I'm not familiar with the source, but it sounds plausable enough. I would have thought they'd cover their tracks better, but the operation had Iran written all over it. I find it disturbing that we're letting them go blameless.
Bill
You'll want to take a good look around the Iran Focus site. There is absolutely nothing going on except IRAN IS EVIL. Can't tell if it has an origin in the neoconservative community though that's certainly possible as sourcewatch has no listing yet for it but all the typical neocon warmonger types (Perle, Ledeen, Cheney, etc) turn up in the content listings. There appears to be a sister site called Iran Terror.
It's not a news gathering organization or site. It's pure propaganda.
Tico
Care to tell me who or what linked you to this?
OCCOM BILL wrote:I'm not familiar with the source, but it sounds plausable enough. I would have thought they'd cover their tracks better, but the operation had Iran written all over it. I find it disturbing that we're letting them go blameless.
But Bill knows better. Jesus H Keeeeerist, Bill. Can you say thinking person?
You've just got to get rid of that signature line, the crap about a "good man". Good men don't wish and hope and encourage the murder of other human beings for BS "patriotic" reasons.
I looked and looked and I couldn't find Occom Bill anywhere in the list.
Ticomaya wrote:Quote:Iran Focus
London, Aug. 16 - Iran masterminded the July 12 attack on an Israeli military squad by the Lebanese militia Hezbollah which ignited a major military offensive against the group by the Jewish state, Iran Focus has learnt.
A well-placed source inside the clerical establishment told Iran Focus that prior to the start of hostilities Tehran dispatched several top officials including the chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) to attend a summit in Syria which took place on July 4 and focused on ways to upset the regional balance in the Middle East.
Hassan Khomeini, the grandson of the founder of the Islamic Republic, travelled to the Syrian capital last month, staying in Damascus between July 1 and 6 under the cover of pilgrimage to a revered Shiite Muslim shrine.
Simultaneously, several top Hezbollah officials arrived in Damascus for what they claimed was to meet Hassan Khomeini.
On July 4, the secretary general of Iran's Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Larijani made an unannounced trip to the Syrian capital.
The Supreme Commander of the IRGC Major General Yahya Rahim Safavi and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of the Staff of the Islamic Republic's armed forces Major General Hassan Firouzabadi also secretly travelled to Damascus to attend the summit.
The summit, which was held at the Iranian embassy in Damascus, was also attended by top Syrian security officials and Iran's ambassador to Syria Hassan Akhtari. The radical Shiite cleric was formerly the chief of staff of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
During the summit a politico-military strategy was drawn up for a possible attack by Hezbollah fighters against Israel to trigger a regional war, and the militia was called on to prepare for an offensive.
Days later, on July 11, following a round of talks in Brussels with European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana on Iran's nuclear standoff with the West, Larijani made a second unannounced to trip to Damascus. There he met and held talks with Syrian Vice-President Farouk al-Shara, making the final arrangements for the actions that were to follow.
Finally, while meeting a top Hezbollah official in the Iranian embassy, Larijani gave the order for the Lebanese militia to mount the cross-border attack on the Jewish state, triggering the 34-day war which has left 157 Israelis and 1,110 Lebanese dead.
Can I get a "
good lookin' out"?
Why would Iran, Syria, Hesbollah and Hamas want to fire unguided rockets haphazardly into Israel?
I suppose, to provoke a reaction, and an invasion. And that's what happened. Why would they want that to happen? To try out their troops, and their new RLG anti-tank weapons.
Which, by all accounts, were successful. Israel was not able to secure the required land in the available timescale without further civilian casualties.
What do you think the arab master-plan is, if they're working to a common strategy?
Just can't see us going to war with Iran; I mean, what are we going to invade them with? Bush is so screwed up he can't even handle Iraq, what would he expect to do with a larger country like Iran?
Thankyou. Honesty appreciated.
On the page you linked, this comes up as the second article...
Quote:Fitzgerald: Tips for visiting a mosque
Before visiting a mosque, please google the phrase "taqiyya and tu-quoque" and arm yourself with knowledge. Be prepared to ask -- sweetly, in an Infidel-Wants-to-Know Mode -- about Muhammad's marriage to Aisha when she was nine, about the assassinations of Asma bint Marwan and others, about the massacre of the inoffensive Jewish farmers of the Khaybar oasis, about the decapitation of 600-900 helpless prisoners of the Banu Qurayza, and about so much more. Be sure to mention the Hadith.
Do not let the presentation to those Infidels (hmmm, doesn't that spicy chicken and that pita, and then the honeyed dessert, all waiting for us afterwards, smell good, I can't keep my mind off it, how nice these people are, what good hearts they have to invite us in to share their food and their faith) be allowed to finish without making the most that you possibly can out of that "question time." And bear in mind that you will only be called on once, so you had better have your questions ready -- not really to be answered, but so that they can provoke thought and unease in your fellow Infidels who have come, unlike you, without any mental weapons whatsoever.
This is designed to foment hatred and division, certainly not to promote understanding.
Just turn it around and imagine a Muslim standing up in Sunday Service and asking such questions designed only to embarrass the Sunday Service attendees. And there certainly are many passages in the bible which could be used in an identical manner as we see above.
Thanks for that article, Xingu, i have always admired Carter, and greatly enjoyed reading the piece.
Jack Carter (son of Jimmy) won the Nevada primary this week. I'm not sure of his positions but I find it interesting.
Yeah, Boss, that piqued my interest, too. I didn't know about his son in the primary, but then, i don't try to keep abreast of all the state primaries, since that is a matter of literally hundreds of hopefuls. I wish his son all the best.
I find it interesting the both Carter and Bush are born-again Christians. One is a man of peace who seeks negotiation, compromise and just settlements. The other is a simple minded war monger.
Even among the religious right you can find vast differences.
Fans of J Carter (or of Garry Wills) really ought to read this...
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18670
blatham wrote:
Thankyou. Honesty appreciated.
Honesty always given, despite your claims to the contrary.
blatham wrote:On the page you linked, this comes up as the second article...
Quote:Fitzgerald: Tips for visiting a mosque
Before visiting a mosque, please google the phrase "taqiyya and tu-quoque" and arm yourself with knowledge. Be prepared to ask -- sweetly, in an Infidel-Wants-to-Know Mode -- about Muhammad's marriage to Aisha when she was nine, about the assassinations of Asma bint Marwan and others, about the massacre of the inoffensive Jewish farmers of the Khaybar oasis, about the decapitation of 600-900 helpless prisoners of the Banu Qurayza, and about so much more. Be sure to mention the Hadith.
Do not let the presentation to those Infidels (hmmm, doesn't that spicy chicken and that pita, and then the honeyed dessert, all waiting for us afterwards, smell good, I can't keep my mind off it, how nice these people are, what good hearts they have to invite us in to share their food and their faith) be allowed to finish without making the most that you possibly can out of that "question time." And bear in mind that you will only be called on once, so you had better have your questions ready -- not really to be answered, but so that they can provoke thought and unease in your fellow Infidels who have come, unlike you, without any mental weapons whatsoever.
This is designed to foment hatred and division, certainly not to promote understanding.
Understanding of what? It appears designed to arm the "infidel" with knowledge prior to being invited to a mosque. As the author of that article said, the questions should be asked "sweetly," and are designed to provoke "thought and unease" in the other infidels. You have a problem with thought provoking questions?
The proprietor of the JihadWatch site, Robert Spencer, has the following opinion of Islam:
[quote="Robert Spencer"]Islam is the only religion in the world that has a developed doctrine theology and legal system that mandates violence against unbelievers and mandates that Muslims must wage war in order to establish the homogeneity of the Islamic social order over the world. Now, these things are objectively verifiable facts. Anyone can look at the Koran. Anyone can look at the Muslim sources, the Muslim history, Muslim legal texts and so on and find that to be true.[/quote]
blatham wrote:Just turn it around and imagine a Muslim standing up in Sunday Service and asking such questions designed only to embarrass the Sunday Service attendees. And there certainly are many passages in the bible which could be used in an identical manner as we see above.
The problem with your analogy is the Bible does not command all Christians to make war against and subjugate all unbelievers, as the Quran does. The reality is Islam is creating terrorists, not Christianity. And if you think the questions should not be asked because they "foment "
hatred and division," then I must question your devotion to truth, honesty, and forthrightness.
BBB
I say a pox on all religions---except capitalism, of course.
BBB
tico says
Quote:As the author of that article said, the questions should be asked "sweetly," and are designed to provoke "thought and unease" in the other infidels. You have a problem with thought provoking questions?
So, a Muslim stands up in Sunday Service and asks, sweetly, "Um...I wonder how many of you christians have sold your daughters into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7? And, by the way, are any of you women present menstrually unclean because Leviticus 15 demands that none of us have contact with you? One last question, my dear loving christian friends, I can hear a lawnmower going outside and I noted that a Mexican fellow is cutting the church lawn. Exodus 35:2 demands that he be put to death for working on the Sabbath and I wondered if that will happen in the parking lot or the church basement? If outside, and if burned at the stake, can we roast weenies?"
No problem with thought provoking questions, no.
And you probably do not want to get into a discussion on the crusades or the christianities behavior in Europe through the period of the Inquisitions.
Lebanon says it won't force Hezbollah to disarm
Posted on Wed, Aug. 16, 2006
Lebanon says it won't force Hezbollah to disarm
By Shashank Bengali and Hannah Allam
McClatchy Newspapers
BEIRUT, Lebanon - Thousands of Lebanese soldiers were set to head south Thursday to take over territory seized by Israel in its war with Hezbollah. But Lebanon said its army wouldn't be disarming the militants or searching for their weapons.
Some Israeli troops occupying Lebanon's southern tier, meanwhile, began pulling out and heading home, the army said.
The exact time for the deployment was not announced, although officials expected troops to begin moving at 6 a.m. on Thursday.
The Lebanese government's decisions virtually assured, for now, that Hezbollah's sophisticated arsenal of missiles and anti-tank weapons would remain in southern Lebanon, perhaps hidden from view but still easily within striking distance of northern Israel.
Lebanese officials said it was a compromise to avoid a confrontation with Hezbollah, an increasingly powerful force in Lebanon since the monthlong war. Hezbollah's leader has claimed victory over Israel and said this is "the wrong time" to discuss giving up its weapons despite a U.N.-brokered call for the group's disarmament.
Israel's foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, said that the Lebanese deployment presented "a chance for peace." But, she said, unless Hezbollah was eventually disarmed, the region would continue to see more violence like that of the past month, which left more than 1,000 Lebanese and 150 Israelis dead.
"We must ensure that the end result of the process will be the full and complete disarmament of Hezbollah," Livni said. "The world cannot allow itself to repeat the omissions of the past, to allow Hezbollah to rise again and threaten the future of the region."
By sending its army to patrol the south, Lebanon hoped to speed diplomatic efforts to form and deploy an enhanced, 15,000-strong U.N. peacekeeping force. On Wednesday, U.N. officials said they welcomed the Lebanese deployment but said the movement of international forces into the area was likely still several days away.
The Bush administration was fully on board, praising the Lebanese government's decision to put its troops on the move. At the White House, spokesman Tony Snow offered assurances that disarmament would happen eventually. "It's going to take some time," he said.
Under last week's U.N. resolution, the Lebanese and U.N. forces together will gradually take over land currently occupied by Israeli forces and patrol the southern fifth of Lebanon, Hezbollah's traditional stronghold, between the Litani River and the Israeli border.
Lebanese officials said all 15,000 Lebanese troops would be in place within three to four days. U.N. peacekeepers stationed outside the southern town of Tyre said early Thursday that the soldiers were expected to arrive later Thursday afternoon and take over highway checkpoints and other positions throughout the south.
Under the cease-fire, which took effect Monday, the Lebanese and U.N. forces are to be the only armed groups in the region. But the cease-fire plan doesn't give the U.N. peacekeepers the authority to disarm Hezbollah.
The government of Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora has said it wants Hezbollah to hand over its weapons to allow the national army to control security in the country.
But in negotiations over the past several days with Hezbollah representatives, Saniora and his backers withdrew calls for the group to disarm. Hezbollah is believed to have several thousand short-range Katyusha rockets, plus dozens of medium-range Iranian-made rockets and an undisclosed number of other, more advanced weapons.
On Wednesday evening, Saniora's Cabinet approved something of a don't-ask-don't-tell policy on the weapons: The Lebanese army may seize arms that they see. But they won't go looking for them.
"There will be no arms other than official arms," said Lebanon's acting interior minister, Ahmed Fatfat. "Where they (soldiers) find weapons, they will take them."
Saniora said the long-term security of Lebanon required Hezbollah to disarm eventually.
"No national unity is achieved except with a single sovereign and free state, with single decision-making and with no dual authority," he said in a televised address.
Members of Saniora's government said they had assurances from Hezbollah that it would abide by the cease-fire and accept the army's authority. But with thousands of Israeli troops still inside Lebanon - and disputes with Israel over the Chebaa Farms territory and prisoners still unresolved - Lebanese officials said it was politically impossible to convince Hezbollah's fighters to abandon what they call their "resistance."
In the village of Aaitaroune Wednesday morning, there was no sign that Hezbollah fighters were putting down their weapons. A few men toting AK-47s watched through binoculars as several dozen Israeli soldiers walked toward the village through a valley of tobacco fields.
"Hezbollah has pledged to collaborate fully with the Lebanese army, which is going as a totally friendly and national force," said Michel Pharaon, minister of parliamentary affairs.
But Pharaon acknowledged that the presence of thousands of Hezbollah weapons could invite another Israeli military campaign on southern Lebanon.
"We are of course a little worried for the future," Pharaon said. "But practically ... we couldn't see it any other way at this time."
Milos Strugar, a spokesman for the U.N. mission in Lebanon, said there were no immediate plans to move 2,000 U.N. troops already in Lebanon into the new peacekeeping mission. Up to 13,000 more U.N. troops have been authorized, and envoys from several countries - France, Turkey, Pakistan and Malaysia - were in Beirut Wednesday to discuss possibly contributing troops.
On Wednesday, the French foreign minister indicated for the first time that France would be willing to lead the peacekeeping mission at least until February.
It's been 36 years since the Lebanese army was last deployed in the south, where Hezbollah has been the dominant force for the past two decades. On Wednesday there was little government presence in the region besides traffic cops, while Hezbollah agents were widely visible assessing damages and pledging to help families rebuild destroyed homes.
Throughout the streets, yellow signs were flying to proclaim Hezbollah victory, written in English, Arabic and French.
Leila Fadel of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram in southern Lebanon and McClatchy Newspapers special correspondent Nada Raad in Beirut contributed to this report.
blatham wrote:tico says
Quote:As the author of that article said, the questions should be asked "sweetly," and are designed to provoke "thought and unease" in the other infidels. You have a problem with thought provoking questions?
So, a Muslim stands up in Sunday Service and asks, sweetly, "Um...I wonder how many of you christians have sold your daughters into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7? And, by the way, are any of you women present menstrually unclean because Leviticus 15 demands that none of us have contact with you? One last question, my dear loving christian friends, I can hear a lawnmower going outside and I noted that a Mexican fellow is cutting the church lawn. Exodus 35:2 demands that he be put to death for working on the Sabbath and I wondered if that will happen in the parking lot or the church basement? If outside, and if burned at the stake, can we roast weenies?"
No problem with thought provoking questions, no.
I'd have no problem with those questions being asked, as long as he wasn't interrupting the service, and it was time for questions.
But what exactly is your beef here, blatham? If there were groups of Christians going around the world selling daughters into slavery, and executing people who work on the Sabbath, you might have a point that could be understood. But as it is, this doesn't seem to be a big problem in the world. Unfortunately, there are quite a few groups of Muslims who teach and preach Jihad and terrorism is supported by the Quran, and these folks are becoming terrorists, in the name of Allah.
Quote:And you probably do not want to get into a discussion on the crusades or the christianities behavior in Europe through the period of the Inquisitions.
I have no problem acknowledging past or current bad behavior of Christians, but unless we are going to similarly focus on the bad behavior of Muslims thousands of years ago -- and why would be be doing that? -- I don't see the relevance of that particular discussion to the topic at hand.
-----
blatham wrote: If outside, and if burned at the stake, can we roast weenies?"
Yes, but they will be pork weenies ... sorry.
