It is quite awful to know what is coming ahead of time, and then be ignored by the mainstream when you try to tell them.

In 2003, I released a novel where the main character, a professor, was writing a book called the Second Holocaust where he claims that a Second Holocaust has started which will culminate in Iranian nuclear attacks against the almost 6 million Jews of Israel. I am not saying that Iran will be successful against the Israeli IDF, but the concern that occupied my  mind when I wrote the book has become a lot more concrete and worrisome.

Furthermore I had the professor in the book get in trouble for some politically incorrect language at a lecture;  then after the book came out, I got in trouble, not for what I said, but for what an 18 year old part time book clerk and member of the Muslim Students Association fabricated that i said.

My book, The Second Catastrophe:  A Novel about a Book and its Author was banned by Chapters in Canada and was never picked up in the U.S., despite good reviews.

Last week, Mantua Books released my new book, TOLERism:  The Ideology Revealed, in which I warn that politically correct tolerance has morphed into the ideology of Tolerism, and that Obama is one of the main symptons, where tolerance towards the illiberals has become excessive and tolerance has become more important than justice.  Again, I was too prescient,  As we know, last week, an Islamist who was still a psychiatrist in the U.S. army despite all kinds of talk about how the Muslims in the U.S. should support Muslim countries rather than America, how America in responding to 9/11 was warring against all of Islam, rather than fighting terrorist groups, and who had worshipped in mosques led by two radical Islamists, killed twelve fellow soldiers and injured 33 more.

Yelling the traditional chant of Jihadists, "Allahu Akhbar" as he opened fire in a pre-meditated attack, the media and Obama the Dunce reacted in typical politically correct, morally relativistic terms.

The first Washington Post article took 11 paragraphs to even mention that the attacker was Muslim!

President Obama, put in a couple of disgraceful performances wherein he shows why he is one of the last people in the U.S. who should be President in a time of war against the West by Radical Islam:   Even on Saturday, by which time more information had come out about the Islamist ideology of the attacker (who should always be described as a "terrorist" - except that the politically correct, morally infantile Obama has abolished the word - Obama unbelievable declined to mention that this attack was by an Islamist, or was caused by the Islamists who indoctrinated the terrorist.

Instead Obama said, (and I am not joking):  "We cannot fully know what leads a man to do such a thing." This has got to go down as one of the most ridiculous statements by an American president in history.   We KNOW already what Islamist hatred causes their people to do.   Where has Obama been?   Of course he knows it too, but feels the need to downplay the fact.  That is why some Americans are belatedly worrying about the Islamic background and the spirtual mentors who influenced this smooth talking, no action, poseur.

Incidentally, it took me 5 minutes from hearing the initial report to find out:

Hasan attended the mosque in Silver Spring Maryland where the imam was at the time Faisal Khan.   Faisal Khan was a supporter of the demonstrations in Washington by Muslims who wanted Sami Al-Arian released from jail.   Sami Al-Arian is the disgraced professor from Florida who pled guilty to one count of conspiracy (other counts were dropped as part of a plea bargain) to assist a terrorist entity, namely the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.  Al-Arian refused to comply with a subpoena to come to a Grand Jury to testify against an alleged co-conspirator and was convicted of contempt of court, in addition to the original charge, which really bothered some of the activists in the Washington area Muslim community.

Then,  it was discovered that the Islamist doctor had attended a mosque in Virginia headed by an Islamist imam, which was also attended (at the same time) by two of the World Trade Centre terrorists.    There is no evidence of direct link, but this shows what kind of crowd and imams he associated with.

But if the American people were not concerned that their future Commander in Chief hung out with the America-hating Rev. Wright and the ex-terrorist Bill Ayers, and with other anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-Semitic ideologues, I guess they don't see anything wrong with radical Islamists who hate America serving in the armed forces.

Again, my book is prescient and again I watch the inevitable results of what I warn against.  I derive no pleasure, none at all, from being right.

Then last week I made a post about the danger that our current cultural relativists will soon attack the moral foundations of Remembrance Day.  I sent a copy of the essay to a number of newspapers who of course declined it, without even bothering to write back, as they must consider me some kind of flake.

But yesterday, I found that what my essay warns against has already started.  Of course, it has started in Britain first.   Which is par for the course.  I am going to reprint the article from the website from one of these left wing pacifist British Christian churches, who seem happy to cheer on the Islamification of their country which, based on other areas of the world where Muslims are in control, will inevitably mean that the Christian churches, left wing or not, will not be tolerated.   Toleration as I have argued in my new book is only a one way street.

Here is the report;  I have emphasized certain ridiculous points by adding bold face type.   Mark my words, this is the next frontier in the Left's assault on decency, morality and our historic accomplishments as liberal democracies:

from http://ekklesia.co.uk/node/10504:

We need a more inclusive Remembrance Day

Finally, the U.N. does something useful:

Firstly:   At last some sanity regarding Hizbollah:

JPost.com » Middle East » Article

Oct 17, 2008 11:18 | Updated Oct 17, 2008 11:25

UN chief: Hizbullah must be disbanded

By ASSOCIATED PRESS

Print Subscribe E-mail Toolbar

Share article: What's this?

Talkbacks for this article: 26

 

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned that Lebanon will not be a fully sovereign state until Hizbullah, and other militia groups are disbanded.

A Hizbullah march in Beirut.
Photo: AP [file]

Slideshow: Pictures of the week

"Hizbullah's maintenance of separate military assets and infrastructure is a fundamental challenge to the government's attempts to consolidate the sovereignty and authority of the Lebanese state," he wrote in a six-month report to the UN Security Council, obtained Thursday by The Associated Press.

"In addition, several Palestinian militias operate in the country, inside and outside of refugee camps," said the secretary general, adding that they also undermine the stability of the country and the region.

In the report, Ban also said he was encouraged by the positive developments in relations between Lebanon and Syria, but called on the two countries to take further steps to improve security along the border.

"Over the last six months, Lebanon has experienced both the ruinous effects of sectarian violence and hope and optimism," he said in the report.

"I applaud the historical steps that have been taken so far by Presidents Suleiman and Al-Assad," he said. "For the first time since their independence, the two neighboring states are establishing diplomatic relations."

The foreign ministers of Syria and Lebanon signed a document Wednesday formalizing diplomatic ties between the two countries for the first time in their turbulent history.

The signing comes a day after Syrian President Bashar Assad issued a decree establishing diplomatic relations with its smaller neighbor - a long-standing demand of the West and Lebanese politicians opposed to Syria's influence in the country.

The two countries have not had formal diplomatic relations since both gained independence from France in the 1940s in an arrangement that many Lebanese viewed as a result of Syria's refusal to recognize Lebanese sovereignty.

Ban, in his report, said in addition to establishing diplomatic relations, Lebanon and Syria must also take concrete steps to implement other agreements reached during these meetings, including "joint activity to improve security arrangements along that border."

In his April report, Ban highlighted the mounting international concern over Lebanon's failure to fill the presidential post, left vacant after pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud stepped down last November.

In Thursday's report, he said the most significant progress made in the last six months was Lebanon's compliance with requirements for a "free and fair presidential election according to Lebanese constitutional rules."

Ban said Lebanese President Michel Suleiman's election on May 25 "represented a significant step forward," but said "I remain concerned by the political assassinations and explosions that continue to plague Lebanon."

The secretary-general said that clashes in May and violent incidents since then raised concerns "that groups on all sides of the political spectrum may be re-arming."

In the report, Ban called on Lebanese parties to immediately halt all efforts to acquire and build paramilitary capabilities.

He reiterated that disarming and disbanding all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias should be done through a political dialogue "that will lead to the monopoly on the use of force by the government of Lebanon throughout all of its territory."

"The ultimate purpose of disarmament is the establishment of a strong Lebanese state for all inhabitants of Lebanon," he said.

Print Subscribe E-mail Toolbar

Secondly:

At last Iran suffers a diplomatic defeat:

Israel welcomes UN Security Council's refusal of Iran

By JPOST.COM STAFF AND ALLISON HOFFMAN

Print Subscribe E-mail Toolbar

Share article: What's this?

Talkbacks for this article: 37

 

Iran lost its bid to become a temporary member of the UN Security Council on Friday. As expected, the Asian seat went to Japan, which received 158 votes compared to the Islamic Republic's 32.

Ahmadinejad speaks at the UN.
Photo: AP [file]

Slideshow: Pictures of the week

Israeli officials were quick to express their approval of the results.

"The UN has saved itself from disgrace by preventing Iran's acceptance into the Security Council," Kadima leader Tzipi Livni said following the vote. "Iran's candidacy in itself was unacceptable."

"International action on Iran and the threat it represents must continue on all levels," she added.

Israeli Ambassador to the UN Gabriela Shalev offered her congratulations to the newly elected countries to the council. "With today's results, the members of the international community have demonstrated their resolve to prevent Ahmadinejad¹s Iran - a country that supports terrorism and threatens international peace - from a seat on the Security Council," stated Shalev.

"The very fact that Iran, a country that has repeatedly threatened to wipe Israel off the map, was even a serious candidate for the Security Council, a body charged with maintaining international peace and security, is an intolerable and unacceptable idea," she added.

Iran's nuclear power plant in Bushehr, southwest of Teheran.
Photo: AP [file]

British Ambassador John Sawers was also satisfied with the vote. "I'd just like to highlight how fitting it is that Iran secured only 32 votes," he said, adding that this "comprehensive feat, a thrashing of Iran is a very important signal of the whole memberships' concern about Iran's actions."

"If Iran, by some massive error of misjudgment had come onto the Security Council, it would have obstructed the effective work of the council," he said.

US Deputy Ambassador Alejandro Wolff said he was also satisfied with the outcome of the elections.

"It's encouraging and important for Iran to understand that its continued violation of international binding resolutions of the Security Council is reflected in this very poor showing," he said.

Iran's UN Mission released a statement Friday after the election that said the voting was affected by "inadequate opportunities with intense competitions in the Asian group ... unfair behavior and a false propaganda campaign by certain major powers."

Iran's mission said it would continue to "call for change" and insist "on the need for a Security Council that is more democratic and better responding to the realities of the current era."

Austria, Turkey, Uganda and Mexico also won nonpermanent seats on the council.

Austria and Turkey beat Iceland Friday in the battle for two European seats on the council. Mexico ran unopposed for the Latin American seat as did Uganda for the African seat. The five new members of the council will serve two-year terms.

Iran may be under three sets of sanctions from the UN Security Council over its nuclear program, but that did not stopped it from campaigning for the temporary membership.

The chances of Iran winning the Asian regional seat against rival Japan in Friday's voting were widely viewed as slim-to-none: Victory would have required support from two-thirds of all General Assembly member countries that turn up for the secret ballot.

Yet experts said just being in the race at all may be prize enough for Teheran, which announced its candidacy in September 2007.

"As with many governments, the Iranian government sometimes finds it advantageous to portray itself as an outsider that's challenging the status quo," said Ian Hurd, a political scientist at Northwestern University in Chicago who has written about legitimacy and power on the Security Council.

"They may want to run and lose to keep that outsider status," he said.

Iran, which last sat on the Security Council in 1956, may be the only country to vie for one of the body's 10 rotating seats while under active sanctions. Rwanda already held a seat on the Security Council when genocide erupted there in 1994. Libya, which currently holds a seat, expressed interest but did not make a formal bid until after sanctions linked to the investigation of the 1988 Pan Am jet bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland were lifted in 2003, according to analysts with the Columbia University-affiliated Security Council Report.

UN rules allow any member country to declare its candidacy, but the charter instructs representatives to consider candidates' contribution to the "maintenance of international peace and security."

Teheran claimed in its candidacy documents that it had played an "undeniable" role in regional security matters and "was firmly committed to pursuing the realization of the goal of a world free from weapons of mass destruction," according to the Iranian Fars News Agency.

The agency also reported Wednesday that Teheran had offered to support a permanent seat for Japan in exchange for its withdrawal.

Japan, which has held nine terms, last sat on the Security Council in 2006.

While Tajikistan and Pakistan have reportedly offered their support to Iran, few expect the matter to go to more than one ballot. Nonetheless, the Italian government passed a resolution this week vowing to block Iran's election on the basis of sanctions if its candidacy proceeds.

"This resolution encourages a decisive and joined European action aimed at safeguarding not only the decency of the international discourse, which must be totally clean of any anti-Semitic or anti-West hint, but also the [Security Council's] credibility," said Fiamma Nirenstein, the vice-president of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the Italian Chamber of Deputies.

Turkey, meanwhile, is mounting its own bid against Austria and Iceland, whose financial crisis has cast a shadow on its candidacy for one of two open European seats.

Analysts expect balloting to go more than one round, with the outside possibility of a new candidate entering at the last minute in the event of a deadlock.

Israel's UN delegation declined to comment on which country it planned to support.

The Turkish government, which put up a banner across the street from UN headquarters in New York advertising its bid, has positioned itself as a bridge between East and West, building on its role brokering talks between Syria and Israel.

Continued

Today, I give over my post to Bradley Burston of Ha'aretz newspaper.  This article was actually written a week ago, but it summarizes nicely some of the important issues about Iran.

Erasing Ahmadinejad from the map

By Bradley Burston

Tags: Ahmadinejad, Israel, UN

The wager of the year goes something like this: A year from now, which is more likely to remain on the map of the world - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or the state of Israel? The call is no cinch, since: Two weeks ago, the head of Atomstroiexport, the state-run Russian company building Iran's first nuclear plant, said that work on the project was in its final stage, and that by the end of the year the company would take steps that will make the launch of the Bushehr plant "irreversible" by February next year. In a wide-ranging report issued last week, the International Atomic Energy Agency declared that it was "gravely concerned" over Iran's stonewalling inspectors seeking to evaluate its uranium enrichment projects, and its refusal to answer questions about 20 years of past research into designing a nuclear weapon. The IAEA revealed indications that Iran may have received foreign expertise in experiments on a detonator that could be used in the implosion of a nuclear weapon. Russia has been providing advanced anti-aircraft systems and upgrading Iran's air defenses to protect nuclear facilities against possible Israeli and/or American aerial offensives. Reports have said the system is slated to be operable by January. At the same time, the IAEA believes Iran has acted to modify Shehab-3 missiles, whose range includes Israel, to carry nuclear warheads. The U.S.-Russian-Chinese-French-British-German initiative to persuade Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program in return for a package of political, economic and technological incentives appears to be deadlocked for good, with Iran insisting that it will never give up the project. On Saturday, Russia went on record as strongly opposing western pressure for tougher UN sanctions against Iran. Iran has markedly increased the efficiency of the centrifuges at the heart of the enrichment program. The chief of IDF Intelligence' research division said Sunday that Tehran had produced about 480 kilograms of low-level enriched uranium, up to one-half of the amount of fissionable material needed to create an atomic bomb. Perhaps most troubling of all, media reports have said that 50-60 tons of uranium, which if enriched to weapons grade level would be sufficient to produce five or six atom bombs, have gone missing from the Isfahan complex, which enriches raw uranium "yellow cake" into material that can be used for either nuclear power or atomic weapons. Before you resolve to put your money on Mahmoud, however, you might note and factor in the following: Iran, the world's fourth largest oil exporting nation, is a society in growing economic distress. There are mounting and potentially incendiary discrepancies between rich and poor. Despite, and to an extent because of, its energy resources and the high price of oil, the inflation rate is fast passing an annual rate of 25 percent. Merchants in the open market of Tehran have complained that electric power to the bazaar is often cut off six to eight hours a day. While consumption of fuel is rising, output of oil is falling. If European states cut fuel imports further, the government will be in a very vulnerable position. Ahmadinejad faces re-election on June 12, 2009. Analysts believe that the election will center on economic issues, particularly inflation, and not on foreign relations, the nuclear issues, or conflict with Israel. . The Islamic Revolution of 1979 is increasingly showing its age. It is the nature of revolutions to turn pathetic as they gray. Yet they often surprise us when they do. Next year will mark three decades since Iran's Islamic Revolution and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini came to power. It bears consideration that it was the Soviet Union, not Ronald Reagan, that in the end toppled the Soviet Union. Iranians are not unaware of the freedoms and the prosperity of their brethren in the west. It is true that failing revolutions often turn especially dangerous toward the end, and the bottom-line risk implied by a nuclear Iran is world war. But if the Iranian people, pragmatic and perceptive as they are, can see their way past Ahmadinejad and the excesses of radical rule, a new Middle East could be the true result. After all, this month marks the 30th anniversary of an impossibility, an event which at the time beggared all belief. Israel's largest, most implacable and powerful foe, a Muslim nation which had threatened the Jewish state with annihilation and had sought to acquire nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them, agreed in writing to a permanent state of peace. There is no small irony, then, in the timing of Ahmadinejad's annual field trip to Manhattan this week, a spectacle which makes the 1979 Camp David peace treaty between Israel and Egypt seem all the more distant, and, sadly, all the more singular, all the more unrepeatable. It may be said that it is the nature of aging revolutions to repeat themselves, first as tragedy, later as farce. The 10-year Iran-Iraq war was the tragedy, a million lives lost senselessly, needlessly, in what was called the The March to Jerusalem. Herewith the farce: This week, Ahmadinejad will headline a series of events in Manhattan, beginning with a Tuesday address to the UN General Assembly and a toast and ceremonial dinner from General Assembly President Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, the Los Angeles-born, Sandanista-raised friar of radical chic. Two days later, in what may prove a perverse echo of his appearance at Columbia University exactly a year ago ["In Iran, we don't have homosexuals, like in your country."], Ahmadinejad is to take part in a Religions for Peace dialogue with church leaders. Perhaps, in full farce, he'll try his hand at comedy again, as he did at Columbia a year ago ["So let me just joke -- try to tell a joke here. I think the politicians who are after atomic bombs or are testing them, making them, politically, they are backward, retarded."] Ahmadinejad may well be having the time of his life over all of this. He may be tickled 12 shades of pink over the Hillary Clinton-Sarah Palin debacle. He may believe he has Israel, the EU, Washington, the UN, even his Russian creditors, exactly where he wants them. Just a matter of time, he must be humming to himself, before the stinking corpse disappears. For the record, though, I'd put my money on Israel. In fact, as dark as these days certainly are for Israel and the west, if I were Ahmadinejad and the ayatollahs, I'd begin to worry. Not so much about an aerial onslaught and the attendant World War III. I'd worry more about the society they've created. And about the cost-benefit analysis which ordinary Iranians are increasingly forced to draw. How Ahmadinejad has benefited the Iranian people by his exploitation of - and damage to - the Palestinian cause, by turning Iran into a pariah state, by his Holocaust denial and smirking disingenuous death threats to Israel, by the billions dumped in pursuit of the bomb, by a fortune wasted on funding suicide terror half a world away, by a fortune wasted on colonizing and arming south Lebanon and destabilizing the north. This coming year, Iran will celebrate three decades of a terrible social experiment. The lessons learned may not be kind to Ahmadinejad, nor to radical Islam. Age and folly and the brutality of self-righteousness are beginning to catch up with both of them

So, I told you, dear readers, that I was going to take a break until after the Jewish New Year holydays on Monday evening through Wednesday evening.

Fortunately, for me, I observe the Jewish Sabbath, and don't go on the computer or watch televison from Friday evening to Saturday evening, or I would probably be posting seven days a week.

In other words, I ended up only taking one day off, and here I am again.  Why?  Because the threats and dangers emanating out of Iran are becoming worse and worse.  And the least we can do here in the freedom of the West, is talk about it, protest it, write letters, write blogs, pressure politicians, and get our minds away from our stock portfolios and housing prices and into something much more important for the history of the World, and not only the well-being of the Jewish people - the promises of genocide coming from Iran, and that nasty Ahmadinejad who is not ashamed to make a speech, explicitly breaching the U.N. Charter threatening a member state.   And the tolerists just tolerate.

But we, dear Readers, will not tolerate.  First some information:

----------------------------

From Phyllis Chesler's blog.

PajamasMedia

PajamasXpress

Archive

Bookmark

Store

Press

Contact Us

Advertising

News Tips for PJM

Search

Newsflash: The disinformation campaign has begun. First, the mainstream media did not issue an estimate of the crowd number. Only FOX estimated that the crowd numbered about 2,000. Most of the MSM camera shots were close frames of the speakers. They did not pan across the crowd.  Now, the 9/22 rally organizers are telling people that the rally was a “great success;” Jewish media are asking attendees to estimate the crowd size.

And now, one of my readers has written a post claiming that the 9/22 rally drew “10,000″ people and was a “great success.” I published the Comment but THIS IS A LIE. Please go to AtlasShrugs2000 and see the photos of the rally that Pamela Geller posted.

THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Friends: Earlier today, I was told that the crowd rallying against Ahmadinejad outside the UN has been estimated at anywhere from 2,000-4,000. The media is strangely quiet about the number. But participants have confirmed that the turnout was not what it used to be. FOX has said that about 2,000 people were there. Thats it.

Various members of the LiberalHawks group, including the fearless Pamela (Blog) Gellar of Atlas Shrugs, remind me that in 2006, when this group of Jewish Big Shots rallied against Ahmadinejad, that the crowd was estimated at 40,000. In 2007, the crowd was estimated at 20,000-25,000.

No matter what the reason, people didn’t turn out today and this makes me sad. Yes, I thought that caving into the J Street Jews was unwise. Yes, I thought that dis-inviting Palin was foolish, possibly disastrous. But this is a battle that will require all of us for a very long time. So, whether people decided to stay away for reasons of conscience or whether they came for precisely the same reason, this was too small a showing against a nuclear and genocidal Iran.

My suggestion: Let everyone come to the rally planned for September 25th at 5:30 outside the Grand Hyatt Hotel. And I mean everyone. Democrats, Republicans, Independents, non-voters. And I mean politicians and religious leaders too. Inside the Hyatt countless American churches hope to engage in heartfelt dialogue with the Dinner Jacket.

Let’s unite while it still counts.

And, tommorrow, from 12-2, Iranian dissidents are planning a Wall of Shame right at the Isaiah Wall, opposite the UN, with which to confront Ahmadinejad. Their issue is the epidemic execution of children in Iran. I urge those who can, to bear witness to these crimes against humanity and attend this as well.

------------------------------------

Where are the tens of thousands of protestors?

Where is the leadership from mainstream Jewish organizations?   It seems that they are too tolerist to even understand what their priorities are.

It is easier to run a Museum of Tolerance, or boast about your successes in tracking down some skinheads, than it is to really confront the Islamist threat in Iran, the Middle East, and now throughout the West.

My new series of blogs shall concentrate on the problem of making sure actions are taken against Iran.

 We know that under an Obama/Biden presidency, and perhaps under any presidency, given the near economic collapse of the American financial system, there will be little appetite to spend money and American lives to take actions, which will be perceived (incorrectly) as taken for the benefit of the "Jews of Israel".

We know that appeasement is much more popular in times of economic difficulty.   We are heading for a big problem, and the polls tell us more American Jews will be voting for Barack "let's have more dialogue" Obama than for McCain.

On the other hand, Herb Keinon of the Jerusalem Post, in his last video report, argues that if the threat was extremely imminent, then Bibi Netanyahu, would be joining the ruling coalition that Livni is putting together, to create a Unity Government, to face what may be the defining crisis of our times.   Keinon says the fact that Netanyahu has not expressed the desire to join the coalition is a good sign.

And read this from the IAEA inspectors (from Israel's Debkafile):

Iran on way to atom bomb capability – ElBaradei

September 26, 2008, 8:26 PM (GMT+02:00)

Iran is on its way to mastering technology that would enable it to build atomic bombs, International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohamed ElBaradei said to the German Sueddeutsche Zeitung Friday. Having nuclear arms unfortunately still symbolizes prestige and power. Asked if Iran was on the way to “virtual” nuclear-weapons power status, ElBaradei replied: “That is correct,” but added: Tehran could not “break out” to a bomb as long as IAEA monitors remained at nuclear sites.

DEBKAfile notes that the inspectors are restricted to a few declared sites, whereas US satellites have caught covert facilities hidden from the oversight of the nuclear watchdog where suspected weapons activity is underway. Only last week, ElBaradei himself complained of Tehran’s stonewalling and non-cooperation with the inspections.

Turning to possible military action, the IAEA director stressed that in his view it would be disastrous. It would rally the Iranian people behind the regime. He added: The know-how is there, you cannot take it out of their minds. They will simply, in my view, go underground. At attack will simply create a ball of fire which will ricochet everywhere.”

The issue will not be resolved until Washington agrees to negotiate with Tehran directly. Europe is not really in the front seat.

--------------

But what concerns me is this:

---

US-Russian deal lets Iran’s nuclear bomb program off the hook

DEBKAfile Special Report

September 27, 2008, 5:21 PM (GMT+02:00)

Iran perfects nuclear-capable ballistic missiles

Friday, Sept. 26, 2008 was the day the policy pursued by Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni and Shimon Peres, of reliance on the international community to stop Iran developing a nuclear bomb, sank without a trace. The international community declined to adopt fresh economic sanctions to rein in an increasingly defiant Tehran.

A deal between the US and Russia in New York sealed a very brief non-sanctions draft reaffirming previous council decisions for the five permanent Security Council members and Germany to table. It also called for Iran’s compliance.

This ignored the reality of Iran openly flouting all three previous sanctions resolutions: Tehran continues to enrich uranium, reprocess plutonium, build nuclear-capable missiles and stonewall on International Atomic Energy Agency’s questions and inspections.

Even the usually forgiving IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei changed his tune and admitted Thursday that Iran was on its way to “mastering technology that would enable it to build atomic bombs.”

Yet no comment has come from Israel, either from the Kadima-nominee for prime minister Tzipi Livni or defense minister, Labor’s Ehud Barak, although ElBaradei was clearly preparing the ground to raise his hands and admit failure in stop Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon capability. The world would have to swallow the pill.

This acceptance was reflected in the West’s backing down on a fourth round of sanctions. Iran, free of fear of retribution, may go forward with its first underground nuclear test some time next year, flaunting the inability of its arch-foes, America and Israel, to prevent it attaining the status of first Islamic nuclear power.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could therefore afford to be cockier than ever when he addressed the UN General Assembly in Nazi-style anti-Semitic, anti-Israeli and anti-American language. Tehran would ignore any council demand imposed by “arrogant powers” to curb its nuclear program, he declared. The issue was closed.

The Iranian leader can afford to crow. This week he won solid backing from Iran’s ultimate power, supreme leader ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who called on the nation to give him their support.

This cleared the way for Ahmadinejad’s re-election as president next year and enable him to continue to shepherd the national nuclear weapons program through to completion.

He certainly picked up the gap in perception of the program between Israel and the world powers. While Israeli spokesman still refer to a future threat which there is still time to stop, most world leaders appear reconciled to its presence.

The collapse of Israel’s foreign policy on this issue came at an unfortunate juncture:

1. The pandemonium in the US-led financial world has removed the Iranian threat from international consciousness.

2. Moscow, Iran and Syria are cementing their partnership, giving Tehran’s nuclear aspirations a strong diplomatic umbrella.

Moscow is pursuing cold war tactics in two new spheres: the Middle East, from its center of gravity in Tehran, and Latin America, resting on Venezuela’s anti-American posture and friendly relations with Iran.

Israel’s foreign policy, lame and defensive at the best of times since Livni took over, appears as oblivious as ever to the disastrous developments pressing down on the Jewish state.

-------------------------------------------

So readers, let us emphasize what Debkafile, an astute source of information on Israel's security system, says:

"Israel’s foreign policy, lame and defensive at the best of times since Livni took over, appears as oblivious as ever to the disastrous developments pressing down on the Jewish state."

More on this terrible problem in future posts.

 

In my previous post about the Olympic Games, I wrote that the Olympics died at Munich in 1972, when Israeli athletes were singled out for kidnap and murder by terrorists.

It was not the murder of the Israeli athletes that killed the Games, in my opinion, but the reaction of the Olympic movement to the kidnapping and the subsequent murders.   A memorial service was held.

IOC President Avery Brundage never once referred to the athletes during a speech in which he praised the strength of the Olympic movement.

The Israelis, and many others who listened in shock, were outraged.

The Olympics paused only one day before resuming.

"Incredibly, they're going on with it," Los Angeles Times columnist Jim Murray wrote. "It's almost like having a dance at Dachau."

Since then, survivors and relatives have pushed for - but never received - a moment of silence to be held at succeeding Olympics.

"They always accused me of wanting to bring politics into the Olympics, and that the Arab countries would walk out," Ankie Spitzer, the widow of one of the slain athletes said. "I said, 'Not at all. You don't even have to mention politics or Israel. Just say they were Olympians, part of the dream."'

Many of the 80,000 people who filled the Olympic Stadium for West Germany’s soccer match with Hungary carried noisemakers and waved flags, but when several spectators unfurled a banner reading “17 dead, already forgotten?” security officers removed the sign and expelled the offenders from the grounds. During the memorial service, the Olympic flag was flown at half-staff, along with the flags of most of the other competing nations, at the order of Willy Brandt. Ten Arab nations and the Soviet Union demanded their flags remain at full-staff, which Brandt accepted.

The terrorists, who most historians agree had their mission disclosed to Yassr Arafat (who would go on to win a Nobel Peace Prize!), managed to dehumanize the Israeli athletes.  But it would be the failure of the Olympian movement to re-humanize them. By allowing the "feelings" of Arab countries (of whom only one - Jordan- made a statement opposing the murders) to trump a proper memorial, with all flags at half-mast, and to allow politics to supercede the Olympic mission, the IOC served notice that at least for the Jewish nation, the Olympic goals were not paramount.

The pattern of "submitting" to Arab and Muslim "demands" was set in motion, corrupting everything in its path.

Ankie Spitzer, the widow of a slain athlete, in an interview with CBS News after 9/11,  wondered whether a world shocked by Sept. 11 would learn from those who try to forget another day in September over 30 years ago.

"The saddest thing for me is to see what happened in New York (on 9/11) and get the feeling if people responded the right way 30 years ago and the world said, 'This cannot be,' that things might have been different," she said.

How many of the many fans of the Olympics around the world have ever read the "Fundamental Principles of Olympism" in the Olympic Charter.

Here is an excerpt:

1. Olympism is a philosophy of life, exalting and combining in a balanced whole the qualities of body, will and mind. Blending sport with culture and education, Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy of effort, the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles.
2. The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of man, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.

4. The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practising sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.
5. Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement.

Now consider if the Olympics movement by minimizing the way that the terrorists had struck at the very heart of the Principles of Olympism, and by taking the approach that whatever happens "the Olympics must go on" undermined the very Principles by which they should have been governed.

 If for the Israelis there was the worst kind of discrimination, then the Olympics movement should have said that it was impossible to comply with the Principles that year and everyone should have gone home.  Instead, the Germans botched the entire counter-terrorist operation and moreover showed a lack of willpower in following through.  Many historians believe that the Germans were themselves complicit in the highjacking of the Lufthansa airliner which resulted in the release of the 3 remaining hijackers, since the Germans didn't want them around to stand trial with the world's attention being drawn to the German incompetence in not being "good hosts" to the Jews.   The Olympics movement looked ridiculous when Germany released the bodies of the dead terrorists to Libya where their bodies were carried in massive parades and national celebration.

And so we turn to the present.  Nothing learned.   The situation justs gets worse.  You can help make things better, but if you don't they will get worse.   An Iranian swimmer withdrew from a race, rather than swim in the same pool as an israeli Jew.

Here is the news report from Canada's National Post newspaper:

From Allen Panzeri At the Beijing Games

When Iranian swimmer Mohammad Alirezaei suddenly withdrew from the 100-metre breaststroke on Saturday, no one believed it was the result of an injury.

The widespread suspicion was that he pulled out because Israeli Tom Be’eri was in lane seven. Alirezaei had been drawn in lane one.

Iran had earlier said since this was not a “face-to-face” situation, there would be no problem with Alirezaei competing.

“Alirezaei swims in lane one and the representative of the Zionist regime in lane seven, so they will not face each other,” said the secretary of Iran’s Olympic committee, Ali Kafashian.

However, Iran has not competed against Israel at the Olympic Games since the 1979 Islamic revolution.

The two countries are in conflict over religion and nuclear weapons, and Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said Israel should be “wiped out from the map.”

Iran does not recognize Israel as a sovereign state and its athletes have always refused to compete alongside Israelis as a sign of solidarity with the Palestinians.

During the 2004 Olympics in Athens, Iran’s judo world champion Arash Miresmaeili — one of the country’s top hopes for a gold — refused to compete against Ehud Vaks of Israel in the first round.

He was rewarded at home and revered as a source of pride, but Miresmaeili said that quitting the Olympics was “a very difficult decision.”

However, IOC spokeswoman Giselle Davies said the IOC was satisfied that Alirezaei withdrew because of an illness. “The athlete withdraw because of a sickness,” she said.

“He confirmed this in writing to the swimming federation. We also spoke to (Iranian association). And they have underlined to us that all athletes competing here are in the right spirit to compete against athletes of any nationalities.

“We take both the athletes and the NOC had their words on this.”

Does the attitude of the IOC make you as sick as it makes me?  Does Ms. Davies not know or care about the political realities in Iran, a totalitarian country - that it has the official position that Israel as a nation should not exist in the Middle East (and probably the position that as soon as Iran develops nuclear weapons, it will use them on Israel)?

In view of that does she expect us to believe that she can take the word of the athlete that he was feeling sick.   Are we persuaded when she went to the lengths of having him confirm it in writing?

Is Iran at the Olympics with the "right spirit"?

If Iran is showing the right spirit,  then the Olympic Games are dead AND buried.