN, replacing the lying Susan Rice (famously went on every Sunday morning talk show to lie for Obama that Ben Ghazi was caused by the video and not al quida) who moves over to national security advisor. :
POSTED ON JANUARY 30, 2009 BY PAUL MIRENGOFF
Last year, I wrote a series of posts contending that Power is anti-Israel, and at times viciously so. Here is a summary of my evidence:

In a 2002 interview, Power advocated investing billions of dollars to impose a Palestinian state. That investment would include the insertion of “a mammoth” and explicitly “military” force into the disputed territory. Last year, Power desribed this approach as “weird.” But it’s not that weird if you desperately want to tilt U.S. policy decisively in favor of the Palestinians.

Power’s anti-Israel sentiment is further apparent in her support of slashing, if not eliminating, military aid to Israel (an ally surrounded by 300 million people who wish to destroy her) and giving it to the Palestinians, whose charters (whether the Hamas or Fatah version) advocate the destruction of Israel.

Along the same lines, Power has spoken sympathetically about the notion of “alienating a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import [American Jews] and sacrificing…billions of dollars, not in servicing Israel’s military, but actually investing in the state of Palestine.”

Power’s unhappiness with American Jews extends beyond their support for Israel in issues relating to the Palestinians. Outrageously, Power has blamed deference to Israel and the “special interests” that support Israel for the U.S. intervention in Iraq. She does so in the face of evidence that Israel had no particular desire that we overthrow Saddam Hussein, and actually viewed that enterprise as a distraction from the more serious threat posed by Iran.

Power showed the depth of her dislike (if not hatred) for Israel when she blamed Israel for the tactics the U.S. has used in Iraq. She stated that our alleged “deference” to Israel has caused us “to replicate Israeli tactics, which, as the war in Lebanon last summer demonstrated, can turn out to be counter-productive.” Power did not state what she thinks these tactics were, but she seems to have had in mind the bombing of civilians which caused an international outcry. In any case, Power provided no evidence that Israel is to blame for whatever U.S. tactics she finds objectionable.

Still on the subject of Lebanon, Power has expressed outrage at the way Israel has treated the U.N.’s faux peacekeepers in South Lebanon, the ones who stood by while Hezbollah gained a dominant position and used it to commit aggression against Israel. In this connection, Power quotes (with no disapproval) the statement of Sergio Vieira De Mello, the subject of her hagiography, that the Israelis are “bastards.” Power also attributes Israel’s incursion into South Lebanon not to the terrorism launched against it from that area, but to the existence of dispossessed Palestinians and Israeli “insecurity.”

Power criticized the New York Times, which had promoted the bogus Jenin “massacre” story, for attempting to set the record straight through a headline that said “Human Rights Reports Finds Massacre Did Not Occur in Jenin.? Power thought the headline should have been about alleged “Israeli war crimes.”

Fortunately, the portfolio Obama has given Power bears no apparent relationship to Israel. But Power’s obsession with Israel, a nation that, in her twisted world view, is the source of so much mischief, raises the possibility of “portfolio creep.” Perhaps “The Monster,” Hillary Clinton, will provide a safeguard against this prospect