MK Eldad tells INN: "Netanyahu is Weak, He Fell into a Trap"

MK Knesset Aryeh Eldad (National Union) has no illusions about the upcoming talks between Israel and the Palestinians. He spoke frankly about these talks with Israel National News in an exclusive interview Sunday.

INN: What is your opinion of the upcoming talks?

MK Eldad: I think that Netanyahu put himself into a trap when he insisted on direct talks with the Palestinians. These are talks about everything, as was defined by the people invited to participate in them. These are talks about Jerusalem, about the demand to return refugees, about borders--everything. Even if Netanyahu was the strongest man on earth, which he is not, he is trapped. He is bound by some of his predecessors' commitments on previous talks.

They [the PA] will not start with him from the beginning, but rather with the Camp David agreement, with the Clinton plan, with what Olmert offered Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas]in their direct talks. He is far beyond everything that the people who voted for him wanted him to be. So he is starting these direct talks in a very bad position, and I am sure that not only is he wrong in his claim that there will be no preconditions, but rather also the opposite; Obama and Clinton are making all efforts to have the talks begin with a de facto freeze on building in Judea and Samaria.

INN: Will the talks succeed in making the building freezes continue?:

MK Eldad: I think that Netanyahu will face and accept the demand to continue the building freeze. He will continue with no building in Jerusalem, which he has done from the first moment he was elected as Prime Minister. He did not build a single house in Jerusalem since elected, he did not hire a single contractor to build in Jerusalem, and he is doing nothing in Judea and Samaria either.

INN: Why are you so sure that Netanyahu won't stand strong?

MK Eldad: There are early signs for the collapse of Netanyahu. He has agreed to give land for the very acceptance of the Palestinians to sit with him. The ticket price he paid for direct talks was his agreement to build the road to a new Palestinian city called Roabi, near Ramallah. Netanyahu already promised that if they [the PA] would come to direct negotiations, then at the beginning of the talks, he will pass a decision in the Cabinet about changing the status of the land on which the Arabs want to build the road to this city. This he promised to the Americans and Palestinians. And it is amazing that he thinks he can give up the Land of Israel without the decision of the Knesset, not to mention any large-scale national referendum. To imagine that he will give land just for the agreement to talk to him.

These are early signs that Netanyahu is very, very weak and that he can't take a stand on points that he defines as major points for Israel. Once he said "no" to a Palestinian state, now he says "yes" to a Palestinian state. Once he said Jews can always build, now he says Jews cannot build. Once he said Israel will hold onto the Jordan valley, now he says he will accept an international body there. This is a total collapse.

All this will happen unless the Arabs will save us from our own Prime Minister, by breaking off from the talks, by not accepting the offer to go back to '67 borders, and to give them a capital in Jerusalem.
INN: Isn't Netanyahu better than the alternatives, Kadima and Labor?

MK Eldad: If you want to discover the differences between Likud, Kadima, and Labor, you need an electron microscope. There are no differences, it's all in the rhetoric. Once Netanyahu is at the discussion table, his rhetoric won't help him and he's going to give up everything.

INN: What can the Israeli public do to stop these things from happening?

MK Eldad: The public in Israel can demand from their representatives in the Likud, Shas, Bayit Yehudi (Jewish Home), and Yisrael Beteinu (Israel Our Home), to remain faithful to their election promises. They were not elected to build a Palestinian state; they were alected to prevent one from rising. The ministers will not rebel against Netanyahu unless the public demands it. This is the duty of the public of Israel.

We have a Knesset Lobby for the Land of Israel comprising 41 Members of Knesset, and we can draw a very red line to Netanyahu and explain to him that he won't be able to pass any decision without losing his government. But if we want to trust every one of the 41 MKs, we need public pressure on them that they will remain faithful to the Land of Israel lobby. Public pressure is needed on Netanyahu and all the MKs and Ministers, who in their term will have to prevent a Palestinian state from becoming a reality.

INN: Many Jews, especially American Jews believed that Netanayu was different, stronger than other Israeli leaders. What happened to him?

MK Eldad: Nothing happened to Netanyahu; he was always very weak. He could speak very nicely but he could perform nothing. On political issues with the Palestinians, he is one of the weakest Prime Ministers we ever had.


Ehud Olmert talked to the Palestinians very nicely but gave them nothing in the end. Netanyanu has talked tough but is offering them a lot. Netanyahu was always good on theory, but always fails on the practical test. Land for Talks - that is what he is going to do. People still trust his image and not his real performance. They are going to be deeply disappointed.

Netanyahu was elected to prevent the creation of the Palestinian state, to produce something utterly different. But right away, he collapsed under pressure from Obama and declared his support for a Palestinian state. This is a complete collapse.
(IsraelNationalNews.com)

Gulf States Pushing for Attack on Iran

First it was the United Arab Emirates ambassador in Washington, now it’s a Saudi Arabian editorial, and John Bolton says the entire Persian Gulf feels the same: an attack on Iran is the only option - if it's not too late.

An editorial in an official Saudi Arabian newspaper indicates that a military attack against Iran might be the only way of stopping it from obtaining nuclear weapons. “Tehran is moving its conflict with the international community into high gear,” the Al Madina daily wrote this week, “and [in this case] some may consider the military option to be the best solution.”

Delaying recourse to this option, the paper continues, “may lead to a point where it is impossible to implement it - if Tehran manages to produce a nuclear bomb of its own.”

Former Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton goes a bit further, saying it is the only way of stopping it – but adds that it might already be too late.

Just last month, the United Arab Emirates ambassador to Washington said at a conference, "A military attack on Iran by whomever would be a disaster, but Iran with a nuclear weapon would be a bigger disaster."

Ambassador Yousef al-Otaiba was unusually candid in his remarks, saying, "I think it's a cost-benefit analysis. I think despite the large amount of trade we do with Iran, which is close to $12 billion… there will be consequences, there will be a backlash and there will be problems with people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country; that is going to happen no matter what… Am I willing to live with that, versus living with a nuclear Iran? My answer is still the same: 'We cannot live with a nuclear Iran.' I am willing to absorb what takes place at the expense of the security of the U.A.E."

Former Ambassador Bolton feels that many states in the Persian Gulf region feel the same. He told Army Radio today (Thursday), however, that it might very well be too late to attack Iran because of the radioactivity that will emanate from the bombed reactor, harming the civilian population.

"Diplomacy and sanctions against Iran have failed," Bolton told Army Radio's Nitzan Fisher on the Ma Bo'er program, "and don't think the West took seriously enough Iran's efforts over the course of decades to get nuclear power. Frankly, I think the most likely outcome now is that indeed Iran does get nuclear weapons. I think the only possibility of stopping this is the use of military force - an extremely unattractive option, but it's even more unattractive to consider a world in which Iran has nuclear weapons."

He explained, though, that it might be too late: "With Russia beginning to supply fuel in Bushehr [two days from now], it makes the reactor essentially immune to attack, except in the most dire circumstances - because to attack it would mean, almost inevitably, the release of radioactivity into the atmosphere and possibly into the waters of the Persian Gulf."

"I don't think there's a ghost of a chance that the Obama Administration will use force against Iran's nuclear weapons program," Bolton said. "If anyone will do it, it's going to have to be Israel - and I don't know what Israel is going to do... I am very worried that Obama's fallback position is to accept an Iran with nuclear weapons. I think that can have potentially catastrophic consequences in the Middle East and beyond - but I think that's where the Obama Administration is."

Iran's Defense Minister Ahmed Wahidi said this week that Israel's existence will be endangered if it attacks the Bushehr reactor. He said such an attack would be an "international crime."


(IsraelNationalNews.com)

UPDATE: John Bolton Says Three Days Left to Attack Iran

Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, told Israel Radio today that there are only three days left for Israel to attack Iran if it wants to stop the Islamic Republic from manufacturing nuclear weapons.

On Friday, Russia announced that on August 21st, it will start loading nuclear fuel into the Bushehr reactor. Bushehr is Iran's first atomic power station. Bolton said that once the reactor, also built by Russia, becomes operational on Friday, it will be too late to attack, because the attacking it would result in fallout of radioactive material as far as the Persian Gulf and hurt Iranian civilians.

Bolton also expressed pessimism that the U.S. administration would lead an attack against Iran, saying, "I would be very surprised if there are any circumstances in which the Obama administration would use force against Iran's nuclear program."

Earlier in the week, Bolton said, "If Israel wants to do something against the reactor in Bushehr, it must do so in the following eight days." Today he revised his estimate to even less time. He said that in the absence of an Israeli attack, Iran would complete its goal of the establishment of a functioning nuclear reactor.

Bolton was skeptical of the possibility that Israel would attack Iran in the coming days. "I do not think so, I fear that Israel has lost this opportunity," he said.

Already during his tenure in the Bush administration, Bolton stood out due to his approach advocating an attack on the regime in Tehran. He reiterated the danger for Israel and the world, and called on his government to deal with it firmly. Bolton has repeatedly stated that everything must be done to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, including a military attack.

(IsraelNationalNews.com)

Iran Denies Bushehr Activation Will Enable Atomic Weapon Ability

Iran is denying a doomsday message to the world by former U.S. diplomat John Bolton, warning that activation of a nuclear reactor in the Islamic Republic will end the chance to prevent Tehran from developing an atomic weapon.

Iranian officials denied Wednesday that the Bushehr nuclear power plant will produce enriched uranium, or an atomic weapon, after it is activated Friday. Still, to protect its nuclear investment, Iran has vowed to close the Straits of Hormuz if necessary.

On Friday, August 21, Russia is scheduled to begin loading nuclear fuel rods into the reactor, also built by Moscow.

Iranian MP Hossein Sobhaninia has claimed the fueling of the plant “cannot be linked to Iran's nuclear enrichment program; Iran is well aware of its responsibilities.” His colleague, Iranian MP Mohammad Karim Shahrzad added a warning, however, according to a report broadcast by the country's English-language Press TV news network: “The time frame for enrichment activity is a domestic matter,” he said. “It is an issue in which the United States is not entitled to interfere."

By Friday, Bolton, a former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, has warned it will be too late to attack, because such a move would cause radioactive fallout that could reach as far as the Persian Gulf.

Earlier this week, Bolton said in an interview that he believes Israel may have already “lost the opportunity” to prevent Iran from establishing a functional nuclear reactor.

Iranian Army Brigadier-General Ali Shadermani meanwhile has vowed to close the Straits of Hormuz if it appears that the United States might attack the country. “The country's armed forces... are in the highest state of alert,” he told the Mehr news agency on Wednesday.

Shadermani also threatened to attack American troops stationed in Afghanistan and Iraq. “With the slightest move against Iran, we will paralyze those troops stationed in those bases and won't allow them to make any move,” he warned.

The third element in the plan would be aimed at the Jewish State, he said: The Iranian army would, “disturb peace and tranquility in Israel, which is known as the closest ally of the United States," reported Hamsayeh.net. Shadermani added pointedly, "The U.S. and Israel well know that we can do it.”

Israel and other Western nations believe that Iran is intent on building a nuclear weapon of mass destruction. Spent nuclear fuel rods contain material that can be used to build a nuclear bomb – and even if other nuclear plants in the country are shut down, Bushehr could conceivably be used to continue such a project in future.

At present, Russia's agreement with Iran stipulates that the Islamic Republic will return its spent fuel rods abroad to Moscow. However, there is no guarantee that Tehran will keep its word.

According to Bolton, once nuclear fuel rods are placed inside the core of the Bushehr reactor, any attack on the facility could harm Iranian civilians as well as others across an extremely wide area – hence the former diplomat's warning that time is nearly up.
(IsraelNationalNews.com)

F.D.A. Approves 5-Day Emergency Contraceptive

WASHINGTON — Federal drug regulators on Friday approved a new form of emergency contraceptive pill that prevents pregnancies if taken as many as five days after unprotected intercourse.

The pill, called ella, will be available by prescription only. Developed in government laboratories, it is more effective than Plan B, the morning-after pill now available over the counter to women 17 and older.

That pill gradually loses efficacy and can be taken at most three days after sex. Ella, by contrast, works just as well on the fifth day as the first after sex.

Women who have unprotected intercourse have about 1 chance in 20 of becoming pregnant. Those who take Plan B within three days cut that risk to about 1 in 40, while those who take ella would cut that risk to about 1 in 50, regulators say. Studies show that ella is less effective in obese women.

The decision was greeted with enthusiasm by abortion rights groups and denounced by anti-abortion activists. But in recent years both sides have treated the emergency contraceptive pills as a side issue in the wider debate over abortion.

Studies have found that many women fail to realize they are at risk for an unplanned pregnancy after unprotected sex. So they tend not to use the emergency contraceptives even when they receive them free.

“Emergency contraception has no effect on pregnancy rates or abortion rates,” said Dr. James Trussell, director of the Office of Population Research at Princeton, who has consulted without charge for ella’s maker. “Women just don’t use them enough to make an impact.”

Still, the decision by the Food and Drug Administration to approve ella, less than two months after a federal advisory committee voted unanimously to recommend approval, marks a decided shift for the agency.

Under President George W. Bush, White House political advisers overruled united F.D.A. scientists, delaying the decision to make Plan B available over the counter and barring such distribution to women under 18.

Some advocates said Friday that the agency’s relatively rapid adoption of its scientists’ advice meant that its traditional separation from political considerations had returned.

“It’s really important the F.D.A. made a decision that’s based on the scientific evidence and not on the political controversy,” said Diana Zuckerman, president of the National Research Center for Women and Families.

But Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, which opposes abortion, said that political considerations were still at work inside the agency.

“The fact that the F.D.A. waited until late on a Friday night in August to release this when they hoped nobody was paying attention underscores that this is a political decision,” she said.

Ms. Wright warned that men might slip ella to unsuspecting women, and she said testing so far was not adequate to establish whether it was safe.

In studies, the most common side effects associated with ella’s use were mild to moderate headache, nausea, abdominal pain, painful menstrual cramps, fatigue and dizziness.

Ella’s approval may also intensify a long-simmering controversy about whether pharmacists and doctors can refuse to prescribe or fill prescriptions for birth control measures they find personally objectionable.

Much of the debate over the drug springs from an argument over how it works, which despite considerable research remains something of a mystery. It blocks the effects of progesterone, a female hormone that spurs ovulation. It is, however, a chemical relative to RU-486, the abortion pill, and there is some evidence that ella makes the womb less hospitable to a fertilized egg by reducing the lining of the uterus.

To the scientists on the advisory committee, whether the pill works by preventing ovulation or implantation was mostly immaterial to the decision about whether it is safe and effective. But to religious groups, the distinction is crucial, since they consider that preventing implantation of a fertilized egg is akin to abortion.

Animal studies showed that ella had little effect on established pregnancies, suggesting it acts differently from RU-486.

Ella, which was approved in Europe last fall, is manufactured by HRA Pharma, a small French drug maker. In the United States it will be distributed by Watson Pharmaceuticals, a company based in California and New Jersey, which plans to introduce it by the end of the year.

The pill was originally developed by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, part of the National Institutes of Health and now named after Eunice Kennedy Shriver. It decided in 2002 to finance a crucial study to assess the drug’s efficacy as an emergency contraceptive.

Studies have shown that more than one million women who do not want to get pregnant are estimated to have unprotected sex every night in the United States, and that more than 25,000 become pregnant every year after being sexually assaulted. Half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended.

Obama Strongly Backs Islam Center Near 9/11 Site

WASHINGTON — President Obama delivered a strong defense on Friday night of a proposed Muslim community center and mosque near ground zero in Manhattan, using a White House dinner celebrating Ramadan to proclaim that “as a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country.”

After weeks of avoiding the high-profile battle over the center — his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said last week that the president did not want to “get involved in local decision-making” — Mr. Obama stepped squarely into the thorny debate.

“I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground,” the president said in remarks prepared for the annual White House iftar, the sunset meal breaking the day’s fast.

But, he continued: “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are.”

In hosting the iftar, Mr. Obama was following a White House tradition that, while sporadic, dates to Thomas Jefferson, who held a sunset dinner for the first Muslim ambassador to the United States. President George W. Bush hosted iftars annually.

Aides to Mr. Obama say privately that he has always felt strongly about the proposed community center and mosque, but the White House did not want to weigh in until local authorities made a decision on the proposal, planned for two blocks from the site of the Sept. 11 attack on the World Trade Center.

Last week, New York City removed the final construction hurdle for the project, and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg spoke forcefully in favor of it.

The community center proposal has led to a national uproar over Islam, 9/11 and freedom of religion during a hotly contested midterm election season.

In New York, Rick A. Lazio, a Republican candidate for governor and a former member of the House of Representatives, issued a statement responding to Mr. Obama’s remarks, saying that the president was still “not listening to New Yorkers.”

“With over 100 mosques in New York City, this is not an issue of religion, but one of safety and security,” he said.

Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska and the Republican vice-presidential candidate in 2008, has called the project “an unnecessary provocation” and urged “peace-seeking Muslims” to reject it.

The Anti-Defamation League, a Jewish organization, has also opposed the center.

In his remarks, Mr. Obama distinguished between the terrorists who plotted the 9/11 attacks and Islam. “Al Qaeda’s cause is not Islam — it is a gross distortion of Islam,” the president said, adding, “In fact, Al Qaeda has killed more Muslims than people of any other religion, and that list includes innocent Muslims who were killed on 9/11.”

Noting that “Muslim Americans serve with honor in our military,” Mr. Obama said that at next week’s iftar at the Pentagon, “tribute will be paid to three soldiers who gave their lives in Iraq and now rest among the heroes of Arlington National Cemetery.”

Mr. Obama ran for office promising to improve relations with the Muslim world, by taking steps like closing the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and more generally reaching out. In a speech in Cairo last year, he vowed “a new beginning.”

But Ali Abunimah, an Arab-American journalist and author, said the president has since left many Muslims disappointed.

“There has been no follow-through; Guantánamo is still open and so forth, so all you have left for him to show is in the symbolic field,” Mr. Abunimah said, adding that it was imperative for Mr. Obama to “stand up to Islamophobia.”

Once Mr. Bloomberg spoke out, the president’s course seemed clear, said Steven Clemons of the New America Foundation, a public policy institution here.

“Bloomberg’s speech was, I think, the pivotal one, and set the standard for leadership on this issue,” Mr. Clemons said.

Mr. Bloomberg, in a statement, said: “This proposed mosque and community center in Lower Manhattan is as important a test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetime, and I applaud President Obama’s clarion defense of the freedom of religion tonight.”

Sharif el-Gamal, the developer on the project, said, “We are deeply moved and tremendously grateful for our president’s words.”

A building on the site of the proposed center is already used for prayers, and some worshipers there on Friday night discussed the president’s remarks.

Mohamed Haroun, an intern at a mechanical engineering firm, said, “What he should have said was: ‘This is a community decision. Constitutionally, they have the right to do it, but it’s a community decision and we should see what the local community wants to do.’ ”

Anne Barnard and M. Amedeo Tumolillo contributed reporting from New York.

Muslims Seek to Censor Gospel of Christ

Contact: Pat McEwen, Operation Save America, 321-431-3962

BRIDGEPORT, Conn., Aug. 12 /Christian Newswire/ — In an unprecedented move, Muslim leaders in Connecticut are staging a press conference in Hartford this afternoon, to plead with legislators to censor the Gospel of Christ from the public forum around mosques.

That’s right! They are using their own potential for violence to silence the Gospel of Christ. Gentle Christian saints will be conducting a press conference on the public sidewalk in front of the Bridgeport Islamic Center, aka Mafjid An-Noor Mosque in Bridgeport, Connecticut. Truth is hate to those who hate the truth.

Islam is not a religion, nor a cult, but a total and complete 100 % system of life. It has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. In all of the 27 countries ruled by Islam, the church is the state! No other religion will be tolerated.

“Islam presents a monstrous worldview, birthed in the pit of hell, which brings untold misery and murder upon precious people created in the image of God. Religion is its cover (its beard) by which it gains entrance into nations where the ‘freedom of religion’ is sacrosanct. It then takes this freedom afforded to it, and begins its insidious takeover.” Rev. Flip Benham of Operation Save America.

“Like a python, slowly moving upon its prey with almost imperceptible and hypnotic movement, it begins to coil around its victim until it squeezes every last breath of air out of him. When dead, the victim is swallowed whole.”

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion, yet the Quran states in Sura 4:89, “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam) take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.”

The key difference between Islam and Christianity is that Islam believes that we are to lay the lives of others down to promote the cause of Allah. Christianity, on the other hand, believes that we are to lay down our own lives that others might live. There is a huge difference between a Christian martyr (laying his own life down) and a martyr for Islam (laying the lives of others down). One requires courage. The other is the supreme act of cowardice.

Press Conference:

Bridgeport Islamic Society
1300 Fairfield Ave

Friday, August 13, 2010 - 11:15am EDT

Contact:
Marilyn Carroll 203-444-8047 Bridgeport
Dr. Pat McEwen 321-431-3962 for interviews w/ Rev. Benham

Al-Qaeda Plots Against Saudi Monarchs, Israel

Al-Qaeda leaders in Yemen have called to topple Saudi rulers and murder Christians living in Saudi Arabia, according to a taped statement released Wednesday. The person speaking in the tape identified himself as senior Al-Qaeda operative Saeed al-Shihri, but his identity could not be confirmed.

The tape also included a call for rogue terrorist attacks on Israel. Addressing Al-Qaeda supporters in the Saudi Arabian army, the speaker said, “Bear arms against Israel... Whoever is a pilot should seek martyrdom in the skies of Palestine, and whoever is in the navy should aim his weapons at the Jews...”

United States officials have issued a warning to Americans staying north of Riyadh. Terrorists may be planning to attack Western nationals in the Al-Qassim province, they said.

The speaker in Wednesday's tape called on Al-Qaeda supporters to collect information on the Saudi royal family. Those who have access to members of the royal family should kill them, he said. He called to murder Christians as well.

Al-Qaeda has called to attack the government of Saudi Arabia for allegedly supporting the US in its wars on terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan. The international terrorist group is also engaged in battling the Yemeni army, which it has attacked several times this summer.

Al-Shihri is the deputy leader of Al-Qaeda in Yemen, one of Al-Qaeda's larger branches. He was imprisoned for several years in the US-run Guantanamo Bay jail and released in 2007 to Saudi Arabia, where he underwent a rehabilitation program for terrorists.
(IsraelNationalNews.com)

Israeli Concern Prompts Modification of US-Saudi Deal

An arms package sold by the United States to Saudi Arabia will include advanced F-15 fighter jets but not long-range weapons systems and other arms.

A report in the Wall Street Journal on Sunday cited diplomats and officials who said that Israel’s opposition to the inclusion of said weapons in the arms package is what caused the Obama administration to decide to modify the deal.

The package is one of the biggest deals of its kind and would see Saudi Arabia receiving the fighter jets for a period of 10 years at a cost of $30 billion. The report explained that the deal has been a source of behind-the-scenes tension, as Israeli officials repeatedly conveyed their concerns that the US risks undermining Israel’s military advantage by equipping regional rivals with top-flight technologies.

Officials explained that under the proposed sale, the Saudis would receive 84 Boeing Co. F-15s with onboard targeting systems similar to those offered to other foreign governments. These are not as technologically advanced as F-15s flown by the US military. What is more critical to Israel, explained the WSJ report, is that the administration in Washington not offer Saudi Arabia certain weapons, among them standoff systems which are advanced long-range weapons that can be attached to F-15s for use in offensive operations against land- and sea-based targets.

US officials have provided what was called "clarifications" to Israel about the deal, and, while Israel still has some reservations, it is not expected that it will challenge the sale by lobbying Congress, which has the power to block sales of arms it conceives as dangerous to Israel’s military advantage.

Several weeks ago it was reported that Israel and the US were nearing a $3 billion deal that would see Israel buying 19 advanced F-35 warplanes that would give it a significant military advantage. The Wall Street Journal report said that the trigger for this deal was likely the US commitment to Israel not to provide the Saudis with advanced arms.

The F-35, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, is a far more sophisticated plane than the F-15. Lockheed Martin has promoted the F-35 as the centerpiece for 21st century global security while strengthening international political and industrial partnerships. The fighter plane combines advanced stealth with fighter speed and agility, fully fused sensor information, network-enabled operations and advanced sustainment. And, Lockheed Martin has said it could start delivering the F-35 as early as 2015, around the same time the Saudis would begin to get new F-15s. Thus, the Saudis would get their advanced F-15s while Israel would be provided at the same time with a much more sophisticated F-35 and retain its military advantage.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak visited Washington a few weeks ago in order to discuss the Saudi deal with US officials. “There are considerations in Washington about moving forward with major deals with our neighbors and we want to make sure that we are in an understanding with the [Obama] administration,” said Barak during the visit. “We understand the American need, under the strategy of the administration, to kind of strengthen the moderate Arab countries facing the same threat from hegemonic Iran. But, at the same time, we have a tradition of understanding with following administrations to keep Israel's superiority in weapons' systems and munitions.”

Following Barak’s visit, Israeli officials said they felt more comfortable about how the F-15s sold to the Saudis would be equipped. US officials said that the F-15s in the package will be "very capable" aircrafts, while denying that the US made changes to the deal in order to appease Israel.

(IsraelNationalNews.com)

Arab League Blasts Israel for Dismantling Fake Cemetery

The Arab League Assistant Secretary General for Palestinian Affairs Mohamed Sobeih on Saturday condemned the digging up of what he said were Muslim graves in Jerusalem's Mamillah cemetery by Israeli authorities.

According to a report filed from Cairo by Chinese news agency Xinhua, the cemetery “includes the graves of the companions of Prophet Mohammed” and “is the biggest and oldest graveyard in the Palestinian lands.”

The report completely ignored the facts reported by Arutz Sheva in an exclusive feature: the tombstones were brand-new constructions and were being faked, in an attempt to grab some land from Independence Park (Gan HaAtzmaut).

Sobeih told reporters: "The Arab League is closely following up this heinous crime when Israel has planned to establish a museum of tolerance instead of the cemetery."

"Israel is destroying the Muslims' graves when Arabs are restoring the Jewish ones everywhere in the world," he added.

It is not clear what Jewish graves Sobeih was talking about. At least as far as Israel is concerned, Arabs have been very busy defiling Jewish tombs in recent years. These include the Tomb of the Patriarchs, Joseph's Tomb, the Tombs of Joshua and Caleb, and many synagogues.
(IsraelNationalNews.com)

Rabbi Reveals Name of the Messiah

Shortly before he died, one of Israel's most prominent rabbis wrote the name of the Messiah on a small note which he requested would remain sealed until now. When the note was opened, it revealed what many have known for centuries: Yehoshua, or Yeshua (Jesus), is the Messiah.

A few months before he died, one of the nation’s most prominent rabbis, Yitzhak Kaduri, supposedly wrote the name of the Messiah on a small note which he requested would remain sealed until now. When the note was unsealed, it revealed what many have known for centuries: Yehoshua, or Yeshua (Jesus), is the Messiah.

With the biblical name of Jesus, the Rabbi and kabbalist described the Messiah using six words and hinting that the initial letters form the name of the Messiah. The secret note said:

Concerning the letter abbreviation of the Messiah’s name, He will lift the people and prove that his word and law are valid.

This I have signed in the month of mercy,
Yitzhak Kaduri

The Hebrew sentence (translated above in bold) with the hidden name of the Messiah reads: Yarim Ha’Am Veyokhiakh Shedvaro Vetorato Omdim

The initials spell the Hebrew name of Jesus, Yehoshua. Yehoshua and Yeshua are effectively the same name, derived from the same Hebrew root of the word “salvation” as documented in Zechariah 6:11 and Ezra 3:2. The same priest writes in Ezra, “Yeshua son of Yozadak” while writing in Zechariah “Yehoshua son of Yohozadak.” The priest adds the holy abbreviation of God’s name, ho, in the father’s name Yozadak and in the name Yeshua.

With one of Israel’s most prominent rabbis indicating the name of the Messiah is Yeshua, it is understandable why his last wish was to wait one year after his death before revealing what he wrote.

When the name of Yehoshua appeared in Kaduri’s message, ultra-Orthodox Jews from his Nahalat Yitzhak Yeshiva (seminary) in Jerusalem argued that their master did not leave the exact solution for decoding the Messiah’s name.

The revelation received scant coverage in the Israeli media. Only the Hebrew websites News First Class (Nfc) and Kaduri.net mentioned the Messiah note, insisting it was authentic. The Hebrew daily Ma'ariv ran a story on the note but described it as a forgery.

Jewish readers responded on the websites' forums with mixed feelings: “So this means Rabbi Kaduri was a Christian?” and “The Christians are dancing and celebrating,” were among the comments.

Israel Today spoke to two of Kaduri’s followers in Jerusalem who admitted that the note was authentic, but confusing for his followers as well. “We have no idea how the Rabbi got to this name of the Messiah,” one of them said.

Yet others completely deny any possibility that the note is authentic. Kaduri’s son, Rabbi David Kaduri, said that at the time the note was written (September 2005), his father’s physical condition made it impossible for him to write.


KADURI'S PORTRAYAL OF THE MESSIAH

A few months before Kaduri died at the age of 108, he surprised his followers when he told them that he met the Messiah. Kaduri gave a message in his synagogue on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, teaching how to recognize the Messiah. He also mentioned that the Messiah would appear to Israel after Ariel Sharon’s death. (The former prime minister is still in a coma after suffering a massive stroke more than a year ago.)

Other rabbis predict the same, including Rabbi Haim Cohen, kabbalist Nir Ben Artzi and the wife of Rabbi Haim Kneiveskzy.

Kaduri’s grandson, Rabbi Yosef Kaduri, said his grandfather spoke many times during his last days about the coming of the Messiah and redemption through the Messiah.

His spiritual portrayals of the Messiah—reminiscent of New Testament accounts—were published on the websites Kaduri.net and Nfc:

“It is hard for many good people in society to understand the person of the Messiah. The leadership and order of a Messiah of flesh and blood is hard to accept for many in the nation. As leader, the Messiah will not hold any office, but will be among the people and use the media to communicate. His reign will be pure and without personal or political desire. During his dominion, only righteousness and truth will reign.

“Will all believe in the Messiah right away? No, in the beginning some of us will believe in him and some not. It will be easier for non-religious people to follow the Messiah than for Orthodox people.

“The revelation of the Messiah will be ful lled in two stages: First, he will actively confirm his position as Messiah without knowing himself that he is the Messiah. Then he will reveal himself to some Jews, not necessarily to wise Torah scholars. It can be even simple people. Only then he will reveal himself to the whole nation. The people will wonder and say: ‘What, that’s the Messiah?’ Many have known his name but have not believed that he is the Messiah.”


FAREWELL TO A 'TSADIK'

Rabbi Yitzhak Kaduri was known for his photographic memory and his memorization of the Bible, the Talmud, Rashi and other Jewish writings. He knew Jewish sages and celebrities of the last century and rabbis who lived in the Holy Land and kept the faith alive before the State of Israel was born.

Kaduri was not only highly esteemed because of his age of 108. He was charismatic and wise, and chief rabbis looked up to him as a Tsadik, a righteous man or saint. He would give advice and blessings to everyone who asked. Thousands visited him to ask for counsel or healing. His followers speak of many miracles and his students say that he predicted many disasters.

When he died, more than 200,000 people joined the funeral procession on the streets of Jerusalem to pay their respects as he was taken to his final resting place.

“When he comes, the Messiah will rescue Jerusalem from foreign religions that want to rule the city,” Kaduri once said. “They will not succeed for they will fight against one another.”


THE RABBI'S FOLLOWERS REACT

In an interview with Israel Today, Rabbi David Kaduri, the 80-year-old son of the late Rabbi Yitzhak Kaduri, denied that his father left a note with the name Yeshua just before he died.

“It’s not his writing,” he said when we showed him a copy of the note.

During a nighttime meeting in the Nahalat Yitzhak Yeshiva in Jerusalem, books with the elder Kaduri’s handwriting from 80 years ago were presented to us in an attempt to prove that the Messiah note was not authentic.

When we told Rabbi Kaduri that his father’s official website (www.kaduri.net) had mentioned the Messiah note, he was shocked. “Oh no! That’s blasphemy. The people could understand that my father pointed to him [the Messiah of the Christians].”

David Kaduri confirmed, however, that in his last year, his father had talked and dreamed almost exclusively about the Messiah and his coming. “My father has met the Messiah in a vision,” he said, “and told us that he would come soon.”

Israel Today was given access to many of the rabbi's manuscripts, written in his own hand for the exclusive use of his students. Most striking were the cross-like symbols painted by Kaduri all over the pages. In the Jewish tradition, one does not use crosses. In fact, even the use of a plus sign is discouraged because it might be mistaken for a cross.

But there they were, scribbled in the rabbi's own hand. When we asked what those symbols meant, Rabbi David Kaduri said they were “signs of the angel." Pressed further about the meaning of the “signs of the angel," he said he had no idea. Rabbi David Kaduri went on to explain that only his father had had a spiritual relationship with God and had met the Messiah in his dreams.

Orthodox Jews around the Nahalat Yitzhak Yeshiva told Israel Today a few weeks later that the story about the secret note of Rabbi Kaduri should never have come out, and that it had damaged the name of the revered old sage.

A Pakistani flood-affected person use plastic sheet to protect himself from rain as he sleep along the roadside in Azakhel



SUKKUR, Pakistan – Authorities evacuated thousands of Pakistanis living along expanding rivers on Saturday as forecasts predicted even more heavy rain could deepen the country's flood crisis. As the prime minister appealed for national solidarity, hardline Islamists rushed to fill in the gaps in the government's aid effort.

Pakistani officials estimate as many as 13 million people throughout the South Asian nation have been affected by the worst flooding in the country's 63-year history, though the United Nations, apparently using different metrics, has put the number at roughly 4 million. About 1,500 people have died, most of them in the northwest, the hardest-hit region.

The intense deluge that began about two weeks ago has washed away roads, bridges and many communications lines, hampering rescue efforts staged by aid organizations and the government. Incessant monsoon rains have grounded many helicopters trying to rescue people and ferry aid, including six choppers manned by U.S. troops on loan from Afghanistan.

Confidence in the national government's ability to cope has been shaken by the decision of President Asif Ali Zardari to visit France and England amid the crisis.

Floodwaters receded somewhat Friday in the northwest, but downpours in the evening and early Saturday again swelled rivers and streams. Pakistani meteorologist Farooq Dar said heavy rains in Afghanistan were expected to make things even worse into Sunday as the bloated Kabul River surged into Pakistan's northwest.

That will likely mean more woes for Punjab and Sindh provinces as well, as new river torrents flow east and south.

An Associated Press reporter saw many people walking on foot and using trucks to migrate to safer places in interior Sindh, where tens of thousands have fled for safer land and floodwaters have swallowed many villages. Some Pakistanis, however, refused to leave their crops and homes.

"Let the flood come. We will live and die here," said Dur Mohammed, 75, who lives in a mud brick home in Dadli village.

Mohammed was one of 250 people in Dadli resisting evacuation, even though floodwaters have already began touching the embankments of the Indus River less than one mile (two kilometers) away. Many feared that if they left and the floods never came, their household items would be stolen.

Pakistan's military said Saturday it had rescued more than 100,000 people from flood-affected areas, while 568 army boats and 31 helicopters were being used for the rescue operation.

The army was also providing food and tents to the survivors, an army statement said.

Some 30,000 Pakistani soldiers are rebuilding bridges, delivering food and setting up relief camps in the northwest, which is the main battleground in the fight against al-Qaida and the Taliban. Foreign countries and the United Nations have donated millions of dollars to the aid effort.

The U.S. has tapped soldiers from its war effort in Afghanistan to operate four Chinook and two Black Hawk helicopters to evacuate people from the northwest's Swat Valley and carry aid there. Around 85 U.S. soldiers are involved, though ongoing rain has limited their flights.

Also helping in the relief effort are Islamist charities, including the Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation, which Western officials believe is linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba. Lashkar is the militant group blamed for the deadly 2008 attacks in Mumbai, the financial capital of India, Pakistan's regional archrival.

The Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation says it is running 12 medical facilities, providing cooked food for 100,000 people every day, and plans to open shelters soon.

"The magnitude of this tragedy is so severe, and the area affected is so vast, that the government alone cannot meet the needs of such a large number of affectees," said Atique Chauhan, a spokesman for the foundation. "The U.S. efforts for rescue and relief are good, and we will appreciate help from all of humanity, whether it is the U.S. or even India."

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani appealed for national unity during the crisis.

"I request that all the political parties be united and work together to help the flood victims," he told reporters on Saturday, adding that the government is doing everything it can to move people to safer ground.

"The next two days are very critical in this regard," Gilani said. "Our top priority is to rescue people, to save their lives. But we will also provide them all facilities, and we will work for their rehabilitation."

___

Toosi reported from Islamabad. Associated Press writers Riaz Khan in Peshawar and Munir Ahmed in Islamabad contributed to this report.

Fidel Castro makes 1st official gov't appearance

HAVANA – A lively and healthy-looking Fidel Castro appealed to President Barack Obama to prevent a global nuclear war in an emphatic speech Saturday that marked his first official government appearance since emergency surgery four years ago.

Castro's speech before the Cuban parliament, along with other numerous recent public appearances, raised questions about how much he will resume a leadership role.

Castro, who turns 84 in a week, arrived on the arm of a subordinate, waving and smiling as the crowd applauded loudly in unison.

"Fidel, Fidel, Fidel!" the participants chanted. "Long live Fidel!"

Dressed in olive-green fatigues without military insignias, he immediately took the podium and delivered a fiery 11-minute speech on his fears of an impending global nuclear war. He implored Obama and other wealthy nations to make sure such an event never happens.

Castro then took a seat next to Parliament leader Ricardo Alarcon — instead of sitting in the chair that parliament members leave empty in his honor during his absence. Current President Raul Castro sat on the other side of the stage, where he listened intensely and took notes as his older brother spoke.

Lawmakers followed the speech with enthusiastic remarks to Fidel Castro about how fully recovered and healthy he appeared. They also commented on the topic at hand.

Asked by one parliamentarian if Obama would be capable of starting a nuclear war, Castro replied, "No, not if we persuade him not to."

He patted his hand on the desk for emphasis, then fell silent, seemingly surprising a crowd long accustomed to the hourslong speeches for which he was famous during his 49 years in power.

Castro's participation in Saturday's legislative session marks the bearded revolutionary's first official government act — and his first joint appearance with Raul — since his emergency intestinal surgery in 2006.

It was bound to raise questions about his future role in the government. Even before he confirmed his attendance at this weekend's gathering, top leaders and state media had begun calling him "commander in chief," a title he had largely shunned since relinquishing power.

Fidel Castro was Cuba's unquestioned, unchallenged "maximum leader" for 49 years, starting after his band of rebels toppled Fulgencio Batista on New Year's Day 1959.

Following his surgery, he dropped from sight and ceded power to Raul, five years his junior. Rumors about his health swirled as he remained for years in near seclusion.

Recently, however, the former Cuban leader has been making near-daily appearances in and around Havana: He has addressed groups of Cuban intellectuals and Communist Youth meetings, and even made a trip to the Havana aquarium for a dolphin show.

Castro, who has written on the topic of nuclear war for months, maintains that the United States and Israel will attack Iran and that Washington could also target North Korea. He has suggested the conflict could have Armageddon-like consequences for the whole world, even predicting in several opinion columns that fighting was to already have begun by now.

Chinese missile could shift Pacific power balance

ABOARD THE USS GEORGE WASHINGTON – Nothing projects U.S. global air and sea power more vividly than supercarriers. Bristling with fighter jets that can reach deep into even landlocked trouble zones, America's virtually invincible carrier fleet has long enforced its dominance of the high seas.

China may soon put an end to that.

U.S. naval planners are scrambling to deal with what analysts say is a game-changing weapon being developed by China — an unprecedented carrier-killing missile called the Dong Feng 21D that could be launched from land with enough accuracy to penetrate the defenses of even the most advanced moving aircraft carrier at a distance of more than 1,500 kilometers (900 miles).

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — The USS George Washington supercarrier recently deployed off North Korea in a high-profile show of U.S. sea power. AP Tokyo News Editor Eric Talmadge was aboard the carrier, and filed this report.

___

Analysts say final testing of the missile could come as soon as the end of this year, though questions remain about how fast China will be able to perfect its accuracy to the level needed to threaten a moving carrier at sea.

The weapon, a version of which was displayed last year in a Chinese military parade, could revolutionize China's role in the Pacific balance of power, seriously weakening Washington's ability to intervene in any potential conflict over Taiwan or North Korea. It could also deny U.S. ships safe access to international waters near China's 11,200-mile (18,000-kilometer) -long coastline.

While a nuclear bomb could theoretically sink a carrier, assuming its user was willing to raise the stakes to atomic levels, the conventionally-armed Dong Feng 21D's uniqueness is in its ability to hit a powerfully defended moving target with pin-point precision.

The Chinese Defense Ministry did not immediately respond to the AP's request for a comment.

Funded by annual double-digit increases in the defense budget for almost every year of the past two decades, the Chinese navy has become Asia's largest and has expanded beyond its traditional mission of retaking Taiwan to push its sphere of influence deeper into the Pacific and protect vital maritime trade routes.

"The Navy has long had to fear carrier-killing capabilities," said Patrick Cronin, senior director of the Asia-Pacific Security Program at the nonpartisan, Washington-based Center for a New American Security. "The emerging Chinese antiship missile capability, and in particular the DF 21D, represents the first post-Cold War capability that is both potentially capable of stopping our naval power projection and deliberately designed for that purpose."

Setting the stage for a possible conflict, Beijing has grown increasingly vocal in its demands for the U.S. to stay away from the wide swaths of ocean — covering much of the Yellow, East and South China seas — where it claims exclusivity.

It strongly opposed plans to hold U.S.-South Korean war games in the Yellow Sea off the northeastern Chinese coast, saying the participation of the USS George Washington supercarrier, with its 1,092-foot (333-meter) flight deck and 6,250 personnel, would be a provocation because it put Beijing within striking range of U.S. F-18 warplanes.

The carrier instead took part in maneuvers held farther away in the Sea of Japan.

U.S. officials deny Chinese pressure kept it away, and say they will not be told by Beijing where they can operate.

"We reserve the right to exercise in international waters anywhere in the world," Rear Adm. Daniel Cloyd, who headed the U.S. side of the exercises, said aboard the carrier during the maneuvers, which ended last week.

But the new missile, if able to evade the defenses of a carrier and of the vessels sailing with it, could undermine that policy.

"China can reach out and hit the U.S. well before the U.S. can get close enough to the mainland to hit back," said Toshi Yoshihara, an associate professor at the U.S. Naval War College. He said U.S. ships have only twice been that vulnerable — against Japan in World War II and against Soviet bombers in the Cold War.

Carrier-killing missiles "could have an enduring psychological effect on U.S. policymakers," he e-mailed to The AP. "It underscores more broadly that the U.S. Navy no longer rules the waves as it has since the end of World War II. The stark reality is that sea control cannot be taken for granted anymore."

Yoshihara said the weapon is causing considerable consternation in Washington, though — with attention focused on land wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — its implications haven't been widely discussed in public.

Analysts note that while much has been made of China's efforts to ready a carrier fleet of its own, it would likely take decades to catch U.S. carrier crews' level of expertise, training and experience.

But Beijing does not need to match the U.S. carrier for carrier. The Dong Feng 21D, smarter, and vastly cheaper, could successfully attack a U.S. carrier, or at least deter it from getting too close.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned of the threat in a speech last September at the Air Force Association Convention.

"When considering the military-modernization programs of countries like China, we should be concerned less with their potential ability to challenge the U.S. symmetrically — fighter to fighter or ship to ship — and more with their ability to disrupt our freedom of movement and narrow our strategic options," he said.

Gates said China's investments in cyber and anti-satellite warfare, anti-air and anti-ship weaponry, along with ballistic missiles, "could threaten America's primary way to project power" through its forward air bases and carrier strike groups.

The Pentagon has been worried for years about China getting an anti-ship ballistic missile. The Pentagon considers such a missile an "anti-access," weapon, meaning that it could deny others access to certain areas.

The Air Force's top surveillance and intelligence officer, Lt. Gen. David Deptula, told reporters this week that China's effort to increase anti-access capability is part of a worrisome trend.

He did not single out the DF 21D, but said: "While we might not fight the Chinese, we may end up in situations where we'll certainly be opposing the equipment that they build and sell around the world."

Questions remain over when — and if — China will perfect the technology; hitting a moving carrier is no mean feat, requiring state-of-the-art guidance systems, and some experts believe it will take China a decade or so to field a reliable threat. Others, however, say final tests of the missile could come in the next year or two.

Former Navy commander James Kraska, a professor of international law and sea power at the U.S. Naval War College, recently wrote a controversial article in the magazine Orbis outlining a hypothetical scenario set just five years from now in which a Deng Feng 21D missile with a penetrator warhead sinks the USS George Washington.

That would usher in a "new epoch of international order in which Beijing emerges to displace the United States."

While China's Defense Ministry never comments on new weapons before they become operational, the DF 21D — which would travel at 10 times the speed of sound and carry conventional payloads — has been much discussed by military buffs online.

A pseudonymous article posted on Xinhuanet, website of China's official news agency, imagines the U.S. dispatching the George Washington to aid Taiwan against a Chinese attack.

The Chinese would respond with three salvos of DF 21D, the first of which would pierce the hull, start fires and shut down flight operations, the article says. The second would knock out its engines and be accompanied by air attacks. The third wave, the article says, would "send the George Washington to the bottom of the ocean."

Comments on the article were mostly positive.

___

AP writer Christopher Bodeen in Beijing and National Security Writer Anne Gearan in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.

Report: UN Teaches Jihad in Jerusalem

The Palestinian Authority continues to incite young schoolchildren to armed struggle against Israel in its textbooks – textbooks that are used by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) to teach incitement in Israel's capital city, says investigative reporter David Bedein, who spoke in an interview with Arutz Sheva's Hebrew-language news service.

The books in question include passages praising terrorists killed while attacking Israel as “martyrs”. They also teach children that Arabs descended from those who fled Israel during the War of Independence have a right to “return” to Israel.

Bedein's finding that the textbooks in Arab schools in Jerusalem are as problematic as those used in PA schools elsewhere is backed by a frank interview with PA Minister of Education Lamis al-Alami, who spoke with a member of Bedein's investigative team and told her that the textbooks provided by the PA for UNRWA schools are the precisely the same in Jerusalem as in Ramallah, Shechem and Gaza.

"These books discuss war against Israel, martyrs, the right of return. It's the first education system since the Third Reich which prepares its pupils to demonize Jews and to wage war against the Jews ” Bedein said.

He invited listeners to verify his story for themselves, saying, “Go to book stores on Salah a-Din street [a major road in eastern Jerusalem – ed.] and compare the books you see there to those sold in Ramallah and Gaza. It's the same thing, books engaged in racist incitement against the Jewish people.”

Arab schools in Jerusalem receive funding from the Jerusalem municipality. UNRWA schools in Jerusalem and elsewhere receive much of their funding from 38 nations, primarily from the United States and the European Union. Two UNRWA facilities are located inside Jerusalem - in the neighborhoods of Shuafat and Kalandia.

Bedein first raised the issue of incitement in Jerusalem schools 10 years ago. Among those he spoke to was former prime minister Ehud Olmert, then mayor of Jerusalem, who responded at a news conference to Bedein's question with little concern. “They can teach what they want, and we'll teach what we want,” Olmert said about incitement in the PA school books being used by Arab schools with funding from the Jerusalem municipality and the Israel Ministry of Education.

Bedein expressed hope that current Israeli leaders will now eact differently. Three officials have the power to change the situation, he said – Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat, Education Minister Gidon Saar and Education Committee head Zevulun Orlev.

A new film, "For the Sake of Nakba", details the connection between the UNRWA and PA incitement. Bedein and the research agency that he heads, the Center For Near East Policy Research, www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com, produced the new movie in response to a challenge to prove the reports of incitement in UNRWA schools. The video was recently screened on Capitol Hill. It is based on first-hand testimony from PA leaders and teachers and students in UN schools. It will also be shown at the Orthodox Union's Israel Center in Jerusalem Tuesday August 10th at 11:30 a.m., followed by "For the Sake of Allah", Bedein's film about what Hamas prisoners say they would do if released.
(IsraelNationalNews.com)

Senate confirms Kagan as 112th justice

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – The Senate confirmed Elena Kagan Thursday as the Supreme Court's 112th justice and fourth woman, selecting a scholar with a reputation for brilliance, a dry sense of humor and a liberal legal bent.

The vote was 63-37 for President Barack Obama's nominee to succeed retired Justice John Paul Stevens.

Five Republicans joined all but one Democrat and the Senate's two independents to support Kagan. In a rarely practiced ritual reserved for the most historic votes, senators sat at their desks and stood to cast their votes with "ayes" and "nays."

Kagan watched the vote with her Justice Department colleagues in the solicitor general's conference room, the White House said.

Kagan isn't expected to alter the ideological balance of the court, where Stevens was considered a leader of the liberals.

But the two parties clashed over her nomination. Republicans argued that Kagan was a political liberal who would be unable to be impartial. Democrats defended her as a highly qualified legal scholar.

She is the first Supreme Court nominee in nearly 40 years with no experience as a judge, and her swearing-in will mark the first time in history that three women will serve on the nine-member court together.

Her lack of judicial experience was the stated reason for one fence-sitting Republican, Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, to announce his opposition to her confirmation Thursday, just hours before the vote.

Though calling her "brilliant," Brown — who had been seen as a potential GOP supporter — said she was missing the necessary background to serve as a justice.

"The best umpires, to use the popular analogy, must not only call balls and strikes, but also have spent enough time on the playing field to know the strike zone," Brown said.

Democrats said Kagan could help bring consensus to the polarized court and act as a counterweight to the conservative majority that's dominated in recent years.

With her confirmation, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said near the end of a three-day debate, "average Americans will be a step closer to once again having their voices heard in the highest court in the land."

Most Republicans portrayed Kagan as a politically motivated nominee who would allow her liberal views to interfere with her rulings, and use her post to push the Democratic agenda from the bench.

Kagan "is truly a person of the political left — now they call themselves progressives — one who has a history of working to advance the values of the left wing of the Democratic Party, and whose philosophy of judging allows a judge to utilize the power of their office to advance their vision for what America should be," said Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee.

A handful of Republicans broke with their party to back Kagan. They argued that partisanship should play no role in debates over the Supreme Court and have called Obama's nominee qualified.

Still, it was clear that unlike in past decades — when high court nominees enjoyed the support of large majorities on both sides — party politics was driving the debate and vote on Kagan, much as it did last year when the Senate considered Obama's first pick, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and former President George W. Bush's two nominees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito.

GOP senators have criticized Kagan for her decision as dean to bar military recruiters from the Harvard Law School career services office because of the prohibition against openly gay soldiers. Republicans spent the last hours of debate accusing her of being hostile to gun rights, and they have also spent considerable time criticizing her stance in favor of abortion rights.

Kagan revealed little about what kind of justice she would be in weeks of private one-on-one meetings with senators and several days of testimony before the Judiciary panel, despite having famously penned a law review article blasting Supreme Court nominees for obfuscating before the Senate. She dodged questions about her personal beliefs on a host of hot-button issues and declined repeatedly to "grade" Supreme Court rulings.

But her public appearances and documents unearthed from her time serving as a Clinton administration lawyer and domestic policy aide painted a portrait of the kind of personality she'll bring to the bench. She came across as a sharp intellect who enjoys the thrust and parry of legal debate, someone who's willing to throw elbows to make her opinions heard but nonetheless eager to facilitate consensus.

Kagan will be no stranger to the eight justices she is to join on the Supreme Court, having served as the government's top lawyer arguing cases before them in a post often referred to as the "10th justice." She's already friendly with a number of them, not least Antonin Scalia, the conservative justice who is her ideological opposite.

Kagan's nomination to a lifetime seat on the nation's highest court has drawn relatively little notice this summer, with the public and elected officials preoccupied by bad economic news and the Gulf oil spill, and many lawmakers nervously eyeing the November midterm congressional elections.

But senators used the debate to press dueling visions of the Supreme Court. Democrats say Kagan would be a mainstream, moderate counterweight to a conservative majority they say has defied Congress and ignored the Constitution in its rulings on issues such as workplace rights and campaign finance.

Republicans argued that Obama's choice of Kagan reflects Democratic attempts to pack courts with liberals who will mold the law to their agendas.

When sworn in, Kagan will join two other women on the court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sotomayor, who was Obama's first nominee. Sandra Day O'Connor was the first woman appointed to the court, by President Ronald Reagan. She served from September 1981 to January 2006.

Ex-CIAers to Obama: Israel Might Attack Iran This Month

A group of former CIA officials warns U.S. President Obama that Israel might attack Iran “even within a month,” and that Obama bears responsibility for having praised Netanyahu.

“We write to alert you to the likelihood that Israel will attack Iran as early as this month,” the open letter to Obama begins. “This would likely lead to a wider war.”

The letter, issued on Tuesday by the anti-Iraqi-war VIPS (Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity), continues:
“Israel’s leaders would calculate that once the battle is joined, it will be politically untenable for you to give anything less than unstinting support to Israel, no matter how the war started, and that U.S. troops and weaponry would flow freely. Wider war could eventually result in the destruction of the state of Israel.

“This can be stopped, but only if you move quickly to pre-empt an Israeli attack by publicly condemning such a move before it happens.” [emphasis in the original]

This is only the second memo VIPS has issued. In February 2003, it released a document criticizing then-U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell's famous speech before the United Nations, in which he made the case for war against Iraq by presenting the evidence of Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.

Jerusalem Building Projects and the Iran Problem
The letter is distinctly anti-Israel. Its writers - W. Patrick Lang, Larry Johnson, and Ray McGovern, among others – mock Obama for having expressed confidence that Netanyahu would not try to surprise the United States.

“You may wish to ask Vice President Biden to remind you of the kind of surprises he has encountered in Israel,” the letter states – implying that the announcement of progress in a Jerusalem housing project without informing the visiting Biden beforehand is equivalent to a surprise attack on Iraq.

“Blindsiding has long been an arrow in Israel’s quiver,” the CIA veterans write, going back to 1967 to accuse Israel of “feign[ing] fear of an imminent Arab attack as justification for starting [the Six Day War] war to seize and occupy Arab territories.” Then-Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser’s closure of the Straits of Tiran, his frequent calls to “throw Israel into the sea,” and his amassing of 1,000 tanks and nearly 100,000 soldiers on the Israeli border are overlooked in the memorandum, as are the signing of a Jordanian-Egyptian defense pact and Iraqi deployment in Jordan of troops and tanks at Jordan’s invitation a week before war broke out. Forgotten, as well, was the Egyptian Army’s Order of the Day two days before the war plugging "Holy War" and the re-conquest of "the plundered soil of Palestine."

The letter notes that Congress has implied support of Israel in case of an Israeli attack, but that “a strong public statement by you [Obama], personally warning Israel not to attack Iran would most probably head off such an Israeli move.”

Regime Change
The memorandum states that Israel is motivated not by fear of Iranian nuclear power, which it actually has reason to believe that it need not fear, but simply by the desire for “regime change” in Iran.

It accuses Netanyahu of having a “contemptuous attitude toward” the United States, and at having learned this from Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon.

“One would be well advised,” the VIPS letter states, “to greet with appropriate skepticism any private assurances Netanyahu may have given you that Israel would not surprise you with an attack on Iran.”


(IsraelNationalNews.com)

Mexican President, Felipe Calderon Considering Legalizing Drugs After 28,000 People Killed In Drug War Since 2006

President Felipe Calderon said he would consider a debate on legalizing drugs Tuesday as his government announced that more than 28,000 people have been killed in drug violence since he launched a crackdown against cartels in 2006.

Intelligence agency director Guillermo Valdes also said authorities have confiscated about 84,000 weapons and made total cash seizures of $411 million in U.S. currency and $26 million worth in pesos (330 million pesos).

Valdes released the statistics during a meeting with Calderon and representatives of business and civic groups, where attendees exploring ways to improve Mexico's anti-drug strategy called on the government to open a debate on legalization.

Calderon said he has taken note of the idea of legally regulating drugs in the past.

"It's a fundamental debate in which I think, first of all, you must allow a democratic plurality (of opinions)," he said. "You have to analyze carefully the pros and cons and the key arguments on both sides."

Three former presidents — Cesar Gaviria of Colombia, Ernesto Zedillo of Mexico and Fernando Cardoso of Brazil — urged Latin American countries last year to consider legalizing marijuana to undermine a major source of income for cartels. And Mexico's congress also has debated the issue.

But Calderon has long said he is opposed to the idea, and his office issued a statement hours after the meeting saying that while the president was open to debate on the issue, he remains "against the legalization of drugs."

In proposing the debate Tuesday, analyst and writer Hector Aguilar Camin said, "I'm not talking just about marijuana ... rather all drugs in general."

The most recent official toll of the drug war dead came in mid-June, when the attorney general said 24,800 had died. Valdes did not specify a time frame for the new statistics.

The government does not regularly break down murder statistics, but leading newspapers who kept their own counts say last month was the deadliest yet under Calderon: According to national daily Milenio, 1,234 were killed in July.

The Mexican government says most victims were involved in the drug trade.

Some attendees criticized the government for lacking consistent statistics on the drug war and an effective way to communicate its successes. They also said the government needs to do more to combat the financial arm of organized crime.

"There's no systematic policy for investigating or seizing the assets of organized crime," said Jose Luis Pineyro of Mexico's Autonomous Metropolitan University, "nor a system of locating the properties of organized crime."The Bad Guiy

Source: NPR

What’s next for the Prop. 8 case?

By Liz Goodwin


YAHOO NEWS: Now that a San Francisco federal judge has overturned California's voter-approved gay marriage ban, supporters of same-sex marriage have hailed the decision as a "grand slam." But it's not quite a game-changer — the ruling by Judge Vaughn Walker, which declared that the ballot initiative outlawing gay unions in the Golden State violates the due process and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, sets the stage for a likely Supreme Court challenge to determine the authority of the state to ban same-sex marriage.

Walker's decision marks the first federal test of a state law outlawing gay marriage. Gay-marriage opponents had earlier sought a stay on Walker's ruling, so as to prevent a decision against them from unleashing a wave of gay marriages in the state before they could mount an appeal. Prop. 8 backers say they plan to appeal the decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The language of Walker's decision is sweeping — which makes a Supreme Court challenge more likely than if he had elected to decide the case on narrower points of law. "The evidence shows conclusively that moral and religious views form the only basis for a belief that same-sex couples are different from opposite-sex couples," Walker wrote. He also blasted the defense's star witness and says Prop. 8 "fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license." (You can read the full decision here.)If the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals were to overturn Walker's decision, the Supreme Court may be less likely to rule on the case. In practical terms, that outcome seems unlikely, though — the 9th Circuit has long had the reputation of being the nation's liberal appellate district, with Rush Limbaugh routinely blasting it as the "Ninth Circus" for past rulings such as the 2002 finding that schools can't compel students to recite the "under God" portion of the Pledge of Allegiance. (The court recently reversed that ruling.)

Still, if the case eventually reaches the Supreme Court, conventional wisdom is that the conservative-leaning Roberts Court would not uphold a gay-marriage right, USC lawprofessor David Cruz told a California public radio station this morning.

University of California constitutional law professor Erwin Chemerinsky tells The Upshot that a U.S. district court's decision in Massachusetts to strike down the federal Defense of Marriage Act could actually reach the Supreme Court faster than the Prop. 8 case. "I think ultimately the Supreme Court has to rule on this issue," he said.

A spokesman for the Equal Rights Foundation, a nonprofit that funded the challenge to Prop. 8, tells The Upshot that one of the main effects of the case has been to change public perception of gay marriage.

"One of the most important things about this case is that it's laid all the facts on the table," spokesman Yusef Robb said. "Both sides were given equal opportunity to present evidence and present testimony. As opposed to the political arena where spin and bumper stickers and misleading TV ads is what influences people, in a court of law the facts influence people."

Meanwhile, the pro-Prop. 8 forces are gearing up for their appeal. "We expected nothing different from Judge Vaughn Walker, given the biased way he conducted this trial," Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, told a local paper. "With a stroke of his pen, Judge Walker has overruled the votes and values of 7 million Californians who voted for marriage as one man and one woman."

Vaughn issued a temporary stay on his ruling, so gay couples in California cannot get married yet, despite some confusion after the ruling was announced at the county clerks' offices.

Chris Geidner at Metro Weekly writes that the most important parts of the decision are Walker's "findings of fact," because his legal decisions will be considered anew when the case reaches the 9th circuit. He lists the facts here.

Iran claims to have S-300 surface-to-air missiles

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press Writer

TEHRAN, Iran – Iran has obtained four S-300 surface-to-air missiles despite Russia's refusal to deliver them to Tehran under a valid contract, a semiofficial Iranian news agency claimed Wednesday.

The Fars news agency, which has ties to Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard, Iran's most powerful military force, said Iran received two missiles from Belarus and two others from another unspecified source. Fars didn't elaborate, and there was no immediate official confirmation of the report.

Russia signed a contract in 2007 to sell S-300 missiles to Iran, a move that would have substantially boosted the country's defense capacities. Israel fears that supplying S-300s to Iran would change the military balance in the Middle East.

The S-300 anti-aircraft missile defense system is capable of shooting down aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missile warheads at ranges of over 90 miles (144 kilometers) and at altitudes of about 90,000 feet (27,432 meters).

Russia said in June that the new tough U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran prevent Russia from delivering the missiles to Iran but Iran has insisted that Moscow is under an obligation to carry out the contract to provide the S-300 missiles to Tehran.

"Iran possesses four S-300 PT missiles," Fars reported.

The agency said Iran's possession of the missiles was revealed for the first time last year by Al-Menar TV, which is affiliated the Iranian-backed Islamic militant Hezbollah group in Lebanon. Fars said Iranian government officials never denied the report.

It added that Iran may try to start building the missiles itself.

Russia is in a difficult position in the international standoff with Iran, in part because it does not want to jeopardize decades of political and trade ties with the Islamic republic. Still, Moscow has lately shown increasing frustration with Iran, and last month backed the new sanctions.

Iran insists its nuclear work is only for generating power and other peaceful uses. The U.S. and its allies accuse Iran of using its civilian nuclear program as a cover to develop atomic weapons.

Moscow has delivered other anti-aircraft systems to Tehran, such as the Tor-M1, which can hit aerial targets at up to 20,000 feet.

Feisal Abdul Rauf, the Imam Behind the 'Ground Zero Mosque'

YAHOO NEWS: The last legal hurdle to the proposed Islamic center near the site of the World Trade Center has been removed, but ignorance, bigotry and politics are more formidable obstacles. The unanimous vote Tuesday, Aug. 3, by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission means the building that currently occupies 45-47 Park Place can be torn down, clearing the way for Park51, a project known to its critics as the "Ground Zero Mosque." Criticism spans the gamut, from the ill-informed anguish of those who mistakenly view Islam as the malevolent force that brought down the towers to the ill-considered opportunism of right-wing politicians who see Islam as an easy target.

(Ironically, Islam's roots in New York City are in the area around the site of the World Trade Center, and they predate the Twin Towers: in the late 19th century, a portion of lower Manhattan was known as Little Syria and was inhabited by Arab immigrants - Muslims and Christians - from the Ottoman Empire.)

With city authorities now out of the way, it is the people spearheading the project who must bear the enormous pressure to give up their plans and scrap the building. They are being accused of sympathizing with the men who crashed the planes on 9/11 and of designing the project as, in Newt Gingrich's reckoning, "an act of triumphalism."

And yet Park51's main movers, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan, are actually the kind of Muslim leaders right-wing commentators fantasize about: modernists and moderates who openly condemn the death cult of al-Qaeda and its adherents - ironically, just the kind of "peaceful Muslims" whom Sarah Palin, in her now infamous tweet, asked to "refudiate" the mosque. Rauf is a Sufi, which is Islam's most mystical and accommodating denomination. (See the very best #Shakespalin tweets.)

The Kuwaiti-born Rauf, 52, is the imam of a mosque in New York City's Tribeca district, has written extensively on Islam and its place in modern society and often argues that American democracy is the embodiment of Islam's ideal society. (One of his books is titled What's Right with Islam Is What's Right with America.) He is a contributor to the Washington Post's On Faith blog, and the stated aim of his organization, the Cordoba Initiative, is "to achieve a tipping point in Muslim-West relations within the next decade, steering the world back to the course of mutual recognition and respect and away from heightened tensions." His Indian-born wife is an architect and a recipient of the Interfaith Center Award for Promoting Peace and Interfaith Understanding. (Can Sufism defuse terrorism?)

Since 9/11, Western "experts" have said repeatedly that Muslim leaders who fit Rauf's description should be sought out and empowered to fight the rising tide of extremism. In truth, such figures abound in Muslim lands, even if their work goes unnoticed by armchair pundits elsewhere. Their cause is not helped when someone like Rauf finds himself being excoriated for some perceived reluctance to condemn Hamas and accused of being an extremist himself. If anything, this browbeating of a moderate Muslim empowers the narrative promoted by al-Qaeda: that the West loathes everything about Islam and will stop at nothing to destroy it. (See Daisy Khan explain the role of women leaders in Islam.)

Rauf and Khan have said Park51 - envisaged as a 15-story structure, including a mosque, cultural center and auditorium - will promote greater interfaith dialogue. The furor over the project only underlines how desperately it is needed.