Wednesday, July 2, 2008

From Other Sites on the Line: 3 Jul 08


















Civil War in Sweden?



Cross posted from Gates of Vienna
Hat tip to Snooper at http://anewtone.com/

Wednesday, July 02, 2008
by Baron Bodissey

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.


During an online poll at the national newspaper Aftonbladet, almost half of the readers voted “yes” to a question of whether a civil war is possible in Sweden. I know online polls don’t always reflect the public opinion, but still… This is in a country where there is virtually zero debate about mass immigration, which continues at full speed.My personal opinion is that Sweden is not the most likely candidate for the first civil war, simply because people need to fight back to create a civil war. It takes two to tango. The same for France, which is demographically speaking the worst country, and where a kind of war is waged by immigrants in the streets right now, but where nobody fights back. The Germans won’t go first, either; they are too tied down by their history.My bet is still on Britain for the first full-blown Eurabian civil war, with the Netherlands as a close second, and possibly Denmark. Italians will fight back. I don’t know if the Spanish will.In general, if you live in any Western European country, you should arm yourself very soon, one way or the other.- - - - - - - - -Sverige minner om Libanon— Fjordman

PS: I’m still working on the essays for the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and France regarding Islamization, and will possibly write one for the former Communist countries in Eastern Europe regarding Multiculturalism and the EUSSR. If somebody has some suggestions for any of these texts, they can post them online at Gates of Vienna. If I like the text, it will be included in the book “Defeating Eurabia,” which will be made available online within the coming month. I may credit you as “blog reader X” if your contribution is used, but you must be willing to share it for free, as I do.PPS: One of my texts from three years ago. Especially the final two paragraphs are still relevant: Is Swedish Democracy Collapsing?


A note from Radarsite: For many Americans the concept of actual civil war breaking out in Europe may seem a bit far fetched. Yes, we admit, they are having some difficulties with their immigrant Muslim populations. And, yes, these Muslim immigrants have so far seemingly resisted the idea of assimilation into their European host countries, and have brought with them their backward and barbaric Shari'a laws -- but, civil war? Surely things haven't progressed that far, have they?

Have they?

I fear that we have heard these same hollow voices expressing these same hollow doubts before. In 1938, throughout Europe and Britain, and here in the USA, one could hear thousands of these same voices, expressing this same incredulousness. After the unspeakable horrors and incalculable losses of that Great War, how could rational and sane people even think of contemplating another bloodbath? The very idea was insane. Surely things haven't progressed that far, have they? They asked each other and shook their heads in disbelief.

Look closely, my friends, and understand. Inexorably, all of the necessary elements are coming together. From across the seas we can only watch helplessly as these fateful events unfold, one upon the other. The racial riots in the Parisian suburbs, the violent and unchecked rampaging of "Asian" gangs throughout almost all of the major European capitols, the soaring crime rates, the increasing loss of cultural identity, the seething frustration and the bitterness of those beleaguered indigenous peoples, the Swedes, the Danes, the French and the Brits. These hapless victims of their own Socialist multicultural governments, these occupied nations.

Have things really progressed that far?

Unfortunately, to this particular observer it appears increasingly imminent that the traditional nations of Europe will be forced to choose between two equally unpleasant options: the national humiliation of inundation and subjugation, or the horrors of civil war?

Is there a third option?

Iowa Versus Louisiana: Racist Propaganda or a Disruptive Truth?



Cross posted from WVW News.net

Iowa Versus Louisiana


When will we hear Governor Chet Culver say that he wants to rebuild a 'vanilla' Iowa , because that's the way God wants it?

Just a personal observation...as I watched the news coverage of the massive flooding in the Midwest with over 100 blocks of the city of Cedar Rapids, Iowa under water, levees breaking, and the attention now turned downstream for when this massive amount of water hits the Mississippi, what amazed me is not what we saw, but what we didn't see...

1. We don't see looting.
2. We don't see street violence.
3. We don't see people sitting on their rooftops waiting for the government to come and save them.
4. We don't see people waiting on the government to do anything.
5. We don't see Hollywood organizing benefits to raise money for people to rebuild.
6. We don't see people blaming President Bush.
7. We don't see people ignoring evacuation orders.
8. We don't see people blaming a government conspiracy to blow up the levees as the reason some have not held.
9. We don't see the US Senators or the Governor of Iowa crying on TV.
10. We don't see the Mayors of any of these cities complaining about the lack of state or federal response.
11. We don't see or hear reports of the police going around confiscating personal firearms so only the criminal will be armed.
12. We don't see gangs of people going around and randomly shooting at the rescue workers.
13. You don't see some leaders in this country blaming the bad behavior of the Iowa flood victims on 'society' (of course there is no wide spread reports of lawlessness to require excuses).


Where are all of the Hollywood celebrities holding telethons asking for help in restoring Iowa and helping the folks affected by the floods?

Where is all the media asking the tough questions about why the federal government hasn't solved the problem? Asking where the FEMA trucks (and trailers) are?

Why isn't the Federal Government relocating Iowa people to free hotels in Chicago ?

When will Spike Lee say that the Federal Government blew up the levees that failed in Des Moines ?

Where are Sean Penn and the Dixie Chicks?

Where are all the looters stealing high-end tennis shoes and big screen television sets?

When will we hear Governor Chet Culver say that he wants to rebuild a 'vanilla' Iowa , because that's the way God wants it?

Where is the hysterical 24/7 media coverage complete with reports of cannibalism?

Where are the people declaring that George Bush hates white, rural people?

How come in 2 weeks, you will never hear about the Iowa flooding ever again?

News Source: correspondent


A note from Radarsite: This is probably the most racist article that Radarsite has ever published. The disturbing conclusions reached in this article are undeniably shocking and inflammatory. In some countries this essay would have automatically been banned as constituting Hate Speech. Even here in the USA statements such as these can -- and indeed have been -- considered grounds for legal action. These volatile words are justly considered dangerous and potentially lethal, likened to that old "Shouting 'Fire' in a crowded theater" analogy.

But are they true?

And, even if these statements are proven to be true, is it irresponsible journalism to report them? Does merely reporting the statistical evidence become in and of itself an incendiary act of racism? When do naked facts become racist propaganda? When does reporting the truth become a criminal act of disturbing the peace? Are we even interested in the truth, or merely interested in not making waves? Where are the lines drawn? And who draws these lines?

To call this subject explosive is a gross understatement. It is all but untouchable.

Some time ago Radarsite wrote about a series of articles that had appeared on the web purporting to be an examination of the out-of-control crime rates in Philadelphia. Not once in this entire series was the subject of race brought up. The biggest single societal upheaval in that city's three hundred year history was simply ignored. Instead the author referred to "these people" and their drug problems. And this, my friends, passes for investigative journalism.

Whether we are attempting to address the huge inner city black crime problem, or the pervasive black multi-generational welfare ethos, or the startling differences between the social effects of the floods in Louisiana or Iowa, or the undeniable rise in Houston's crime rate [see below] after warmly welcoming those black Katrina victims into their fair city, we have learned to think and to write in an ingenious new form of Doublespeak. In short, we have succumbed to fear -- especially fear of the truth. Anything, but the truth.

Sorry, but all cultures are not the same.

Like it or not, there are vast historical differences between, say, the Chinese culture and the African-American culture. Differences that go back thousands of years. Major differences between their attitudes towards family, education, work ethos, etc. To attempt to ignore these obvious facts is worse than delusional; it is cowardly and ultimately self-destructive.

Talking about these things only adds fuel to the fire --

This is the screen the PC activists hide behind. By openly discussing these controversial racial issues, they tell us, we are not helping to solve them, we are merely widening the gap. In other words, by speaking the truth we are only making matters worse. What is needed here is tolerance and understanding. An open mind and an open heart.

Tell that to the good folks in Houston.

How the hell can we ever be expected to deal with these enormous societal problems if we are forbidden to even discuss them, if we have to talk to each other in code, if we have to delete our thoughts before we have even thought them?

The issue of race and race relations has become one of the most important issues of our day. Because of the Democratic Presidential candidate, race has been pushed to the forefront of this campaign -- not, as we have seen, just here in America, but all over the world people are watching this drama unfold. Whether we refuse to acknowledge it or not, Barrack Obama has become a symbol for innumerable colored peoples around the world. A symbol of a black man rising up against that traditional post-colonial white oppression.

Today more than ever, we must be able to talk about race openly and without fear. The percentage of blacks who have already committed their votes to Barrack Obama have proven to the world that race matters; to try to continue to deny this obvious truth only worsens our chances to come together. But we can never come together so long as the black community -- and their PC, multiculturalist liberal enablers continue to avoid the harsh truths of the black predicament.

The degenerative state of the inner city black community is a black problem, and can only be solved by blacks. No amount of egocentric white guilt, or liberal white intervention, no amount of tricky euphemisms or outright denials will solve their problems for them.

Finally, I believe that almost everything in the above article is true. I believe that everything I have stated is true. If that makes me a racist, then so be it. I would rather be called a racist than a liar. -rg

Note: "Houston police say evacuees have been victims or suspects in about 20 percent of the city's homicides, more than double their percentage in the population."http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog/2006/02/did-katrina-evacuees-bring-more-crime.html

The Fouse Report: 2 Jul 08




Recent Comments About UCI



"Anti-Semitism at UCI? What anti-Semitism? Musa, Malik Ali? Never heard of 'em."I am including recent updates from Reut Cohen and Red County Blog on the on-going situation at UCI in regards to MSU-sponsored anti-Semitism. It appears that the university is going on the offense with some of their professors publicly defending the university against charges of tolerating anti-Semitism and other radical expression by the Muslim Student Union and their sponsored hate-mongering speakers.First is a description of two of the MSU's favorite speakers, Addul Alim Musa and Amir Abdel Malik Ali as provided by Reut Cohen, recent UCI grad and former acting secretary of Anteaters for Israel. Next is an article published in the liberal periodical, The Nation by UCI History professor Jon Wiener followed by my own response. Last is an excerpt of an interview of Erwin Chemerinski, newly-hired law school dean by Marlo Jo Fisher in the Orange County Register in which Chemerinski declares he has no knowledge of anti-Semitism at UCI. They are numbered 1-4.1
Below is courtesy of Reut Cohen, a recent UCI grad and former president of Anteaters for Israel"

Abdul Alim Musa and Amir Abdel Malik Ali, two radical imams, are no strangers to UC Irvine where they regularly spread their seething hatred of America, Israel and Jews on behalf of the Muslim Student Union (MSU). These speakers are involved with the As-Sabiqun movement which aims for Islamic revivalism and enabling Islam to take "complete control of ... the lives of all human beings on Earth."

Below is information about both speakers and the radical and hateful As-Sabiqun movement.DiscovertheNetworks.org includes the following information about Musa:Imam Abdul Alim Musa is the founder and director of the As-Sabiqun movement, which aims to “enable Islam to take complete control of … the lives of all human beings on Earth.” He serves as director of Masjid Al-Islam in Washington, DC, and is a senior member of the Institute of Contemporary Islamic Thought (ICIT) -- a pro-Iranian, pro-Hezbollah, Islamist think tank. Musa also sits on the governing body of the Muslim Alliance of North America, which is headed by Siraj Wahhaj. In addition, Musa is a frequent speaker on American college campuses, often at the invitation of the Muslim Student Union and chapters of the Muslim Students Association. In 2004 the San Francisco Bay View described Musa as “one of the highest-ranking Islamic leaders in the Black community, nationwide and specifically in the Islamic movement.”

Two days before 9/11 -- at a September 9, 2001 fundraiser at UC Irvine on behalf of the cop-killer Jamil Al-Amin -- Musa said: “Imam Jamil coined a phrase, and that phrase meant this: ‘If you don't give us justice. If you don't give us equality. If you don't give us our share of America. If you don't stay out of our way and leave us alone, we’re gonna burn America down.”During a May 9, 2007 “Islamic Revival” event at UC Irvine Musa discussed his belief that the U.S. carried out the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon: “When you hear about some bomber that blew up the World Trade Center or blew up this or blew up that, I'm telling you brothers and sisters, that is your CIA. That is your government blowing up people, blaming it on us … Didn't Adolph Hitler burn the Reichstag, blame it on the people and he became the Fuhrer and what happened? He could suspend civil liberties. And he could wipe out and he could war against all of his enemies. That's what Adolph Hitler did, isn't that right? He burned the Reichstag himself.... They blew up the World Trade Center, blamed it on us, and then come out with the PATRIOT Act and all these criminal laws. Right?” At the same event, Musa said: “Who ran the slave trade … who funded [it]? You’ll study and you will find out: the Jews … It was the Jewish bankers … in Vienna, with pockets full of money, funding and insuring, that’s who did it…. you can’t tell us about no holocaust. Between the African Americans and the Native Americans, everybody else’s stuff was [supposedly] small potatoes [according to Jews].”

Here is a bio for Amir Abdel Malik Ali:Amir-Abdel Malik-Ali (also known as Abdul Malik Ali and Abd Al-Malik) is a black Imam associated with the Masjid Al Islam mosque in Oakland. A graduate of San Francisco State University and a former Nation of Islam member, he is a frequent guest lecturer at Muslim Student Union and Muslim Students Association events. A passionate supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah, he helped organize a July 1999 rally in San Francisco at which Imam Abdul-Alim Musa proudly displayed a cashier’s check made out to “Hamas, Palestine.” Malik-Ali endorses suicide bombings as a legitimate “resistance” tactic: “Palestinian mothers are supporting their children who are suicide bombers, saying, ‘Go honey, go!’ That ain’t suicide; that’s martyrdom.”Also among Malik-Ali’s notable quotes and positions are the following:“The enemies of Islam know that when we come back to power we’re gonna check ’em.”“Stay conscious and ask Allah to raise the Muslims and give us victory over the disbeliever.”“When it’s all over, the only one standing is gonna be us [Muslims].”“Sooner or later, today’s Muslim students will be the parents of Muslim children. And they should be militants.”“Neo-cons are all Zionist Jews.”\Israelis ought to return “to Germany, to Poland, to Russia. The Germans should hook y’all up. You [Israelis] should go back to Germany.”“In America, you’re mostly fighting with your tongue, but you should also learn how to fight with the sword.”

At the Sixth Annual Muslim Student Association Conference held at UC Berkeley in February 2004, Malik-Ali denounced “the white man, who is the enemy.”At the Universal Heritage Foundation’s December 2003 Islamic Conference in Florida, he warned moderate American Muslims that their desire to be “liked” was turning them into “‘house slaves’ in the mansion of a racist, imperialistic and destructive America.”He has described Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a “pretty good guy.”

Read the rest of Gary's explosive article here:
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/>

Tuesday, July 1, 2008

From Other SItes on the Line: 2 Jul 08



















Criticism of Islam now banned by UN Human Rights Council


Cross posted from Monkey in the Middle
http://findalismonkeyinthemiddle.blogspot.com/2008/07/criticism-of-islam-now-banned-by-un.html


Cross Posted at Reject the UN


Tuesday, July 1, 2008

Islamic Law calls for women and non-believers to be treated as second class citizens in their own lands. Under Shar'ia law a woman can be beaten, raped, forced into marriage, even killed to preserve her family's honor. Non-Muslims are forced to pay a special tax called Jajiya. Non-Muslims are forbidden in many lands to even worship freely. Some Muslim nations go as far as refusing to let non-believers into their nations. Under Islam, slavery flourishes. The rights of the individual are denied to include the right of medical treatment, work, an education, or even the simple act of walking outside one's home.Yet under the UN and its Human Rights Council, these topics are not to ever be brought up. They are now forbidden to criticize or discuss.

The UN Human Rights Council is not allowed to judge religions, according to president Doru Romulus Costea of Romania. Criticism of Sharia law or fatwas is now forbidden. This ruling follows attempts by the Egyptian and Pakistani delegates at the Council to silence criticism of Human Rights abuse in the Islamic world. The representative of the Association for World Education, in a joint statement with the International Humanist and Ethical Union, had denounced the stoning to death of women accused of adultery and of girls being married at the age of nine years old in countries where Sharia law applies.

The speaker, David Littman, was interrupted by no fewer than 16 points of order and the proceedings of the Council were suspended for forty minutes when the Egyptian delegate said that “Islam will not be crucified in this Council” and attempted to force a vote on whether the speaker should be allowed to continue.

To have joined the UN the member nations all had to sign the Declaration of Human Rights. A simple document that gives equal rights to each person in the world.

PREAMBLE
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Yet the only Muslim nation to actually allow any Human Rights in it is Turkey. All other Muslim nations insist on following that document of hatred and abusive powers known as the Cairo Declaration. A document that strips women and non-Muslims of all their rights. A document that would place the whole world under Shar'ia law.

ARTICLE 1:(a) All human beings form one family whose members are united by their subordination to Allah and descent from Adam. All men are equal in terms of basic human dignity and basic obligations and responsibilities, without any discrimination on the basis of race, colour, language, belief, sex, religion, political affiliation, social status or other considerations. The true religion is the guarantee for enhancing such dignity along the path to human integrity.
(b) All human beings are Allah's subjects, and the most loved by Him are those who are most beneficial to His subjects, and no one has superiority over another except on the basis of piety and good deeds.

ARTICLE 10:
Islam is the religion of true unspoiled nature. It is prohibited to exercise any form of pressure on man or to exploit his poverty or ignorance in order to force him to change his religion to another religion or to atheism.

ARTICLE 12:
Every man shall have the right, within the framework of the Shari'ah, to free movement and to select his place of residence whether within or outside his country and if persecuted, is entitled to seek asylum in another country. The country of refuge shall be obliged to provide protection to the asylum-seeker until his safety has been attained, unless asylum is motivated by committing an act regarded by the Shari'ah as a crime.

ARTICLE 22:
(a) Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shari'ah.
1. Everyone shall have the right to advocate what is right, and propagate what is good, and warn against what is wrong and evil according to the norms of Islamic Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 24:
All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah.

ARTICLE 25:
The Islamic Shari'ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.

This in effect puts the world under Muslim domination and control. And the UN is set to throw out the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and adopt as its standard the Cairo Declaration. This will be the first step for the Muslim nations of the world to seize full control over all the non-Muslim nations, forcing each and every one of them to adopt strict Shar'ia law. Forcing one half of the Human Race, women, into second-class citizenship. And destroying the ideals of democracy and freedom that this world as been striving towards for the last 200 years.

Just another reason, one of many that US support for the UN should end. The United Nations Human Rights Council is a misnomer. It should be called the Shar'ia Law Enforcement Agency.


Posted by Findalis

A note from Radarsite: This is an extremely important article. With her usual thoroughness, Findalis sets out with the utmost clarity exactly how the individual integrity and sovereignty of the Western nations are being compromised by the Third World led cronies of the UN. That infamously inept, corrupt and outdated organization has now gone beyond merely being useless and has actually become dangerous to the Free World. The United Nations is now just one more battleground in the Clash of Civilizations, or more accurately, the Islamic war against the West.

And make no mistake about it, this is precisely what it has become: the Muslim world versus the rest of the world. The law of Shari'ah versus the Declaration of Human Rights, barbarism versus civilization.

If the Muslim world chooses to live in the Dark Ages, so be it. But we cannot -- we must not -- allow them to drag us down with them.

Whatever benefits we may have once derived from membership in this Byzantine institution have long passed. It has now become a virtual Enemies of the West club. The time is now and the message is clear: Reject the UN. - rg

Lest we forget...

Dawn

Bye-bye Britain. It was nice knowing you.


From the Daily Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1030798/Muslims-outraged-police-advert-featuring-cute-puppy-sitting-policemans-hat.html
Muslims outraged at police advert featuring cute puppy sitting in policeman's hat

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:15 PM on 01st July 2008


A postcard featuring a cute puppy sitting in a policeman's hat advertising a Scottish police force's new telephone number has sparked outrage from Muslims.


Tayside Police's new non-emergency phone number has prompted complaints from members of the Islamic community.

The choice of image on the Tayside Police cards - a black dog sitting in a police officer's hat - has now been raised with Chief Constable John Vine.


Tayside Police caused uproar in the Muslim community after they released this advertisement featuring police puppy Rebel sitting in a hat

The advert has upset Muslims because dogs are considered ritually unclean and has sparked such anger that some shopkeepers in Dundee have refused to display the advert.

Dundee councillor Mohammed Asif said: 'My concern was that it's not welcomed by all communities, with the dog on the cards.


'It was probably a waste of resources going to these communities.


'They (the police) should have understood. Since then, the police have explained that it was an oversight on their part, and that if they'd seen it was going to cause upset they wouldn't have done it.'


Councillor Asif, who is a member of the Tayside Joint Police Board, said that the force had a diversity adviser and was generally very aware of such issues.

He raised the matter with Mr Vine at a meeting of the board.





Tayside Police Chief Constable John Vine said the advert was not intended to cause any offence. The chief constable said he was unaware of the concerns and that the force had not sought to cause any upset but added he would look into the matter.




Councillor Asif said: 'People who have shops just won't put up the postcard. But the police have said to me that it was simply an oversight and they did not seek to offend or upset.'

Cards featuring police dog-in-training Rebel have been distributed to communities throughout the area to advertise the single number point of contact for non-emergency calls to the police.

Rebel has proved a popular recruit for Tayside Police after coming through the very first Lothian and Borders Police dog-breeding programme in February.


One of seven German Shepherd pups born in early December, he has now completed his course of inoculations, and is free to venture out onto the streets of Tayside.

A spokesman for Tayside Police said: 'Trainee police dog Rebel has proved extremely popular with children and adults since being introduced to the public, aged six weeks old, as Tayside Police's newest canine recruit.

'His incredible world-wide popularity - he has attracted record visitor numbers to our website - led us to believe Rebel could play a starring role in the promotion of our non-emergency number.

'We did not seek advice from the force's diversity adviser prior to publishing and distributing the postcards. That was an oversight and we apologise for any offence caused.'

A note from Radarsite: 'We did not seek advice from the force's diversity adviser prior to publishing and distributing the postcards. That was an oversight and we apologise for any offence caused.'

Listen closely, folks. This is the sound of a nation falling. It is a frightful sound, one that I never believed that I'd live to hear. It is the sickening sound of surrender. It is that same shameful and sickening sound we heard from Vichy France in 1940.
Worse than surrender, it is abject submission and cowardly collaboration.

Can this be that same courageous Britain of the Blitz? Can this be that same valiant nation who withstood the daily privations of the U-boat blockades and the devastations of a Dunkirk? Are these, then, the weak-kneed grandchildren of those tough, brave Tommies? What, I wonder, would Winston say?

Bye-bye Britain. it was nice to know you.

From ABC: Here comes trouble. Not from Iran, but from Israel




Recommended by CNN.com




Hat tip to Leonard Peracchio
From ABC News
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/US/Story?id=5281043&page=1

Pentagon Official Warns of Israeli Attack on Iran
U.S. Offical Sees Two 'Red Lines' That Could Prompt Strike


BY JONATHAN KARL
WASHINGTON, June 30, 2008

Senior Pentagon officials are concerned that Israel could carry out an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities before the end of the year, an action that would have enormous security and economic repercussions for the United States and the rest of the world.

A senior defense official told ABC News there is an "increasing likelihood" that Israel will carry out such an attack, a move that likely would prompt Iranian retaliation against, not just Israel, but against the United States as well.

The official identified two "red lines" that could trigger an Israeli offensive. The first is tied to when Iran's Natanz nuclear facility produces enough highly enriched uranium to make a nuclear weapon. According to the latest U.S. and Israeli intelligence assessments, that is likely to happen sometime in 2009, and could happen by the end of this year.

"The red line is not when they get to that point, but before they get to that point," the official said. "We are in the window of vulnerability."

The second red line is connected to when Iran acquires the SA-20 air defense system it is buying from Russia. The Israelis may want to strike before that system -- which would make an attack much more difficult -- is put in place.

Some Pentagon officials also worry that Israel may be determined to attack before a new U.S. president, who may be less supportive, is sworn in next January.

Pentagon officials believe the massive Israeli air force exercise in early June, first reported by the New York Times, was done to prepare for a possible attack. A senior official called it "not a rehearsal, but basic, fundamental training" required to launch an operation against Iran.

"The Israeli air force has already conducted the basic exercise necessary to tell their senior leadership, 'We have the fundamentals down.' Might they need some more training and rehearsals? Yes. But have they done the fundamentals? I think that is what we saw," the official told ABC News, adding that if Israel moves closer to military action, he expects to see more exercises like the one conducted in early June.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, was in Israel over the weekend for a series of meetings with senior Israeli military officials, including, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, the chief of staff of the Israeli Defense Forces. According to a military spokesman, Iran's nuclear program was "a major topic" of discussion.

The widely held view among Pentagon officials is that an Israeli attack would do only temporary damage to Iran's nuclear program, and that it would cause major problems in the region and beyond, prompting a wave of attacks on U.S. interests in Iraq, the Persian Gulf and elsewhere.

A note from Radarsite: Here, my friends, is the latest warning from our ever-vigilant leftist MSM: Trouble is on the way. Not from Iran's unyielding determination to acquire nuclear weapons, but from Israel's unyielding determination to stop them.
"The widely held view among Pentagon officials is that an Israeli attack would do only temporary damage to Iran's nuclear program, and that it would cause major problems in the region and beyond, prompting a wave of attacks on U.S. interests in Iraq, the Persian Gulf and elsewhere."
If this is indeed the view among "Pentagon officials", then we'd better just pack up and make our cowardly exit from the world stage. Or maybe we need some new Pentagon officials.

Is this the kind of support we are going to be giving our only ally in that whole blood-soaked region? Yes, without our military support -- as has been argued elsewhere -- an attack against Iran's nuclear and Defense facilities by Israel alone would indeed most likely only succeed in doing "temporary damage". Which is precisely why we need to provide them with our military and moral support.

Can this really be ABC's considered professional opinion? Do they have no shame? Is this the way we treat our allies?

The monumental threat posed to the Middle East, and eventually to the entire world, by Ahmadinejad's unwavering nuclear ambitions is to just be ignored. The real threat to the world comes from Israel. If Israel moves to defend itself, if they attack, Iran might just get mad. "Some Pentagon officials also worry that Israel may be determined to attack..." Some Pentagon officials worry?

What, I wonder, would have been their advice to America after Pearl Harbor?

What would our current courageous MSM's advice have been? - rg

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/20/israel.exercise/index.html