Israel, the U.S. and the Arab World

Lebanon and Syria to Join Forces Against Israel

Haaretz
December 19, 2009

Lebanese Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri told Syrian President Bashar Assad on Saturday that he sought to improve the relations between their countries to better defend Lebanon against Israel, the Syrian news agency Champress reported.

During a meeting in Damascus, Hariri also accused Israel of violating and denying Arab rights, according to the agency.

The leaders met to end nearly five years of animosity between Damascus and a broad political alliance led by Hariri.

Syria's official SANA news agency said the pair discussed how to turn the page on recent turmoil in bilateral relations. It quoted Hariri as saying he was looking for "real and strategic ties with Syria."

According to Champress, Assad told Hariri that Syria was working to establish the best possible relations with its smaller neighbor, which would protect both countries' interests. He stressed that stability in Lebanon was an inseparable part of stability in Syria, the news agency said.

"I can say that the dialogue was constructive and the atmosphere was cordial," Buthaina Shaaban, an Assad aide, told reporters after a first round of talks that lasted three hours.

She said the meeting had broken the ice between the two leaders who discussed all issues in a "frank, transparent and cordial climate."

Earlier Saturday, Assad warmly welcomed the prime minister at the entrance of the presidential palace in Damascus after Hariri, a billionaire businessman, flew in to the Syrian capital on his private jet.

Lebanese political sources expect the two leaders to agree on opening a new page in their personal relationship and on strengthening cooperation between their governments to guarantee Lebanon's stability.

"At the end of the day, Syria is the nearest country to us. God willing this visit will bring stability and security to Lebanon," Bahia al-Hariri, a member of the Lebanese parliament and the premier's aunt, said in Lebanon.

Hariri's "March 14" alliance has accused Syria of assassinating his politician father, Rafik al-Hariri, in February 2005. They also blamed Damascus for attacking and killing other politicians and journalists.

Syria denies the allegations. A special court based in The Hague has yet to indict anyone for the Hariri killing.

Outrage in Lebanon over the assassination and international pressure forced Syria to withdraw its troops from Lebanon in April 2005, ending three decades of military presence in its smaller neighbour.

Saad al-Hariri's coalition has often clashed in the past with Syria's allies in Lebanon, led by the powerful Iranian-backed group Hezbollah, and the political crisis has threatened to plunge Lebanon into a new civil war.

Rapprochement between Syria and Saudi Arabia, which backs Hariri, earlier this year eased tension and allowed Hariri, who won a parliamentary election in June, to form a unity government that includes Hezbollah and other Damascus allies.

Hezbollah, which fought a war against Israel in 2006, the Second Lebanon War, is the only armed group in Lebanon. It is considered a terrorist group by Washington but Hariri's government has said it is a legitimate force whose aim was to end Israeli occupation of some Lebanese territory.

Hariri, accompanied by only one senior aide, will spend the night in the Syrian capital and hold further talks with senior officials before returning to Beirut on Sunday.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israeli-Iranian Conflict

2010: A Year of Decision for Israel on Iran

Haaretz
December 18, 2009

... Maj. Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland, a former head of the National Security Council, said this week that in his view, Israel will have to decide in the year ahead whether to attack or not.

"The question of a decision on attacking Iran's nuclear capability is liable to be very much not theoretical but very practical in 2010," Eiland said at the same conference at which Yadlin spoke.

According to Eiland, an Israeli attack will be feasible only in the event that a crisis occurs in nuclear-related talks between Iran and the great powers, followed by a cessation of negotiations altogether and the failure by the United States to cobble together an international coalition against the Iranians.

Another retired major general, Prof. Isaac Ben-Israel, who was a Kadima MK in the previous Knesset and advised Olmert on security affairs, noted at the same conference:

"If there is no choice, Israel can set back the Iranian nuclear process."

Iran can be expected to retaliate against such an attack with Shihab missiles. Ben-Israel, who specialized in operations research in the air force and took part in planning the attack on the Iraqi reactor in 1981, estimated that Israel would be hit by about 80 Iranian missiles - twice the number that Saddam Hussein fired at Tel Aviv, Haifa and Dimona during the 1991 Gulf War. According to Ben-Israel, the Iranians would also make use of Hezbollah, which serves them to deter Israel from attacking their nuclear facilities:

"Hezbollah has more missiles than it had during the Second Lebanon War, but the number of missiles that will be fired at Israel will not be much larger than it was then." (In 2006, some 4,200 Hezbollah missiles and rockets struck Israel, killing 54 people.)

Even if Obama agrees to an Israeli attack, the real dilemma that will confront Netanyahu, his colleagues in the forum of seven and the heads of the army and intelligence, will lie in assessing the benefits vs. the damage. Israel will survive an Iranian missile attack and a rain of rockets from Lebanon. But an attack also carries strategic costs, which will only be aggravated if the operation against Iran does not succeed: Israel will be denounced as a militant and aggressive state, the price of oil will soar, America and its allies in the gulf are liable to be adversely affected - and worst of all, Iran will be perceived as the victim of Israeli aggression and will obtain international legitimization to renew the devastated nuclear project. Israel will also have to gamble on whether Syrian President Bashar Assad will join the war on the side of Iran, or will follow custom and sit on the sidelines.

Another critical question in this discussion concerns the deployment on the Israeli home front. In the wake of the Second Lebanon War, the political and military echelons understand how exposed the civilian population is to a massive missile and rocket attack. The summer of 2010 has already been earmarked by the IDF as an in-principle target date for completion of repairs on essential lacunae. But despite the massive media coverage given to the multilayer defense system against missiles, it is worth recalling that most of its components still exist only on paper. In every scenario of warfare projected for the years ahead, many more missiles will be fired at Israel than can be intercepted by its anti-missile system.

In the face of all the risks and damage, what will Israel gain from an attack? A three- to five-year delay in the manufacture of the Iranian bomb, according to the optimistic estimate. Is that worth the certain price that will be paid and the risk entailed in a complicated air mission so far from home? Do Netanyahu and Barak have what it takes to make that decision? It's not certain.

And these doubts lead the experts to assess that Israel will agonize and will talk about a strike, but will do nothing. In their view, it is more reasonable that the U.S. and Iran will continue their dialogue, with "controllable" crises erupting from time to time. As long as Obama sees to it that Israel does not feel isolated and abandoned in the face of the Iranian threat, Netanyahu will not dare attack.

Understanding this, Obama dispatched 1,500 soldiers to Israel for a missile-defense exercise about two months ago, and he continues to operate the sophisticated warning radar that Bush stationed in the Negev. The president prefers to reassure Israel on the Iranian front and exact concessions from Netanyahu on the Palestinian front.

The question that is apparently not now under discussion between Jerusalem and Washington is the stage at which Iran will agree to stop its nuclear project under international pressure. Will this be a case of Iranian nuclear brinkmanship, with Tehran just a decision away from a bomb, or will Iran gamble and go the whole way? Even then, it's likely there will be enough experts in the administration and in American research institutes who will recommend that Israel take a deep breath and adapt to the new situation. In other words, learn how to stop worrying and love the bomb.

Despite the experts' assessments -- and as MI head Yadlin hinted this week -- no scenario promises that the year ahead will be quiet and tranquil. Most of the wars in the past broke out by surprise, because of mistaken risk assessments or seemingly irrevocable political commitments. The same could happen between Israel and Iran.

Prof. Yehoshafat Harkabi was director of Military Intelligence in the second half of the 1950s. Some officers in the present General Staff continue to view his books, notably "Israel's Fateful Hour" and "Nuclear War and Nuclear Peace," as relevant guidelines even today.

"What is special about our situation in Israel is that we cannot allow ourselves a process of learning by trial and error," Harkabi wrote in 1986 in the last chapter of "Israel's Fateful Hour." "We cannot allow ourselves the calamities of mistaken policy, lest we are unable to turn around and start over. Our great weakness is that it is very doubtful whether we will be able to backtrack from the wrong path ... Many countries can adopt foolish policies and will suffer accordingly, but without experiencing any great ill, whereas we are permitted only narrow margins of error" [unofficial translation].

Harkabi quotes the British military historian Basil Liddell-Hart:

"An important difference between a military operation and a surgical operation is that the patient is not tied down. But it is a common fault of generalship to assume that he is."

Iran: New Centrifuges Being Developed

Associated Press
December 18, 2009

Iran's nuclear chief said Friday the country has started making more efficient centrifuge models that it plans to put in use by early 2011 - a statement that underscores Teheran's defiance and adds to international concerns over its nuclear ambitions.

The official, Vice President Ali Akbar Salehi, said Iranian scientists are still testing the more advanced models before they will become operational at the country's enrichment facilities.

Teheran has been saying since April that it is building more advanced centrifuges capable of enriching uranium with higher efficiency and precision, but Salehi's remarks were the first indication of a timeline when the new models could become operational.

The new centrifuge models will be able to enrich uranium much faster than the old ones; some experts estimate that this next generation could double or even triple the rate of uranium production.

Such a development would add to growing concerns in the West because they would allow Teheran to accelerate the pace of its program. That would mean Iran could amass more material in a shorter space of time that could be turned into the fissile core of missiles, should Teheran choose to do so.

Iran's uranium enrichment is a major concern to the international community, worried that the program masks efforts to make a nuclear weapon. Teheran insists its enrichment work is peaceful and only meant to generate electricity, not make an atomic bomb.

Iran has threatened to expand its enrichment program tenfold, even while rejecting a plan brokered by the UN nuclear watchdog agency to supply fuel for Iran's research reactor if Teheran exports most of its enriched stockpile. The UN plan would leave Iran - at least temporarily - without enough uranium to produce a bomb.

Centrifuges are machines used to enrich uranium - a technology that can produce fuel for power plants or materials for a nuclear weapon. Uranium enriched to low level is used to produce fuel but further enrichment makes it suitable for use in building nuclear arms.

"We are currently producing new generation of centrifuges named IR3 and IR4," Salehi told the semiofficial Fars news agency. "We hope to use them by early 2011 after resolving problems and defects."

He did not elaborate on the technical details or the difference between various centrifuge types.

However, Salehi added:

"We are not in a rush to enter the industrial-scale production stage."

The new centrifuges would likely replace the decades-old P-1 centrifuges, once acquired on the black market and in use at Iran's main uranium enrichment facility in Natanz, central Iran.

Iran has said the new centrifuges would also be installed at Iran's recently revealed secret uranium enrichment facility. The plant is still under construction at Fordo, near the holy city of Qom.

Salehi said that more than 6,000 centrifuges are currently enriching uranium - 2,000 more than the figure mentioned in a November report by the UN watchdog, the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency.

The IAEA has reported that it is watching Iran's efforts to improve its centrifuges.

Iran says it will install more than 50,000 centrifuges at Natanz, but currently they have installed fewer than 9,000, so there could easily be room for more advanced models in the future, a Vienna nuclear expert said. The expert spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

Iranian officials have claimed that most parts for the new centrifuges are made domestically and others have been imported -- a sign that Iran was able to get around UN sanctions imposed on the country for its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment.

Iran's defiance has not wavered amid recent signals of possible more UN sanctions over its enrichment. Salehi said Friday such new sanctions won't stop Iran from developing its nuclear program.

"We don't welcome new (UN Security Council) resolutions," he told ISNA, another semiofficial news agency. "But resolutions won't stop us in any field, including the nuclear."

Netanyahu Must Decide Whether to Strike Iran’s Nuclear Facilities

The Times
December 14, 2009

The moment is fast approaching when Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, may have to make the most difficult decision of his career — whether to launch a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities and risk triggering a conflagration that could spread across the Middle East.

Israeli experts believe the point of no return may be only six months away when Iran’s nuclear programme will have — if it has not already — metastasised into a multitude of smaller, difficult-to-trace facilities in deserts and mountains, while its main reactor at Bushehr will have come online and bombing it would send a radioactive cloud over the Gulf nations.

Mr Netanyahu has consistently called Iran the most serious threat Israel faces. President Ahmadinejad of Iran has called for Israel to be obliterated and his Revolutionary Guards supply training, money and weapons to both Hezbollah in Lebanon, on Israel’s northern border, and to Hamas in the Gaza Strip, whose missiles are believed to be capable of reaching Tel Aviv.

In the run-up to his election this year, Mr Netanyahu promised that “under my Government, Iran will not be allowed to go nuclear.” Yet Mr Ahmadinejad has promised to produce 20 per cent enriched uranium: a big step towards weapons-grade fuel.

With the Iranian threat at the front of his strategic thinking, Mr Netanyahu has surrounded himself with old comrades from Israel’s most prestigious military unit, the Sayeret Matkal, or General Staff Reconnaissance. Mr Netanyahu served in the elite unit in the 1970s under Ehud Barak, who went on to become Israel’s most decorated soldier and later Prime Minister in his own right.

When Mr Netanyahu came to power, he made great efforts to recruit his former commander as Defence Minister. Mr Barak serves with another former leader of the unit, the Deputy Prime Minister, Moshe “Bogie” Yaalon. The Israeli Prime Minister has hard-wired his core Cabinet with so much military experience for a good reason. Striking Iran’s nuclear facilities would be a huge military and political gamble. Although Russia has delayed supplying Iran with S300 anti-aircraft missiles, which could weaken any Israeli attack, the air force would have to mount one of its largest long-range attacks to have a chance of disabling Iran’s nuclear installations.

Earlier this year a report by Anthony Cordesman of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, warned that “a military strike by Israel against Iranian nuclear facilities is possible . . . (but) would be complex and high-risk and would lack any assurances that the overall mission will have a high success rate.”

At roughly the same time, Leon Panetta, the head of the CIA, went on a covert visit to Israel to seek assurances that the new Government would not surprise the Obama Administration with a sudden unilateral attack.

In 2007, in what is often seen as a trial run for an attack on Iran, an Israeli squadron flew undetected through Turkish airspace and over Syria’s unprotected border to destroy what was thought to be a nuclear facility under construction with Iranian and North Korean support.

In June 2008, the air force staged exercises over the Mediterranean, with dozens of fighters, bombers and refuelling tankers flying roughly the same distance as between Israel and Iran. Earlier this year, Israeli jets again carried out a long-range bombing mission, hitting trucks in Sudan that were believed to be bringing Iranian weapons to Hamas via Egypt.

In the immediate term, the threat of a strike has receded. Israel is satisfied that Iran’s hostile stance towards the international community has increased the chances of serious, crippling sanctions. Officials noted that for the first time Russia seemed to be serious about isolating Tehran.

But that international front could easily crack, and then Mr Netanyahu would be faced with the decision on whether to order his bombers into action. Iran has already threatened to bomb Israel’s cities with its long-range missiles should its nuclear facilities come under attack.

It could also, in stages, order Hezbollah to launch rockets across the northern border. The attack could come in conjunction with a Hamas assault from the Gaza Strip.

Alternatively both sides may choose to do nothing. Some analysts believe that Israel might tolerate Iran as a “threshold nuclear state”, capable of building a bomb but not testing it.

Iran could opt for the path chosen by Syria in 2007, if Israel strikes at isolated facilities miles from an urban areas, where the only casualties would be technicians and guards. After the strike against Syria, neither side admitted what had happened, thereby avoiding a war and saving face.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran-Venezuela-Cuba Alliance

Cuba and Venezuela Criticise U.S. at Alba Trade Summit

BBC News
December 14, 2009

Cuba's President Raul Castro and Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez have criticised the US during a key alternative trade summit in Havana.

Mr Castro accused the US of treating Latin America as its "backyard" and denounced a deal giving US armed forces access to Colombian military bases.

Meanwhile Mr Chavez said US criticism about Latin America's relationship with Iran was an "imperial offensive."

Both were speaking at the opening of the left-wing Alba summit in Havana.

A regional political and economic bloc, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of America (Alba), was founded five years ago as a radical alternative to America's free trade policies in the region.

The BBC's correspondent in Havana Michael Voss says Mr Castro's harsh rhetoric was reminiscent of the Cold War.

It could be a signal that ties between Cuba and the US might be taking a turn for the worse.

Mr Castro said:

"On the one side, there's an exploitative model of dependence subordinated to the interests of the empire, on the other, the advance of revolutionary and progressive forces, representing the disposed."

Mr Castro said President Obama had carried out a hegemonic offensive with the Colombia deal.

He also criticised Washington for presiding over what he described as "an electoral farce" in Honduras.

He said the country's people "have been deprived of their constitutional rights and there has been imposed, with the support of the US administration and a coup-led government (in Honduras), an electoral farce."

Shortly afterwards Mr Chavez openly rejected a warning made by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday that Latin American countries needed to "think twice" about fostering a relationship with Iran.

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last month visited Brazil, Venezuela and Bolivia which voiced support for Iran's right to a nuclear programme.

But the US is concerned about what the consequences of the stepped up diplomatic efforts could mean.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Olmert's Plan for Peace with the Palestinians

Haaretz
December 17, 2009

Former prime minister Ehud Olmert proposed giving the Palestinians land from communities bordering the Gaza Strip and from the Judean Desert nature reserve in exchange for settlement blocs in the West Bank.

According to the map proposed by Olmert, which is being made public here for the first time, the future border between Israel and the Gaza Strip would be adjacent to kibbutzim and moshavim such as Be'eri, Kissufim and Nir Oz, whose fields would be given to the Palestinians.

Click here to view the map detailing Olmert's peace plan

Olmert also proposed giving land to a future Palestinian state in the Beit She'an Valley near Kibbutz Tirat Tzvi; in the Judean Hills near Nataf and Mevo Betar; and in the area of Lachish and of the Yatir Forest. Together, the areas would have involved the transfer of 327 square kilometers of territory from within the Green Line.

Olmert presented his map to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in September of last year. Abbas did not respond, and negotiations ended. In an interview with Haaretz on Tuesday, Abbas said Olmert had presented several drafts of his map.

The version being disclosed Thursday in Haaretz is based on sources who received detailed information about Olmert's proposals.

Olmert wanted to annex 6.3 percent of the West Bank to Israel, areas that are home to 75 percent of the Jewish population of the territories. His proposal would have also involved evacuation of dozens of settlements in the Jordan Valley, in the eastern Samarian hills and in the Hebron region. In return for the annexation to Israel of Ma'aleh Adumim, the Gush Etzion bloc of settlements, Ariel, Beit Aryeh and settlements adjacent to Jerusalem, Olmert proposed the transfer of territory to the Palestinians equivalent to 5.8 percent of the area of the West Bank as well as a safe-passage route from Hebron to the Gaza Strip via a highway that would remain part of the sovereign territory of Israel but where there would be no Israeli presence.

Olmert gave Col. (res.) Danny Tirza, who had been the primary official involved in planning the route of the security fence, the task of developing the map that would provide the permanent border between Israel and the Palestinian state. Olmert's proposed annexation to Israel of settlement blocs corresponds in large part to the route of the security fence. In his proposal for a territory swap, Olmert rejected suggestions previously raised involving the transfer to the Palestinians of the eastern Lachish hills, deciding instead to establish communities there for evacuees from the Gaza Strip. He also showed a preference for giving the Palestinians agricultural land over the transfer of the Halutza sands near the Egyptian border.

The implementation of the Olmert plan would require the evacuation of tens of thousands of settlers and the removal of hallmarks of the West Bank settlement enterprise such as Ofra, Beit El, Elon Moreh and Kiryat Arba, as well as the Jewish community in Hebron itself.

Olmert reached a verbal understanding with the Bush administration to the effect that Israel would receive American financial aid to develop the Negev and Galilee to absorb some of those settlers evacuated from the West Bank. Other evacuees would have been resettled in new apartments to be built in the settlement blocs that Israel would annex.

Olmert's office said in response to the disclosure of the plan:

"On September 16, 2008, [Olmert] presented Palestinian Authority President Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] a map that had been prepared based upon dozens of conversations that the two held in the course of the intensive negotiations after the Annapolis summit. The map that was presented was designed to solve the problem of the borders between Israel and the future Palestinian state. Giving Abu Mazen the map was conditioned upon signing a comprehensive and final agreement with the Palestinians so it would not be used as an 'opening position' in future negotiations the Palestinians sought to conduct. Ultimately, when Abu Mazen did not give his consent to a final and complete agreement, the map was not given to him."

Olmert's office also told Haaretz that "naturally for reasons of national responsibility, we cannot relate to the content of that map and the details of the proposal. At the same time, it should be stressed that in the details contained in your question, there are a not inconsiderable number of inaccuracies that are not consistent with the map that was ultimately presented."

Olmert is currently suggesting that his map provide the basis for the resumption of negotiations with the Palestinians. In his talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and foreign statesmen, the former prime minister has said the international community must demand a formal response from Abbas to the Olmert proposal and proceed from there in the talks. Olmert has not presented the detailed map to Netanyahu.

Shaul Arieli of the Council for Peace and Security, which developed a map with a final border as part of the Geneva Initiative, said Israel's capacity to swap territory with a future Palestinian state is more limited than what Olmert reportedly proposed.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran

Iran Test Fires Missile Capable of Hitting Israel

Telegraph
December 16, 2009

Iran said it has successfully tested what it called an upgraded version of its longest-range, solid-fuel Sajjil-2 missile.

State television broke the news in a one-sentence report that gave no details on the test of the Sajjil-2 missile, a high-speed, surface-to-surface missile with a range of about 1,200 miles.

That range places Israel, Iran's sworn enemy, well within reach and streches as far away as south-eastern Europe with greater precision than earlier models.

Iran has intensified its missile development programme in recent years, a source of serious concern in Israel, the United States, and its Western allies at a time when they accuse Tehran of seeking to build a nuclear weapon.

Iran, which is under several sets of United Nations sanctions over its nuclear programme, denies the charge. It says its nuclear program is aimed solely at generating electricity.

Iran tried to deceive world by 'testing' old missiles, US experts believe
Iran's missile test shows it has no desire to unclench its fist
Iran accused of testing triggers
Israel will not hesitate if threatened, defence minister says

Threats and Sanctions Have Lost Efficiency: Mottaki

Tehran Times
December 14, 2009

Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki has stated that the era of threats and sanctions against nations has elapsed, saying threatening Iran with such tactics have proven futile.

The U.S. defense secretary and the British prime minister have called for an intensification of sanctions against Iran for its nuclear program. Mottaki said such statements are a legacy of the Bush administration.

“Presumably Western politicians are used to repeat such a language,” Mottaki said in Manama.

The chief diplomat went on to say that employing such a language towards a nation who is determined to safeguard its native technological achievements is doomed to failure.

Washington is worried about Iran’s growing influence in Latin America, a region which the United States has considered its backyard for centuries.

Hilary Clinton, the U.S. secretary of state, has called Iran’s idea of expanding ties with Latin American countries severely alarming.

On Clinton’s remarks, Mottaki said, “Americans’ behavior” is in stark contrast to the international treaties such as the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. He added Iran strongly condemns such unprofessional remarks which go against the internationally-accepted norms.

“The fact that Clinton analyzes countries’ bilateral relations suspiciously while employing threatening tactics is against diplomatic and professional principles.”

He said no member of the UN has the right to prevent others from establishing constructive ties with other countries based on mutual respect and equal partnership.

Asked about U.S. officials’ interventionist remarks about Iran’s internal affairs, the minister said the Iranian nation never allows foreigners to meddle in its domestic issues which are primarily aimed at dividing the nation and destabilizing the country.

Iran to Test New Missiles in Near Future

Tehran Times
December 14, 2009

Iranian Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi announced on Sunday that Iran will soon test some new missiles and warships.

He made the remarks on the sidelines of the technology and research achievements exhibition in Tehran.

These projects are now in the final phase and further details will be released soon, he added.

The minister said the Defense Ministry is determined to make more technological breakthroughs in cooperation with Ministry of Science, Research and Technology.

“The research and technological cycle has taken shape in the Ministry of Defense by relying on the capabilities of universities and research centers,” said the minister.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

World at War

We Have Had Two World Wars; The Third Is Underway (Excerpt)

By OverlordsOfChaos.com

Unfortunately for the people of the world, everything is going according to the New World Order Plan. But what is this New World Order Plan? In a nutshell, the Plan is this. The Dark Agenda of the secret planners of the New World Order is to reduce the world's population to a "sustainable" level "in perpetual balance with nature" via population and reproduction control… a mass culling of the people via Planned Parenthood, toxic adulteration of water and food supplies, release of weaponised man-made viruses, man-made pandemics, mass vaccination campaigns, and a planned Third World War… then, the Dark Agenda will impose upon the drastically reduced world population a global feudal-fascist state with a World Government, World Religion, World Army, World Central Bank, World Currency and a microchipped population… in short, to kill 90% of the world's population and to control all aspects of the human condition, and thus rule everyone, everywhere from the cradle to the grave.

... The occult aim of the Third World War, apart from the Dark Occult Power raised from the immense carnage, pain and death, is to stir up the differences between the Jews and the Arabs, between the political Zionists and the leaders of the Islamic world, between the Zionist State of Israel and the Muslim world.

A second contrived dilemma, put in place to help trigger the coming war, is the stand-off between North and South Korea left after the Korean War … a war that the US-led forces should have easily won if they were not betrayed by the communist traitors, who are, in truth, the internationalists and globalists in Washington and the United Nations.

The seeds of the Jew-Arab war were sown during the beginning of the 20th century when the Zionist Movement was allowed to press its case for the establishment of a Zionist nation in Palestine wholly against natural justice and common sense. The ruthless, cynical and illegal occupation of Palestine was achieved primarily because of the Holocaust; a terrible tragedy that the Zionist leadership not only did nothing to stop but also positively encouraged it to happen.

Shocking is it not? Such truths go against generally held assumptions and beliefs on the knotty subject of the Holocaust. Yet, it is true because, gentle reader, the world is very different from what it is commonly perceived to be.

The carefully contrived disputes between the two Koreas, North and South, and between Israel and her Arab neighbours, are the flashpoints for the great conflagration by which other powers and nations, irreconcilably divided on these issues, will be brought into conflict and forced to fight each other, resulting in total global warfare.

The resultant war is intended to bring the whole world to its knees and all powers and nations reduced to a state of complete exhaustion -- physically, economically, mentally, spiritually. Then, in this most abject condition, the survivors will be offered hope, peace and security by the one who will come forward and promise an end to all such things -- the long-anticipated leader of the New World Order, the spiritual leader of the Secret Societies behind the five-thousand-year-old Luciferian Conspiracy for World Government, the one who Fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians call the Antichrist.

• The nightmare scenario painted by the Secret Masters of the Luciferian Conspiracy for World Government is that the long-planned Third World War, which will usher Antichrist onto the world's stage, will begin in the Middle East, drawing in the super powers -- US, Europe, Russia and China -- whose flames will be fanned into a terrible conflagration that will consume the world.
• Once the Middle East is set ablaze -- a war that may include India and Pakistan -- then "communist" North Korea is planned to attack the "capitalist" South Korea using Weapons of Mass Destruction.
• Moreover, at this most critical time, when the US military is over stretched and fully committed to both conflicts in the Middle East and Korea, China will invade Taiwan.
• Then the social decay that has been nurtured within mainline USA, whose fruit is the Multicultural Time Bomb, will be ignited into near civil war proportions, causing massive civil disruption.
• Then Russia, the sleeping Soviet Bear, will make its move.
• Truly the Third World War …

Reader, understand we live in most perilous times, so perilous that the entire fabric of our civilisation is threatened; and the great and terrible tragedy is that the vast majority do not comprehend it.

Most people cannot, will not, and do not want to accept the Truth. Most people are quite unaware that there is an ancient conspiracy to enslave mankind in a global tyranny of unimaginable horror, which makes pale everything that occurred during the terrors of the French and Bolshevik Revolutions and that occurred in Nazi Germany and Communist China.

Even when the overwhelming evidence is presented to them, they adamantly refuse to contemplate that such a thing exists or that wicked and evil people are working assiduously to bring it about. Most refuse to believe anything is wrong in the world, especially that there exists an agenda for global governance ruled by the Global Elite and predicated on tyranny.

Moreover, most will not believe that the situation is as bad as it actually is and that the Secret Plan for World Government is so nearly complete, or that a very small group of men truly rule the world.

Furthermore, most will not believe that an integral component in this plan for world tyranny is the destruction of Natural Moral Order on Earth, whose greatest expression is the Christ Impulse released from the Cross at Calvary; that, to this end, the wicked and evil men behind the move toward the New World Order have meticulously planned the destruction of Natural Moral Order.

And they are plotting to do this by destroying Western Civilisation and the spirituality that underpins it, Christianity, with a long-planned Third World War … a planned global conflagration that will dwarf the horrors of the two previous attempts designed to bring about World Government.

The assault on Western Civilisation comes from within and without, but it is the cancer within that has fatally wounded the West … an amoral and spiritual cancer that has been nurtured by the leaders of the secret societies and their minions, the traitors and fools, with the sole intention of destroying the living body of Christ-on-Earth, whose exoteric expression is Christianity and all of the things arising from this, but especially Western Christian Civilisation itself.

This cancer comprises the myriad attacks upon Natural Moral Order that collectively are called the Humanist Agenda, but whose main components are Scepticism, Rationalism, Humanism, Multiculturalism, Feminism, the Homosexual Agenda, and the modern Thought Tyranny called Political Correctness that terrorises truth and common sense into silence.

The architects of this Humanist assault on Natural Moral Order have planned meticulously and have played their parts exquisitely such that they have brought humanity to the brink of destruction … Just as they have planned for so long … with the terrible prospect of a third and final World War … a total Global War of such magnitude and horror that the surviving remnant of humanity will willingly submit themselves to abject slavery in exchange for peace, certainty and security.

The Ancient Plan for World Empire, the once "closed" and fiercely guarded conspiracy, is now an "Open Conspiracy," for its leaders are now so confident of success (and that nothing or no one can prevail against them) that they feel discretion is no longer required. And now they begin to boast of their works. Thus the evidence for this Ancient Plan of the Secret Societies is now everywhere to be seen for those with eyes to see and ears to hear. The writing, so to speak, is on the wall; yet, tragically, the vast majority of humanity does not see it.

We truly live in an age of delusion and illusion … an age in which the world and its people and all of its institutions and governments are ruled by the prince of this world … and the great tragedy is that the majority think nothing of it.

The Architects of the Evil Agenda behind the New World Order, The High Priests of the Luciferian Creed, have planned Three World Wars to bring about conditions propitious for the inauguration of their World Empire and the ushering onto the world's stage of Antichrist … the Second Beast of the Apocalypse … they have succeeded in precipitating the first two … the third and most terrible war is about to begin … a terrible tempest long foretold ...

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Israel's Defense Minister Declares War on IDF-Linked Seminaries

DEBKAfile
December 14, 2009

As Israel wrestled with a fateful decision on Iran's nuclear issue and war tensions building up around its borders, defense minister Ehud Barak went to war on the military-yeshiva "Hesder" contract, under which seminary students are conscripted - most volunteering for combat units - along with their studies.

Raising the specter of mutiny in the armed forces, Barak Sunday, Dec. 13, expelled the West Bank Mt. Bracha yeshiva from the contract when its dean, Rabbi Eliezer Melamed, refused a summons to a hearing with the minister on charges of inciting student-soldiers to refuse orders affecting the status of Jewish settlements on conscientious grounds.

In refusing the minister's summons, Rabbi Melamed retorted he was not a civil service underling but the head of an academic-religious institution entitled to his opinion. Barak could have demanded his resignation, but opted instead to blacklist the entire institution.

Ideological and political divides on land-for-peace moves run deep in Israel - and not just among the 350,000 Jews living on the West Bank in government-approved towns and villages and unauthorized outposts.

Barak is head of the minority Labor party which strongly advocates these moves, while prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu leads the majority Likud party which is committed to a Land of Israel ideology.

By going too far in his showdown with the yeshiva principal, Barak now stands accused of exacerbating popular divisions and high-handed action to force West Bank communities and the Orthodox seminary network, as well as the armed forces and the government majority to toe his political line.

Right wing spokesmen stress the omission of Barak and the heads of the army to limit the academic freedoms of university professors to express their views, or summon them for hearings, even though some encourage students to dodge compulsory military service altogether, not just disobey certain orders on matters of conscience.

Binyamin is blamed for failing to intervene in the dispute, although it was touched off by the construction freeze orders he had circulated to West Bank communities last week. He may hope it will go away and not affect the stability of his government coalition. However tempers on both sides are rising.

In the past two months, six soldiers were given jail sentences and two others punished for demonstrating against potential government orders to evacuate settlements. That is the extent of the "mutiny" so far, but not the end of it unless a cool head starts pouring oil and promoting some sort of dialogue.

The armed forces are still struggling to heal scars left by the national controversy which flared over Ariel Sharon's order to forcefully evict 8,500 Israelis from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank in 2005. This would be a fleeting nightmare compared with any future moves on the West Bank or Golan for a peace, which only Barak and his diminishing band of followers believes in. Nonetheless, the prime minister is giving them their head and allowing them to stir up trouble for no visible purpose.

In a recent lecture at Bar Ilan University, Rabbi Melamed spoke of "[political] corruption in the upper IDF command." He asked if they could be relied upon to sound the necessary alarums for prisoner swap deals, when he said:

"Military officers kowtow to the will of politicians, the mass media and dominant public views, which is why they failed to warn of the consequences of the Oslo accord, the retreat from Lebanon and the expulsion."

He was referring to the eruption of Palestinian terror after the peace framework accord signed with the Palestinians in Oslo in 1993, the strengthening of Hizballah's grip on South Lebanon after Israel's retreat in 2006, and the expulsion of Jewish communities from Gaza, which resulted in Hamas' takeover of the territory and disastrous escalation of its missile offensive against southwestern Israel.

While Rabbi Melamed is seen by some as a right-wing extremist, it is worth mentioning that the independent a-political Winograd commission appointed to inquire into the failings of the 2006 Lebanon war, was just as critical, if not more, of the military high command. May Israelis of diverse political views - or none - feel the same way. Everyone had hoped that the dark Sharon era when citizens in and out of uniform were muzzled and forced into mindless obedience of the "high command" would never return.

But Ehud Barak has been allowed to revert to the high-handedness exhibited by Sharon, although he must realize that it goes sharply against the questioning nature of the average Israeli.

Maybe Netanyahu is giving him enough slack to hang himself, but in the process he is letting the country be dragged far too close to the abyss of disunity.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Palestine Will Determine World’s Fate: Ahmadinejad

Tehran Times
December 14, 2009

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says the Palestine issue will determine the fate of the entire world.

At a meeting with Hamas Political Bureau chief Khaled Meshaal in Tehran on Sunday, Ahmadinejad said it is essential that all Muslim and free nations support the Palestinian resistance and Iran will always stand beside the resistance and the oppressed people of Palestine.

He went on to say that Palestine is the frontline of the global resistance against the global arrogance and international hegemony.

He called faith in God and resistance the keys to overcome the international hegemonic system, adding that the Zionist regime’s acts of savagery and the U.S. deceptions will not be able to save this system.

The defeat in the wars against Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, the United States’ inability to restore its reputation after U.S. President Barack Obama came to power, and the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan are some of the defeats that the arrogant powers, the U.S. and Israel in particular, have suffered in recent years, the Iranian president said.

Meshaal said the firm positions Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, the Iranian president, and the Iranian nation adopted on various international issues set an example for all nations and governments.

Meshaal also briefed Ahmadinejad on the latest developments in Palestine.

Netanyahu Increases Funds for Jewish West Bank Settlers

The Age World
December 14, 2009

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has won a key vote to give more money to 90 West Bank settlements.

The new national priority map will direct about $1.2 billion towards education, employment and land allocation programs in designated areas.

The $1.2 billion includes about $500 million for Arab communities in northern Israel, and will benefit about 110,000 West Bank settlers living outside its major settlement blocs.

Left-wing leaders, including Defence Minister Ehud Barak, opposed the plan, saying it would boost settler extremists intent on foiling last month's decision to freeze settlement building in the West Bank for 10 months.

Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the new map of national priority areas was a blueprint for future settlement expansion.

"It reveals the extent to which Israel's 'settlement moratorium' is a sham," Mr Erekat said.

Tensions between Jews and Palestinians have been running high since the announcement of the building freeze. Settlers have been involved in several clashes with Israeli security forces.

At the weekend, Jewish extremists were suspected of setting fire to a mosque in the northern West Bank village of Yasuf.

On Sunday, a delegation of Jewish religious leaders and activists, including some from West Bank settlements, tried to reach the village to express their abhorrence of the attack. But the Israeli Army prevented it from entering Yasuf for security reasons as enraged villagers proclaimed that the visitors would not be welcome.

"The people will not allow it," said Wasfi Hassan, a farmer. "It is like killing a man, then going to his funeral."

An acrid odour hung in the air outside the mosque on Sunday. Inside, a pile of cinders marked the spot where holy books had apparently been emptied off shelves and burnt. The walls were charred, and a blackened groove snaked across the carpet of the prayer hall to a back wall, following the arsonists' petrol trail.

The muezzin at a small nearby mosque, Hussam Abd al-Fattah, said worshippers spotted the fire on Friday as they returned from dawn prayers, and neighbours helped put it out.

On the front porch of the mosque, the vandals left graffiti in Hebrew that read: "Price tag - Greetings from Effi." ''Price tag'' is the name of a provocative policy developed by radical settlers last year. It calls for settlers and their supporters to respond to any move by the Israeli authorities against the settlements or illegal outposts, usually by attacking Palestinian property. The villagers assume the attack was meant as revenge for the Israeli Government's temporary moratorium on new building in Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Effi, a Hebrew nickname for Efraim, is also an acronym for a far-right group.

Munir Abbushi, the Palestinian Authority Governor of the Salfit region, which includes Yasuf, a village of about 2000, said there were at least 23 settlements in the region.

Mr Abbushi rejected the idea the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could turn into a religious struggle.

"It is a national conflict. We want an independent state, without settlers," he said.

Israeli leaders condemned the attack. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there was "no place for violence of any sort, neither Jews against Palestinians nor Palestinians against Jews." He said he had ordered security services to try to bring the perpetrators to justice as quickly as possible. President Shimon Peres called the arson a grave act that stood against all the values of Israel.

Mainstream settler leaders condemned the desecration of the mosque.

West Bank Settlements to Receive More Funding Under Plan

CNN
December 13, 2009

The Israeli government on Sunday approved a controversial plan that would classify a number of West Bank settlements as "National Priority Zones," meaning they are entitled to millions of shekels in funding.

The plan was approved on a 21-5 vote, according to government spokesman David Baker.

National Priority Zones are granted millions in funding for education and vocational training. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the goal of the plan is to "help close the gaps that have been created between the various parts of the country."

The plan would include about 2 million citizens, including 40 percent of Israel's non-Jewish population, Netanyahu said. Of that 2 million, 100,000 are West Bank settlers -- and the first-time inclusion of the settlements was not popular with everyone.

Defense Minister Ehud Barak said during a Cabinet meeting that:

"The population of the settlements were represented beyond their proportional weight in society." Also, Barak said, "there are a number of small settlements that continuously are a source of extreme behavior that harms life in the West Bank ... and they should not be awarded a prize by including them in the National Priority Zone."

The funding for housing would not apply to settlers, so the plan does not contradict the government's recently-approved settlement freeze in the West Bank, government spokesman Mark Regev said. But Yariv Oppenheimer, a spokesman for the Israeli settlement watchdog group Peace Now, called the approval outrageous.

"This decision proves that the government actively and practically wants to continue and invest and encourage the settlements," he said. "All their talk about freezing settlements apart from natural growth becomes irrelevant when the government actively encourages investment in these areas."

The priority zones are areas disadvantaged because of residents' socioeconomic situations and security threats, among other factors.

"We are providing benefits in education, employment and infrastructures," Netanyahu said. "We are also trying to provide tangible aid to those who bear the security burden every day."

Palestinian Authority spokesman Nabil Abu Rudaina said the government's decision "shows again that the Israeli government is not serious about the so-called moratorium settlement freeze which they announced several weeks ago" and also shows "that they are doing [their] best to continue their settlement construction activities and to ruin the efforts of President Obama and his administration."

"There should be [an] immediate American response in order to keep the glimpse of hope for any peaceful deal in the future," he said, saying the vote "is a direct message to Obama and his administration that they [Israelis] are not ready for peace."

Netanyahu's government announced a freeze on settlements in the West Bank after the Obama administration requested a ban to jump-start the moribund peace process with the Palestinians. Announcing the freeze last month, Netanyahu appealed to the Palestinian Authority to take advantage of the 10-month "window" to resume negotiations.

Dany Dayan, chairman of the Yesha Council, a group of Jewish municipal councils from the West Bank, told CNN earlier this month that settlements under construction would continue to be built.

Confrontations have erupted almost daily in the West Bank, which groups of settlers forcibly attempting to keep away inspectors enforcing the ban. Dayan indicated settlers would continue to refuse entry of government inspectors to settlements.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran

Secret Document Exposes Iran’s Nuclear Trigger

The Times
December 14, 2009

Confidential intelligence documents obtained by The Times show that Iran is working on testing a key final component of a nuclear bomb.

The notes, from Iran’s most sensitive military nuclear project, describe a four-year plan to test a neutron initiator, the component of a nuclear bomb that triggers an explosion. Foreign intelligence agencies date them to early 2007, four years after Iran was thought to have suspended its weapons programme.

An Asian intelligence source last week confirmed to The Times that his country also believed that weapons work was being carried out as recently as 2007 — specifically, work on a neutron initiator.

The technical document describes the use of a neutron source, uranium deuteride, which independent experts confirm has no possible civilian or military use other than in a nuclear weapon. Uranium deuteride is the material used in Pakistan’s bomb, from where Iran obtained its blueprint.

“Although Iran might claim that this work is for civil purposes, there is no civil application,” said David Albright, a physicist and president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, which has analysed hundreds of pages of documents related to the Iranian programme. “This is a very strong indicator of weapons work.”

The documents have been seen by intelligence agencies from several Western countries, including Britain. A senior source at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that they had been passed to the UN’s nuclear watchdog.

A Foreign and Commonwealth Office spokeswoman said yesterday:

“We do not comment on intelligence, but our concerns about Iran’s nuclear programme are clear. Obviously this document, if authentic, raises serious questions about Iran’s intentions.”

Responding to The Times’ findings, an Israeli government spokesperson said:

“Israel is increasingly concerned about the state of the Iranian nuclear programme and the real intentions that may lie behind it.”

The revelation coincides with growing international concern about Iran’s nuclear programme. Tehran insists that it wants to build a civilian nuclear industry to generate power, but critics suspect that the regime is intent on diverting the technology to build an atomic bomb.

In September, Iran was forced to admit that it was constructing a secret uranium enrichment facility near the city of Qom. President Ahmadinejad then claimed that he wanted to build ten such sites. Over the weekend Manouchehr Mottaki, the Iranian Foreign Minister, said that Iran needed up to 15 nuclear power plants to meet its energy needs, despite the country’s huge oil and gas reserves.

Publication of the nuclear documents will increase pressure for tougher UN sanctions against Iran, which are due to be discussed this week. But the latest leaks in a long series of allegations against Iran will also be seized on by hawks in Israel and the US, who support a pre-emptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities before the country can build its first warhead.

Mark Fitzpatrick, senior fellow for non-proliferation at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said:

“The most shattering conclusion is that, if this was an effort that began in 2007, it could be a casus belli. If Iran is working on weapons, it means there is no diplomatic solution.”

The Times had the documents, which were originally written in Farsi, translated into English and had the translation separately verified by two Farsi speakers. While much of the language is technical, it is clear that the Iranians are intent on concealing their nuclear military work behind legitimate civilian research.

The fallout could be explosive, especially in Washington, where it is likely to invite questions about President Obama’s groundbreaking outreach to Iran. The papers provide the first evidence which suggests that Iran has pursued weapons studies after 2003 and may actively be doing so today — if the four-year plan continued as envisaged.

A 2007 US National Intelligence Estimate concluded that weapons work was suspended in 2003 and officials said with “moderate confidence” that it had not resumed by mid-2007. Britain, Germany and France, however, believe that weapons work had already resumed by then.

Western intelligence sources say that by 2003 Iran had already assembled the technical know-how it needed to build a bomb, but had yet to complete the necessary testing to be sure such a device would work. Iran also lacked sufficient fissile material to fuel a bomb and still does — although it is technically capable of producing weapons-grade uranium should its leaders take the political decision to do so.

The documents detail a plan for tests to determine whether the device works — without detonating an explosion leaving traces of uranium detectable by the outside world. If such traces were found, they would be taken as irreversible evidence of Iran’s intention to become a nuclear-armed power.

Experts say that, if the 2007 date is correct, the documents are the strongest indicator yet of a continuing nuclear weapons programme in Iran. Iran has long denied a military dimension to its nuclear programme, claiming its nuclear activities are solely focused on the production of energy for civilian use.

Mr Fitzpatrick said:

“Is this the smoking gun? That’s the question people should be asking. It looks like the smoking gun. This is smoking uranium.”

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Israeli Settlers Attack Mosque

Al Jazeera
December 11, 2009

Israeli settlers in the occupied Palestinian West Bank have vandalised a mosque, torching its library and spraying hate messages in Hebrew on the building.

The attack blamed on hardline Jews on Friday may be linked to plans that seek to curb their illegal settlement activity on land taken from Palestinians.

Clashes erupted as villagers hurled stones at Israeli troops sent to investigate the incident at the mosque in the northern West Bank's Yasuf village. The security forces responded with teargas.

One of the Hebrew language slogans sprayed on a wall read:

"Get ready to pay the price." Another read: "We will burn you all."

Village councillors and Palestinian security officials blamed Israelis from a nearby settlement for the attack.

The area is home to some of the most hardline settlers who advocate a "price tag" policy under which they target Palestinians in retaliation for any Israeli government measure they see as threatening Jewish settlements.

The Israeli military said "it appears that the suspects wrote hate-filled messages in Hebrew in addition to burning bookshelves and a carpet." It assured the Palestinian Authority that it "views the incident gravely" and that security forces are working to locate the perpetrators, the statement said.

Last week, a house and three vehicles were set on fire in another village, also near the West Bank city of Nablus. The owner of the house told police he saw three Jewish settlers start the fires.

Settlers have expressed outrage over the government's decision to impose a 10-month moratorium on new building permits for Israeli homes in the occupied West Bank, outside annexed Arab east Jerusalem.

Many settlers consider they have a God-given right to live in the biblical Land of Israel, which includes the West Bank.

West Bank Cast into Ferment by Diplomatic-Security Vacuum

DEBKAfile
December 12, 2009

Matters are slipping out of hand on the West Bank. DEBKAfile's military sources and security agencies in the region see the unrest spreading unless it is brought under control.

The Netanyahu government's construction moratorium on settlement construction has had an acutely polarizing effect on Israelis on both sides of the Green Line. Three major Palestinian terrorist attacks were foiled in the last ten days. Whoever trashed a village mosque near Nablus early Friday, Dec. 11, tossed a match onto dry firewood.

The Shin Bet director Yuval Diskin warned the security cabinet this week that Mahmoud Abbas has spearheaded a campaign in world capitals for Israel's ouster from the Middle East equation by making the Jewish state unacceptable as a negotiating partner and blackening its policies. He is harnessing governments to his objective of foisting a Palestinian settlement on Israel.

Diskin called this tactic "a diplomatic uprising (intifada)" which could blow up at any time.

The response of Prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and defense minister Ehud Barak to Abbas' boycott is appeasement and concessions, such as the freeze on Jewish construction in the West Bank.

This policy is not seen by Palestinians and Arab extremists as a desire for peace but as evidence of weakness and an invitation to build up pressure.

Not only are Jewish settlers and their supporters furious at what they see as the Likud leader's back-stabbing, but in the last fortnight, DEBKAfile's military sources report, Palestinian extremists are trying to use their leader's diplomatic intifada as the starting-point for the real thing, a campaign of terror.

The Obama administration and some European capitals are partly to blame for letting the West Bank crisis get out of hand by allowing Mahmoud Abbas to slip the reins and pursue his dangerous game of excluding Israel from diplomacy.

But the Netanyahu-Barak duo and Abbas must bear most of the responsibility for the widening political, diplomatic and security vacuum.

The prime minister and his defense minister have spent the first year of their current term in office showing a marked lack of initiative on any front, whether to counter the Abbas campaign or face looming perils posed by the heavy rearming of Hizballah and Hamas and a potentially nuclear-armed Iran.

In the last fortnight, the IDF is under orders to play down the upsurge of Palestinian attempts at violence on both sides of the Green Line.

Our military sources confirm that, ten days ago, Israeli forces intercepted a band of six terrorists making their way from the northern West Bank into Israel for an attack. Last week, two large roadside bombs were discovered near Beth El primed to blow up against a passing IDF patrol. An alert scout discovered it in time.

Another explosive device was uncovered near Beit Umar in the Hebron sector of the southern West Bank.

And earlier this week, a Palestinian, believed to be a Popular Front member, was prevented from reaching central Jerusalem with six pipe bombs, enough for the biggest multi-casualty attack seen in Jerusalem in years.

In his short term as prime minister, Ehud Barak ignored similar obvious portents of the coming Palestinian war of terror unleashed in 2000 by Yasser Arafat; his suicide killers darkened Israel's cities for more than three years. Even when it climaxed, he told Israeli troops not to turn their guns on the assailants but direct their fire at open ground.

Later, when he returned to government as defense minister in the 2007-2008 Olmert government, Barak watched Palestinian missiles battering southwestern Israel from the Gaza Strip with the same unconcern. Then, too, he instructed the Air Force to confine its bombardments to open spaces.

It was only when popular ire forced the government's hand, that the defense minister launched the three-week Operation Cast Lead in late December, 2008.

Israel's friends and enemies alike are asking what has happened to Israel's strong defense posture in the face of present and impending threats.

Some critics see prime minister Binyamin immersed in a fool's game, playing to the American gallery and trying to soft-soap the settlers while lacking the courage to address the escalating Palestinian challenge. His dependence on Barak, whose short span as prime minister was cut short by a snap election in 2002 after he offered Arafat 92 percent of the West Bank, reinforces the sense of infirmity at the top of government.

This sense has planted the suspicion that the West Bank building freeze was planned to place markers on areas to be ceded in readiness for Israel's handover of territory - at a time when Palestinian intentions are the reverse of peaceful.

Friday, Dec. 11, all these tensions boiled over: Before the police had even broached its investigation into the willful damaging of the Kfar Yasuf mosque, Palestinian spokesmen and their Israeli supporters pointed the finger at "right-wing extremist settlers." One Israeli broadcaster accused "those madmen."

Within hours, the same Palestinian activists and their Israeli champions were rioting in Sheikh Jarrah against the homes Jews have purchased in this predominantly Arab neighborhood of Jerusalem. Police forces stopped them marching on those homes. In the melee, 22 rioters and 6 policemen were hurt.

West Bank rabbis have pleaded for the holy places of all faiths to be excluded from the conflict between the two nations. But the ferment on all sides is rising, inflamed by the diplomatic vacuum dictated by the Palestinian side and the lack of firm resolve and direction in Jerusalem.

Palestinian Run Over Twice By Car After Stabbing Two in a Jewish Settlement

Al Jazeera
December 2, 2009

Violence erupted in the occupied West Bank on Wednesday when a Palestinian man entered a petrol station at the Jewish settlement of Kiryat Arba in the occupied West Bank and stabbed two settlers.

But that was not the end of the story. According to the Israeli army, the Palestinian was then shot by a soldier, after which a car, apparently driven by a settler, ran over the wounded Palestinian, twice, with Israeli soldiers all around.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Israel, the U.S. and the Arab World

Obama’s Unjust Iran Policy

Bill Christison, Counterpunch
December 6, 2009

It takes only two paragraphs to demonstrate the foolishness and utter injustice of President Obama’s present policy toward Iran.

In this world of nation-states, Iran has at least as much right to possess nuclear weapons as the far smaller Israel. The very existence, for over 40 years now, of Israeli nuclear weapons is almost certainly the dominant reason why Iran, while alleging the contrary, continues to move toward acquiring its own nuclear deterrent. If the U.S. president really wants to stop Iran from going nuclear, he has plenty of means and power to pressure Israel to dismantle its own nukes. He is simply unwilling to do so.

Obama has obviously concluded that, for his own political future, the top priority of his Middle East policies must be to continue strengthening the Israeli-U.S. partnership. Therefore he refuses to encourage Israel in any way to eliminate its nuclear weapons and delivery capabilities, or even to talk about the matter. Instead he will follow Israel’s and the Zionist lobby’s bidding and try to prevent Iran from ever acquiring such capabilities for itself. That being the case, citizens of the world, including U.S. citizens, had better prepare themselves for more wars, very possibly nuclear, started by the U.S. and/or Israel, in the months and years to come. Possibly the absurdity — or perhaps it is desperation — of Iran’s proposal for ten new nuclear plants will bring Obama to his senses, but don’t count on it.

Homeland Security Chief Warns of Threat from Al-Qaeda Sympathizers in U.S.

Washington Post
December 3, 2009

Al-Qaeda followers are inside the United States and would like to attack targets here and in other countries, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday night.

The secretary's comments were her bluntest assessment yet of terror threats within the country, and they came one day after President Obama, in announcing his decision to send 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan, warned that extremists have been "sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit more acts of terror."

Addressing the America-Israel Friendship League in New York, Napolitano said a string of recent domestic arrests should "remove any remaining comfort that some might have had from the notion that if we fight the terrorists abroad, we won't have to fight them here," rebutting an argument advanced on several occasions by President George W. Bush.

"The fact is that home-based terrorism is here. And like violent extremism abroad, it is now part of the threat picture that we must confront," Napolitano said. "Individuals sympathetic to al-Qaeda and its affiliates, as well as those inspired by their ideology, are present in the U.S., and would like to attack the homeland or plot overseas attacks against our interests abroad."

Napolitano cited the case of Najibullah Zazi, a Denver airport shuttle driver arrested in September after allegedly training with al-Qaeda in Pakistan.

Zazi allegedly tested homemade bombs, styled after those used in the 2004 Madrid transit bombings, before driving cross-country to New York from Denver. He faces charges of conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction.

Separately, U.S. prosecutors in October accused David C. Headley, a Chicago businessman, of conspiring with members of Lashkar-i-Taiba, an extremist Islamic group in Pakistan allied with al-Qaeda, to plot attacks in Denmark and India.

A U.S. counterterrorism official called Zazi "the first concrete case" since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks of al-Qaeda sending operatives to prepare an attack inside the country. Although intelligence analysts had long identified such a threat, they had begun questioning their assumption, the official said.

"The surprising thing is Zazi is the first," the official said, calling Zazi's contacts with core al-Qaeda leaders "at most one step removed."

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran

NATO: 'Iran Poses Threat to the Whole World'

Haaretz
December 6, 2009

Senior NATO officials last week called Iran's nuclear and missile programs "a potential threat to the peace and security of the entire world." The comments came in conversations with journalists during the meeting in Brussels last week of foreign ministers of North Atlantic Treaty Organization member states.

Iran's nuclear program is not at the top of NATO's agenda. Most of the deliberations, as well as the press briefings, were focused on Afghanistan. Central to the discussion was the recent announcement by U.S. President Barack Obama of the decision to dispatch more American troops to that country. Advertisement

The international community's efforts to pressure Iran into ceasing its nuclear ambitions is spearheaded by the United States, in cooperation with other permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany. In closed talks, and in particular in response to questions raised by journalists from Persian Gulf states, where Iran is perceived as a direct threat, senior NATO officials acknowledged the gravity of the situation.

One official said that if the Iranian nuclear issue is not resolved, "It may develop into a threat to the peace and security of the entire world, not only in a specific region [like the Persian Gulf or Israel]." When asked whether NATO would defend states in the event of an Iranian assault he said that the alliance is committed to providing support to all its members, but said, "However, we have other interests. In case of need, we shall take action as we see fit."

In general the impression from a visit to NATO headquarters is that the organization's diplomats are gradually coming around to the viewpoint and parameters of Washington regarding the potential threat posed by Iran.

Three months ago, an official NATO spokesman was quoted by Germany's dpa news agency as saying that missiles pose an increasing threat to Europe, partly due to Iran's missile program.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Pakistan

Suicide Blast at Pakistan Navy Base

Al Jazeera
December 2, 2009

A suicide bomber has attacked Pakistan's navy headquarters, killing one security guard and wounding four others, police say.

The attacker detonated his explosives after he was stopped at the entrance to the heavily fortified naval complex at around 1.30pm (0830GMT) on Wednesday.

Bin Yameen, a senior police official, said: "The bomber was on foot. We have reports of four wounded."

Fazil Asghar, Islamabad's police commissioner, said the security guard was killed after he asked the man to remove his coat.

Witnesses say the bomber was a teenager.

Security forces quickly cordoned off the area. The naval installation suffered no damage because it was a safe distance from the gate, officials said.

The attack comes a day after a suicide bomber killed a provincial politician, detonating his explosives as he received guests at his home in Pakistan's northwest Swat valley.

More than a dozen people were wounded in that attack in Kanju town, police said.

Khan, 59, was a member of the Awami National Party, part of a coalition that rules the North West Frontier Province (NWFP).

The attacker struck as guests gathered to mark the end of the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha, and the force of the blast damaged parts of the house and grounds.

Kanju town was the former headquarters of Mullah Fazlullah, the leader of the Pakistani Taliban.

Both attacks come during a Pakistani army offensive in Swat which began in April.

Pakistan's Concerns Over U.S. Plan

Al Jazeera
December 2, 2009

Pakistani government officials have expressed concern about President Barack Obama's new Afghan strategy, which calls for Pakistan to step up its co-operation against the Taliban in exchange for a pledge of a long-term partnership.

The Pakistani foreign affairs ministry issued a cautious response on Wednesday that stressed the "need for clarity" in the new US policy.

"Pakistan looks forward to engaging closely with [the] US in understanding the full importance of the new strategy and to ensure that there would be no adverse fallout on Pakistan," the ministry said in a statement on Wednesday.

"Pakistan and the US need to closely co-ordinate their efforts to achieve shared objectives. There is certainly the need for clarity and co-ordination on all aspects of the implementation of the strategy."

In an address to unveil a new strategy for the eight-year conflict in Afghanistan, Obama said on Tuesday a cancer had taken root in Pakistan's border region with Afghanistan and promised US help to end it.



Obama's announcement has raised fears that Pakistan could be further destabilised by a reinvigorated military campaign in next-door Afghanistan, complicating Islamabad's own battle against the Taliban.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the first reinforcements will land in southern Afghanistan by Christmas, kicking off an 18-month surge that the administration plans to begin reversing in July 2011 when it transfers responsibility to the Afghan government.



A growing tide of bombings and suicide attacks, meanwhile, have killed hundreds of people in Pakistan in the past several months since the Pakistani army launched a major offensive against Taliban strongholds in South Waziristan.

Earlier on Wednesday, Islamabad was shaken by a suicide bombing at the entrance to National Naval Headquarters in a highly guarded area.

A teenage boy blew himself up as a guard approached him. Officials said the blast killed the bomber and two guards.

Pakistan fears a US troop surge in Afghanistan would force fighters to flee to its border areas, particularly in the southwestern Baluchistan province where the government is already struggling to end a low-level insurgency by tribal fighters.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran and Russia

Russia Vows to Quickly Complete Iran's First Nuclear Power Station

Associated Press
November 30, 2009

Russia's energy minister pledged on Sunday a quick completion of Iran's first nuclear power station, two weeks after announcing the latest delay, but refrained from giving a specific time for its launch.

The comment from Sergei Shmatko came after talks with Iranian Oil Minister Massoud Mirkazemi and as Iran's government announced plans to build 10 new uranium enrichment plants, in a major expansion of its disputed nuclear programme.

In mid-November, Shmatko said that technical issues would prevent engineers from starting up the reactor at Bushehr -- being built by Russian state contractor Atomstroyexport -- by the end of the year as previously planned.

Moscow, which is under Western pressure to distance itself from Tehran over its nuclear activities, stressed at the time that politics had nothing to do with the delay.

Russia's nuclear chief Sergei Kiriyenko said in February that the Bushehr launch was scheduled for 2009.

Western powers suspect Iran is seeking to build nuclear bombs. Iran, the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, denies this and says its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.

On Sunday, Shmatko declined to comment on Iran's plan to build 10 new plants and was upbeat on Bushehr, which he said met all requirements of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

"We have done our best to complete the project. Now we are testing the system in full compliance with security requirements of IAEA. I'm surprised how well the tests are going," he said.

When pressed on a specific time for the start he said:

"I don't want to guess. What if we have a technical problem and will need a week to fix it?"

Iran's state broadcaster IRIB quoted Shmatko as saying that Bushehr had become "a symbol of cooperation between Iran and Russia and nobody dares to hurt it."

"The quick completion of the Bushehr power plant is the most important issue for both the Iranian and Russian atomic energy organisations," he was quoted as saying.

Shmatko also said he discussed with Mirkazemi joint projects in liquefied natural gas, as Russia is also seeking to become a major LNG player.

IRIB reported the two ministers discussed oil prices and crude output by the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and non-OPEC producers, but Shmatko did not comment to reporters on it.

Iran is a member of OPEC, which has repeatedly sought closer cooperation with non-OPEC member Russia. Last year, Russia said it could consider cutting output with OPEC but later changed its mind and said it had never promised anything to the cartel.

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page

Iran

Iran Says UN Criticism Prompted New Nuclear Plans

Associated Press
November 30, 2009

Iran had no intention of building 10 new nuclear facilities until it was strongly rebuked by the UN nuclear watchdog over its nuclear activities, the country's nuclear chief said Monday.

Vice President Ali Akbar Salehi told state radio that Iran needed to give a strong response to the International Atomic Energy Agency's resolution Friday demanding that Iran halt to construction of its newly revealed uranium enrichment facility and end all other enrichment activities.

Any new enrichment plants would take years to build and stock with centrifuges - if the material could even be obtained under UN sanctions - but the ambitious plans were a bold show by Iran that it won't back down amid a deadlock in negotiation attempts.

The US and its allies fear the facilities give Iran the capability to produce weapons-grade nuclear material and have called for an immediate halt to the enrichment of uranium.

Iran has rejected such claims, saying its uranium enrichment facilities will only produce fuel for nuclear reactors to generate electricity.

The Cabinet ordered the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran to begin building new facilities at five sites that have already been studied and propose five other locations for future construction within two months.

The new sites are to be on the same scale of Iran's only other industrial enrichment plant currently in operation, near the town of Natanz in central Iran.

"We had no intention of building many facilities like the Natanz site, but apparently the West doesn't want to understand Iran's peaceful message," Salehi said.

Salehi, who is also the head of Iran's nuclear program, said the IAEA resolution backed by six world powers left no option for Iran but to give a firm response.

"The action by 5+1 (US, Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany) at the IAEA prompted the (Iranian) government to approve a proposal to build 10 sites like that of Natanz," he said.

On Sunday, Salehi said Iran would build its new sites inside mountains to protect it from possible attack because Iran has decided not to let its nuclear activities stop "even for a moment."

Iran aims to generate 20,000 megawatts of electricity through nuclear power plants in the next 20 years. Iranian officials say the new enrichment facilities are needed to produce enough fuel for its future nuclear power plants.

Ahmadinejad told the Cabinet that Iran will need to install 500,000 centrifuges at the planned facilities to produce between 250 to 300 tons of fuel annually.

"We require multiple sites to produce nuclear fuel for us. We need at least ten new sites," Ahmadinejad said in comments broadcast on state TV Monday.

The International Atomic Energy Agency said earlier this month that about 8,600 centrifuges had been set up in Natanz, but only about 4,000 were enriching uranium. The facility is designed to eventually house 54,000 centrifuges.

But Iran's newly revealed enrichment site, which set off the latest cycle of concern and criticism over Tehran's nuclear intentions, is a small scale site near the holy city of Qom that will house 3,000 centrifuges.

The IAEA resolution came after Iran rejected a UN-backed plan to ship most of its stock of uranium abroad for further enrichment.

The UN-brokered plan required Iran to send 1.2 tons (1,100 kilograms) of low-enriched uranium - around 70 percent of its stockpile - to Russia in one batch by the end of the year, easing concerns the material would be used for a bomb.

After further enrichment in Russia, France would convert the uranium into fuel rods that would be returned to Iran for use in a reactor in Tehran that produces medical isotopes. Fuel rods cannot be further enriched into weapons-grade material.

Iran had indicated that it may agree to send only "part" of its stockpile in several shipments. Should the talks fail to help Iran obtain the fuel from abroad, Iran has threatened to enrich uranium to the higher level needed to power the research reactor itself domestically.

Salehi said the Iranian Cabinet will discuss the issue Wednesday but didn't give any further details.

Diplomats: Iran Censured at UN Nuclear Meeting

Associated Press
November 27, 2009

In a blow to Iran, the board of the U.N. nuclear agency on Friday overwhelmingly backed a demand from the U.S., Russia, China and three other powers that Tehran immediately stop building its newly revealed nuclear facility and freeze uranium enrichment.

Iranian officials shrugged off approval of the resolution by 25 members of the 35-nation board of the International Atomic Energy Agency. But the U.S. and its allies hinted of new U.N. sanctions if Tehran remains defiant.

The West said some time remained for Tehran to come around and accept a specific offer that would delay its ability to make a nuclear weapon as well as engage in broader talks with the ultimate goal of persuading it to mothball its enrichment program.

But that window of opportunity would not stay open indefinitely, officials said.

"The next stage will have to be sanctions if Iran doesn't respond to what is a very clear vote from the world community," British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said.

German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said the resolution's passage shows that "the international community still wants dialogue with Iran, but time is pressing."

"Our hand is still held out," he added. "I hope Iran will take it. Iran must know: our patience is not infinite."

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs avoided mentioning sanctions — but indicated harsher measures were possible unless Iran compromised.

"Our patience and that of the international community is limited, and time is running out," he said in a statement. "If Iran refuses to meet its obligations, then it will be responsible for its own growing isolation and the consequences."

Iran argues that its nuclear program is aimed at creating a peaceful nuclear energy network to serve its growing population. The U.S. and other nations believe Iran's nuclear program has the goal of creating atomic weapons.

The IAEA resolution criticized Iran for defying a U.N. Security Council ban on uranium enrichment — the source of both nuclear fuel and the fissile core of warheads.

Iran Rebuked By UN Nuclear Body

BBC
November 27, 2009

The UN nuclear watchdog's governing body has passed a resolution condemning Iran for developing a uranium enrichment site in secret. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) also demanded that Iran freeze the project immediately.

The resolution, the first against Iran in nearly four years, was passed by a 25-3 margin with six abstentions.

Iran called the move "useless" but the US said it showed time was running out for Iran to address key issues.

Iran says its nuclear programme is for peaceful energy purposes, but the US says it is seeking nuclear weapons.

In September, it emerged that as well as its uranium enrichment facility at Natanz, Iran had a second such facility near the town of Qom. The revelation deepened Western fears about the country's nuclear ambitions.

The IAEA resolution was passed with rare Russian and Chinese backing. Only Cuba, Venezuela and Malaysia voted against it.

It called on Iran to reveal the purpose of the second plant and confirm that it is not building any other undeclared nuclear facilities. After the resolution, the US said Iran needed to address "the growing international deficit of confidence in its intentions".

"Our patience and that of the international community is limited, and time is running out," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

"If Iran refuses to meet its obligations, then it will be responsible for its own growing isolation and the consequences."

Speaking at a Commonwealth summit in Trinidad and Tobago, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown said that sanctions were the next step if Iran did not respond to what was "a very clear vote".

Russia's Foreign Ministry urged Iran to react "with full seriousness" to the resolution.

This resolution is a sign of Iran's growing isolation. It is the first at the IAEA since 2006. Crucially it secured the support of Russia and China. That makes it more likely they will vote for new sanctions on Iran when debate is stepped up in the new year, though there are still some tough negotiations ahead.

It seems that Iran's hesitation over a new fuel deal for its Tehran research reactor and its reluctance to engage in more constructive talks has infuriated even those countries which have protected it in the past.

On Thursday IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei, who has always pressed for a compromise solution, expressed his frustration in dealing with Iran.

In response, Iran has threatened to reduce its co-operation with the UN nuclear watchdog, but not to break off ties completely. The real trouble for Tehran is that the Iranian government now seems to be in too much internal turmoil to make clear decisions and follow them through.

But Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast called the IAEA vote "a theatrical move aimed at pressuring Iran" that would be "useless", state news agency Irna reported.

And Iran's ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, said it was a "hasty and undue" step that would jeopardise the chances of success in negotiations.

"The great nation of Iran will never bow to pressure and intimidation vis-a-vis its inalienable right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy," he said.

The resolution came a day after the outgoing head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei, expressed frustration at Iran's refusal to accept an international proposal to end the dispute over its nuclear programme.

The plan envisages Iran's low-enriched uranium being shipped overseas for processing into fuel. This is seen as a way for Iran to get the fuel it wants, while giving guarantees to the West that it will not be used for nuclear weapons.

Addressing IAEA governors in Vienna on Thursday, Mr ElBaradei said his inspectors had made no progress in their attempts to verify the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programme.

"It is now well over a year since the agency was last able to engage Iran in discussions about these outstanding issues," he said. "We have effectively reached a dead end, unless Iran engages fully with us."

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page