Stephen Tyrone Johns is the name of the officer who has died after being shot at the Holocaust Museum in Washington. He gave his life to prevent many others being killed. RIP
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
In speech in VA, Ames' angel Rev. Wright blames "them Jews"
Obama's former pastor accents inclusiveness.
The retired pastor from Chicago who spoke Saturday in Ames was markedly different from the Jeremiah Wright of the sound bites from the 2008 presidential election campaign. In front of a crowd of 400 people, Wright spoke passionately about the need for acceptance of all people and the importance of social action. -- DM Register, June 7, 2009
But it looks like the press found a somewhat less loving Rev. Wright the other day in Hampton, VA.
Asked if he had spoken to the president, [Rev. Jeremiah]Wright said:
"Them Jews [in the White House] aren't going to let him talk to me."
Quoted by the Daily Press, Newport News, VA. June 9, 2009 Rev. Wright says he doesn't regret severed relationship with president
The retired pastor from Chicago who spoke Saturday in Ames was markedly different from the Jeremiah Wright of the sound bites from the 2008 presidential election campaign. In front of a crowd of 400 people, Wright spoke passionately about the need for acceptance of all people and the importance of social action. -- DM Register, June 7, 2009
But it looks like the press found a somewhat less loving Rev. Wright the other day in Hampton, VA.
Asked if he had spoken to the president, [Rev. Jeremiah]Wright said:
"Them Jews [in the White House] aren't going to let him talk to me."
Quoted by the Daily Press, Newport News, VA. June 9, 2009 Rev. Wright says he doesn't regret severed relationship with president
US increasingly concerned about Iranian threat: Gates
June 9, 2009
WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States is increasingly concerned about recent advances in Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday.
"Our concern about the nature of the Iran problem has continued to rise as they continue to make further progress in enriching uranium," Gates told a Senate Appropriations Committee panel, "and also as they have enjoyed some success in their missile field."
The United States and other Western powers suspect that Iran is using its nuclear program to develop atomic weapons, but Tehran insists it merely aims to produce civilian nuclear energy.
"Our concern with Iran, with Iran's programs -- and I believe I can say also Israel's -- has continued to grow given the unwillingness of the Iranians to slow, stop or even indicate a willingness to talk about their programs," Gates said.
Israel, widely considered to be the Middle East's sole if undeclared nuclear armed power, has not ruled out military action against nuclear sites in the Islamic Republic, which it considers its main enemy.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said that the Jewish state should be "wiped off the map." But US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Sunday that Iran would face "retaliation" if it launched a nuclear attack on Israel.
And President Barack Obama said Saturday during a visit in the northern French city of Caen that it would be "profoundly dangerous" for Iran to get a nuclear bomb.
In late May, Iran, which faces presidential elections on Friday, test-fired a new surface-to-surface missile called Sejil-2 with a range of up to 1,200 miles (2,000 kilometers).
Iran was still defying the United Nations Security Council and has so far amassed 1,339 kilograms of low-enriched uranium hexafluoride (UF6), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in a restricted report, a copy of which was obtained by AFP.
June 9, 2009
WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States is increasingly concerned about recent advances in Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs, US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday.
"Our concern about the nature of the Iran problem has continued to rise as they continue to make further progress in enriching uranium," Gates told a Senate Appropriations Committee panel, "and also as they have enjoyed some success in their missile field."
The United States and other Western powers suspect that Iran is using its nuclear program to develop atomic weapons, but Tehran insists it merely aims to produce civilian nuclear energy.
"Our concern with Iran, with Iran's programs -- and I believe I can say also Israel's -- has continued to grow given the unwillingness of the Iranians to slow, stop or even indicate a willingness to talk about their programs," Gates said.
Israel, widely considered to be the Middle East's sole if undeclared nuclear armed power, has not ruled out military action against nuclear sites in the Islamic Republic, which it considers its main enemy.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said that the Jewish state should be "wiped off the map." But US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Sunday that Iran would face "retaliation" if it launched a nuclear attack on Israel.
And President Barack Obama said Saturday during a visit in the northern French city of Caen that it would be "profoundly dangerous" for Iran to get a nuclear bomb.
In late May, Iran, which faces presidential elections on Friday, test-fired a new surface-to-surface missile called Sejil-2 with a range of up to 1,200 miles (2,000 kilometers).
Iran was still defying the United Nations Security Council and has so far amassed 1,339 kilograms of low-enriched uranium hexafluoride (UF6), the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in a restricted report, a copy of which was obtained by AFP.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Rasmussen Poll:
62% Say Obama Should Not Meet With Iran Until It Stops Nuclear Weapons Program
Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters June 5-6, 2009
Before a meeting is allowed between the President of Iran and the President of the United States, should Iran be required to stop developing nuclear weapons capabilities?
Yes 62%
No 23%
Not sure 15%
62% Say Obama Should Not Meet With Iran Until It Stops Nuclear Weapons Program
Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters June 5-6, 2009
Before a meeting is allowed between the President of Iran and the President of the United States, should Iran be required to stop developing nuclear weapons capabilities?
Yes 62%
No 23%
Not sure 15%
U.S. envoy assures Israel policy rift won't break alliance
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent
U.S. special Mideast envoy George Mitchell assured Israel on Tuesday that Washington would remain its close ally despite differences over West Bank settlements and peacemaking with the Palestinians.
Mitchell told President Shimon Peres his goal was to create conditions for "prompt resumption and early conclusion" of talks leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state "side by side in peace and security with the Jewish state of Israel".
By Barak Ravid, Haaretz Correspondent
U.S. special Mideast envoy George Mitchell assured Israel on Tuesday that Washington would remain its close ally despite differences over West Bank settlements and peacemaking with the Palestinians.
Mitchell told President Shimon Peres his goal was to create conditions for "prompt resumption and early conclusion" of talks leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state "side by side in peace and security with the Jewish state of Israel".
Monday, June 8, 2009
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Three Failed Plans to Wipe Israel Off the Map that keep the conflict going
By Barry Rubin June 7, 2009
There are now no less than three main plans for wiping Israel off the map.
1. Conquest. This is the old PLO strategy and continues to be the Hamas strategy. In addition, it is endorsed less overtly by a large group—arguably a majority—in Fatah, the party that controls the Palestinian Authority.
Israel will be militarily defeated, perhaps with some assistance from internal collapse, and replaced by a Palestinian Arab Islamic (Fatah version) or Palestinian Arab Islamist state.
2. Two-Stages. This was officially adopted by the PLO and Fatah. It is an alternative vision that appeals to many in those two groups but is rejected by Hamas.
A Palestinian state will be created on as much territory as possible and then used as a base for conquering the rest . A diplomatic deal can only be made to obtain such a state, however, if its terms do not foreclose the possibility of the second stage being implemented. The demand that virtually all Palestinians who wish to do so can go and live in Israel is a supplement to ensure that phase one turns into phase 2. In 2000, Yasir Arafat either rejected this in preference to Plan Number 1 or at least deemed the terms offered insufficient to make the second stage easy or possible.
3. Binational state. This is supported by some in PLO and Fatah, partly because it has more appeal to naïve or other Westerners. It is rejected by Hamas.
A binational state will be created. (Note the irony that this totally betrays the idea of the Palestinian movement being a nationalist one seeking its own state.) Despite assurances, it will be unworkable and beset by violence. But since Israel’s strength would be dismantled and millions of Palestinian Arabs would migrate onto its territory, there would be a relatively brief—but very bloody—transition to an Arab victory and the reconstitution of the state as an Arab Muslim Palestine.
None of these plans will actually ever happen but they motivate people to fight, die, kill, and hold conferences, not necessarily in that order.
Another major effect is to convince Palestinians (and also other Arabs and Muslims) that they don’t have to make the compromises necessary for a real two-state solution.
If someone asks you why the conflict remains unsettled, tell them it is because the Palestinian (and to some extent Arab) side doesn’t see why it should settle for less when it can implement plans 1, 2, or 3. And of course to the extent Westerners make them think this is possible they assist in postponing a solution and ensuring more suffering and bloodshed.
----------------------------
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. See the GLORIA/MERIA site at www.gloria-center.org.
By Barry Rubin June 7, 2009
There are now no less than three main plans for wiping Israel off the map.
1. Conquest. This is the old PLO strategy and continues to be the Hamas strategy. In addition, it is endorsed less overtly by a large group—arguably a majority—in Fatah, the party that controls the Palestinian Authority.
Israel will be militarily defeated, perhaps with some assistance from internal collapse, and replaced by a Palestinian Arab Islamic (Fatah version) or Palestinian Arab Islamist state.
2. Two-Stages. This was officially adopted by the PLO and Fatah. It is an alternative vision that appeals to many in those two groups but is rejected by Hamas.
A Palestinian state will be created on as much territory as possible and then used as a base for conquering the rest . A diplomatic deal can only be made to obtain such a state, however, if its terms do not foreclose the possibility of the second stage being implemented. The demand that virtually all Palestinians who wish to do so can go and live in Israel is a supplement to ensure that phase one turns into phase 2. In 2000, Yasir Arafat either rejected this in preference to Plan Number 1 or at least deemed the terms offered insufficient to make the second stage easy or possible.
3. Binational state. This is supported by some in PLO and Fatah, partly because it has more appeal to naïve or other Westerners. It is rejected by Hamas.
A binational state will be created. (Note the irony that this totally betrays the idea of the Palestinian movement being a nationalist one seeking its own state.) Despite assurances, it will be unworkable and beset by violence. But since Israel’s strength would be dismantled and millions of Palestinian Arabs would migrate onto its territory, there would be a relatively brief—but very bloody—transition to an Arab victory and the reconstitution of the state as an Arab Muslim Palestine.
None of these plans will actually ever happen but they motivate people to fight, die, kill, and hold conferences, not necessarily in that order.
Another major effect is to convince Palestinians (and also other Arabs and Muslims) that they don’t have to make the compromises necessary for a real two-state solution.
If someone asks you why the conflict remains unsettled, tell them it is because the Palestinian (and to some extent Arab) side doesn’t see why it should settle for less when it can implement plans 1, 2, or 3. And of course to the extent Westerners make them think this is possible they assist in postponing a solution and ensuring more suffering and bloodshed.
----------------------------
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. See the GLORIA/MERIA site at www.gloria-center.org.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)