Olmert Comes to “Briar-Hopper” State (Kentucky) to Present Israel’s Case

Olmert speech draws crowds, protesters

By Jennifer Hewlett – jhewlett@herald-leader.com

A speech by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert Wednesday night on the University of Kentucky campus filled the Singletary Center for the Arts and also saw dozens of protesters.

Amid tight security, the leader endured heckling during parts of his speech, which included his thoughts on nuclear threats from Iran in the Middle East, the road to peace and also the impact of the Nobel Peace Prize on Barack Obama’s presidency.

“Everything is on the table,” he said about the first issue. Options, he said, range from “complete acquiescence” to military attack.

Other countries on that side of the hemisphere that have developed or are developing nuclear weapons don’t pose as big a threat as Iran, he said.

“None of them can be compared to the Iranians,” he said.

He said if the world would understand the gravity of the situation with Iran that practical solutions would be found.

“The state of Israel does not want to fight with Iran,” he said.

Asked what he thought about Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, Olmert said he didn’t know of any leader in modern times who had gotten so much credit in advance.

Obama will now be judged not only on what he has promised, but what he was given in advance, he said.

“I congratulate him,” he said.

Security was heavy at the Singletary Center with guards checking people’s possessions as they went inside. Several guards were stationed onstage around Olmert.

Outside, members of the Islamic Society of Central Kentucky and others protested Olmert’s appearance, holding signs and standing in silence.

“You cannot practice peace unless you practice justice,” said Khaled Ghoneim, president of the Islamic Society of Central Kentucky.

But some of the protesters weren’t so silent once they went inside for the speech, during which they also held signs.

“This man is responsible for the death of a lot of innocent people,” one man shouted.

“Shame on you,” yelled another.

The protesters blame Olmert for widespread violence in Gaza last winter that left many dead.

Olmert was unfazed.

“The nature of democracy is that there are some people who will disagree with you,” he said. “I hope they will be patient enough to listen.”

Loving the Lies That Feed Our Addiction To War

Iran’s Nuclear Program

Where’s the Proof?

By BRIAN CLOUGHLEY

“The facts and Iraq’s behavior show that Saddam Hussein and his regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction . . .  These are not assertions.  What we are giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.”

–  Washington’s official justification for America’s war on Iraq, announced to the United Nations Security Council in February 2003.

Then in July 2003 the US Secretary of State reiterated that there was “very strong intelligence . . . that Saddam Hussein had biological and chemical weapons.”  And there were many more unequivocal and detailed statements about the reliability, the certainty, of intelligence, notably from the British prime minister, Tony Blair, and Washington’s Dick Cheney.

At that time those of us who considered these assertions to be nonsense were shocked and chastened. After all, the leaders of the world’s largest military and surveillance machine were declaring that they had “solid intelligence” regarding a terrifying arsenal of evil weaponry that would be used by Iraq’s maniacal leader.  All the intelligence gathered by thousands of US spooks and amazingly sophisticated technical devices couldn’t be wrong, could it?

Before the  war on Iraq the US was spending about 50 billion dollars a year on gathering and processing information (it’s now about $70 billion), and with that sort of cash and exotic technical activity being devoted to discovering that Saddam’s  “efforts to reconstitute his nuclear program have been focused on acquiring the third and last component – sufficient fissile material to produce a nuclear explosion,” as we were assured,  then all the official reports and announcements and New York Times’ revelations must have been true.

But they weren’t.

The whole thing was a farrago of baloney :  it was tripe, hogwash, codswallop and claptrap from beginning to end. There were no nuclear, biological or chemical weapons programs of any sort.  And there were no apologies, either, from the demented barbarians in Washington who lied to the world and caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and wrecked their country.

And now we are being told that Iran’s nuclear program is as dangerous as the one Saddam didn’t have.

On  September 25 London’s Times newspaper (among others) reported that  “The West warned Iran that it will face fresh sanctions by December unless it can persuade the world of a “profound change” in its nuclear stance after the existence of its secret underground uranium enrichment plant was uncovered.”

But the plant was not “uncovered” by the West.  An International Atomic Energy Agency spokesman stated that  “on September 21 Iran informed the IAEA in a letter that a new pilot fuel-enrichment plant is under construction in the country. The letter stated that the enrichment level would be up to 5 per cent.” So then the Times tried to save face by claiming that  “Reports from Washington [more of these generous but always anonymous sources] indicate that Iran had learnt of the West’s move and declared [the plant] formally to the IAEA.”

How fascinating.   So Iran knows so much about America’s surveillance of its nuclear facilities – and the intentions of its State and Defense Departments, not to mention the White House – that just before the omniscient US intelligence agencies were about to reveal Iran’s secrets to the world they were pre-empted by the equally all-knowing Iranians.

Some other reports were also intriguing.   The New York Times, ever attentive to anonymous “senior officials,”  (possibly like those who caused it to believe, endorse and publicize the “intelligence” that led to the war on Iraq), carried a piece on September 26 to the effect that  “officials said that they developed a detailed picture about work on the facility from multiple human intelligence sources, as well as satellite imagery. A senior official said that intelligence was regularly shared among American, British and French spy agencies, and that Israeli officials were told about the complex years ago.”

“Multiple human intelligence sources,” indeed.  So the CIA has spies lurking and working in Iran’s nuclear establishment and government. Not only that, but America’s premier Intelligence Agency tells “officials” who tell reporters, and thus the world, that it has such assets. How professional, to be sure.

But if the CIA has all these sources with such amazing access, then there must be information available on the level of enrichment of uranium that is planned.  Perhaps the “officials” who so generously leak highly classified information to selected reporters could indicate what it is?

The deranged Iranian President Ahmadinejad, in one of his clearer moments, said that the newly disclosed nuclear facility was not scheduled to begin operations for another 18 months and that  “It’s not a secret site. If it was, why would we have informed the IAEA about it a year ahead of time?” Then Ahmadinejad said that the Agency was welcome to inspect the facility.

If it is found that the enrichment capability is in fact 5 per cent, then there will be a lot of stupid-looking people in the US and other western countries, as this is nowhere near the approximately 90 percent needed to manufacture nuclear weapons. But be assured, if this majestically hyped affair collapses into nothing because the “multiple human intelligence sources” (if they exist) are found to be fantasizing liars, and if the IAEA inspections find no evidence of weapon-grade enrichment, then those responsible for spreading the story will not confess their blunders.

The last lot of liars, under Bush, have never admitted  that they deliberately led their country into an unnecessary, disastrous and fantastically costly war. And if the current bunch of war fanatics have their way this time, and persuade Mr Obama to attack Iran because they imagine it may one day be nuclear-capable, they will never admit that they made a total mess of the whole thing, either.

President Obama emphasized nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation at the UN Security Council meeting he chaired in September. He declared he had “outlined a comprehensive agenda to seek the goal of a world without nuclear weapons,” adding that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty “says that all nations have the right to peaceful nuclear energy; that nations with nuclear weapons have a responsibility to move toward disarmament.”

Quite so. Most gratifying.  Majestically desirable.  But the elephant in the UN room, the critical mass, as it were,  whose nuclear arsenal is steadfastly ignored by all nuclear powers and the west in general, is Israel,  the country that pays no attention to anything that is said by the UN Security Council regarding any of its illegal actions.

Israel has hundreds of undeclared nuclear weapons. It has signed no treaty concerning their construction or control.  Its uranium enrichment facilities have never been seen by any inspector, and never will be.  It has no intention of “moving towards” nuclear disarmament, and Mr Obama knows this perfectly well.

But we might ask why that ever-willing “senior official” told the New York Times that intelligence about Iran’s nuclear program was not only “regularly shared among American, British and French spy agencies,” but that “Israeli officials were told about the complex years ago.”

How intriguing.  Here we have three members of the UN Security Council, with nuclear capability, swapping intelligence about Iran. But why did Washington (according to the New York Times’ anonymous sources) tell Israel about it?

In fact the complex wasn’t known about “years ago”, but it’s still intriguing that Israel is well and truly in the loop about US intelligence concerning possible nuclear developments in other countries.

Why is Israel so privileged as to be informed about America’s most sensitive intelligence operations?

* * *

Iran  is in the grip of a bunch of quasi-religious bigots who are as wild-eyed as they are ignorant. They are being deliberately provocative towards the western bloc, whose leaders and establishment figures  regard them as pariahs and lose no opportunity to vilify them and try to make their lives difficult.

But the trouble is that when you penalize pariahs, they get back at you in ways that you might never have thought of.

The move towards inflicting penal sanctions on Iran is strong, but if these do not come about, most likely because Russia and China will veto them, then the attack option will be even more attractive.  This way lies utter disaster.  The world would be a much more dangerous place if the US mounted an attack on Iran.

If Israel attacked, the US would have to be party to its operation, if only because Israeli aircraft would have to fly through airspace totally controlled by America.  The reaction of Muslim nations would be, to put it mildly, robust. The standing of the US around the world, which has received a bit of a boost from Mr Obama’s policies, would be dealt a final, dramatic, deadly blow from which it would never recover. The entire world would suffer.

On September 30 the UN’s chief weapons inspector, Mohamed ElBaradei, said he had seen “no credible evidence” that Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Predictably, the smear campaign against him was ramped up and his pronouncement was met with vehement contradiction. We’ll eventually know who was right, however.

The leaked stories in the media about Iran’s supposed nuclear  posture have been planted by US and Israeli sources.  Israel is intent on hyping the supposed threat  because it draws attention away from its genocidal activities in Palestine and its continuing defiant  and illegal building of settlements on stolen Arab land.

There is no proof that there is an Iranian nuclear weapons’ programme.

So remember what we were told last time, during the military build-up based on “facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence,” that led to the disastrous war on Iraq.

And think, this time round, about “multiple human intelligence sources,” who are supposedly providing the same sort of “solid intelligence” about the Iranian nuclear programme. Let’s hope President Obama doesn’t read the New York Times.

Brian Cloughley’s book about the Pakistan army, War, Coups and Terror, is to be published in the US by Skyhorse next month. His website is www.beecluff.com.

TV show sparks new row between Turkey and Israel

The Israeli Foreign Minister has summoned the Turkish Envoy over a series of broadcasts on Turkey’s public TV showing Israeli soldiers brutally killing Palestinian children.Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman “instructed to summon the Turkish ambassador to Israel for talks with officials in the Foreign Ministry in order to protest the broadcasting of a series on the state television inciting hatred against Israel,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement on Wednesday as reported by AFP.The show, called Ayrilik (Farewell), features a love story that develops between the lead characters during Israel’s offensive in the Gaza Strip.A partial episode — available on YouTube — shows Israeli soldiers shooting children in the chest and kicking elderly people on the ground, among other things.Israel launched a 22-day all-out war on the densely populated Gaza Strip last December.Based on a report recently released by B’Tselem human rights group, the offensive killed at least 773 Palestinians who had not taken part in any military activities.252 children under 16, and 111 women were among the victims of the offensive.According to the report, 68 Palestinian teenagers aged 16 to 18 who did not take part in the fighting were also killed by the Israeli army.The results of a UN probe into the Gaza war have also confirmed that the Israeli Army committed war crimes in its “Operation Cast Lead”.The latest row might further undermine relations between the two sides which have already been strained after Turkey withdrew from a joint military exercise over Israel’s decision to send warplanes that participated in the Gaza war.http://www.therebel.org/politics/middle_east/tv_show_sparks_new_row_between_turkey_and_israel_2009101472629/

An ‘Explanatory’ Note From Washington To Pakistan

An ‘Explanatory’ Note From Washington To Pakistan

Genuine Pakistani concerns about the Kerry-Lugar bill have been summarily dismissed thanks to arrogant US congressmen, a politicized Pakistani ambassador in Washington, and an inept pro-US elected government in Islamabad that has lost the trust of a majority of Pakistanis.  US Vice President Joe Biden should seriously look into who turned his brilliant idea into a huge blunder.

image

By Ahmed Quraishi

Thursday, 15 October 2009.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—When the Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi stood in Washington last night to say, ‘This is a historic document’ and tried to act excited, a distinct look of confusion was visible on the faces of the two Americans standing to his right and left: Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Congressman Howard Berman, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

For a second it seemed as if both Mr. Kerry and Mr. Berman were looking at Mr. Qureshi and saying to themselves, ‘Is this guy for real?’

There is a reason why the two seemed distrustful of the minister.

Only a few hours earlier the Pakistani Foreign Minister addressed a press conference with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton where Mr. Qureshi appeared far more excited about the Kerry-Lugar aid bill than his host.  [Ms. Clinton had to point out a couple of times she couldn't be more 'eloquent' than the Pakistani minister in describing the aid bill.]  At one point, Mr. Qureshi rebuffed a Pakistani journalist who said Pakistanis back home were concerned about offensive language in some clauses.

"I’m very glad that they [Americans] have no intentions of micromanaging Pakistan, nor will Pakistan permit micromanagement," Qureshi said.  "Never will we allow any compromise on Pakistan’s sovereignty."

But no sooner he returned to Islamabad than he was back on the plane to Washington.  He had no choice, especially after an uproar in the country where a clear majority in the parliament, media, the public opinion and in the armed forces accused his government of accepting humiliating language that stops short of accusing Pakistan of running terrorist training camps and continuing to proliferate nuclear knowhow, both of which are accusations not backed by any evidence except unsourced US media reports and noise on the US think-tank circuit. The language in at least one clause is carefully drafted to push the civilian government to pick up fights with the military on issues ranging from officer promotions to excluding military input from nuclear-related policy.

So when Mr. Qureshi was back in Washington acting excited all over again, both Kerry and Berman were  understandably unsure whether they should believe the minister or wait for him to go to Islamabad, get an earful again and come back with more reservations.

But a far more serious issue is how Washington’s establishment appears to have dismissed genuine Pakistani concerns with a mere ‘explanatory’ note.  You just have to admire the sense of humor behind naming this piece of paper a ‘joint explanatory statement’ that will be attached to the Kerry-Lugar bill.

Since the Pakistani parliament is still debating the bill and is yet to pass its final resolution on it, it is too early to say how will Mr. Qureshi be received back home [he is en route as these lines are written.]

But here is an initial assessment.

With the so-called ‘Joint Explanatory Statement’, Washington has rebuffed President Zardari, Prime Minister Gilani, Chief of Army Staff Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, and ISI chief Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, who huddled for a couple of hours before designating Foreign Minister Qureshi to fly to Washington and seek changes in the controversial clauses or simply the removal of the three or four controversial clauses so that the remainder of the bill focused on aid and cooperation could move forward.

If the bill is accepted in its present form, Pakistan will

1. Effectively be accepting that two major cities Quetta and Muridke are centers of terror as the bill alleges without any real evidence 

2. Pakistan will also be accepting that it will entertain possible US requests for access to suspected nuclear proliferators as demanded by US and without stipulating that evidence be produced for such a demand

3. Pakistan will also be allowing Washington to demand reports from Pakistani civilian leaders confirming their control over internal military promotions and appointments.  Interestingly, this clause opens the door for more US meddling in Pakistani politics since politicians will be using this clause and Washington’s muscle to reign in the Pakistani military.  The clause is a recipe for endless civil-military tensions. 

4. Pakistan will also not be in a position to dispute unfounded US and British accusations that seek to shift the blame to Pakistan for failures in Afghanistan.

Mr. Qureshi has essentially sold off Pakistani interest on the basis of an ‘explanatory statement’.  He failed to defend the Pakistani position or prevail on the American officials on the core issue of the insult that most Pakistanis feel today because of the humiliating language in the bill. 

Another problem is how the Pakistani embassy in Washington, under Ambassador Husain Haqqani, continues to feed a wrong picture of the debate back home in Pakistan. Mr. Haqqani is under tremendous attack in the Pakistani parliament for his role in failing to stop the controversial clauses. Members of his own government feel that the buck should stop at his desk for the fiasco.  To save his position, it seems Mr. Haqqani is feeding his friends in the US media and the Washington establishment that the angst is Pakistan over the bill is ‘manufactured’ by ‘anti-America forces’ and is ‘manipulated’ by the Pakistani military.  Some of his friends in the US media are peddling the theory that Mr. Haqqani is under attack because of his anti-military writings when he was out of government.

What Mr. Haqqani is not telling the Americans is that politicians in Pakistan have accused him, and not the US Congress or the US government, of deliberately inserting anti-military clauses in the Kerry-Lugar bill with the help of lobbyists paid for by the Pakistani exchequer and in pursuance of a domestic Pakistani political agenda [in other words, settling domestic scores.]  It is also possible that some quarters in Washington that are not very Pakistan-friendly helped push the bill with unnecessary military-related clauses in a document that is focused on US-Pakistani partnership.

The bottom line is this: While his government spokespeople in Islamabad refuse to recognize there is anything wrong with the US bill [even US Ambassador has conceded the language was a mistake'], Mr. Qureshi could not have been expected to put any real effort into convincing US officials to chance the offending language, especially when it is already beginning to look like a battle between his government on the one side and the media-public opinion-political opponents-military on the other side.

It is unfortunate that an effort that most probably was undertaken in good faith by Vice President Joe Biden has degenerated into a major blot on the face of US-Pakistani ties because of overbearing US congressmen, a politicized Pakistani ambassador in Washington, and an inept government in Islamabad headed by insecure leaders.

Pakistan is left saddled with a bill whose language represents a major Pakistani policy concession on military, nuclear and terrorism issues.  A government that passionately defended the bill’s language inside Pakistan made little effort to force a change in language in Washington. 

The worst part is that future US legislation and government policy can now always look back and use the clauses that are part of the bill to perpetuate popular US accusations against Pakistan.

Does Mr. Qureshi really believe he will receive a hero’s welcome in Islamabad tomorrow morning?

© 2007-2009. All rights reserved. AhmedQuraishi.com

Israel ‘must answer’ for Gaza war

Israel ‘must answer’ for Gaza war

Palestinian workers clear rubble at parliament building in Gaza, bombed by Israel in January

Israel is accused of bombing civilian buildings without military necessity

The Palestinians have urged the UN to act to punish Israel for its offensive in the Gaza Strip last winter.

The move reverses a Palestinian decision to defer action on a UN report that accuses both Israel and Hamas of war crimes during the conflict.

Israel rejected the report as biased during a UN Security Council debate.

Meanwhile, UN chief Ban Ki-moon urged "credible" investigations by Israel and the Palestinians into allegations of war crimes during the conflict.

Palestinian U-turn

"The world has for too long witnessed Israel’s impunity, knowing well that this has been repeatedly fuelled by the lack of punishment and accountability," Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad al-Malki said during a Security Council debate on the Middle East on Wednesday.

Israeli bombardment of Gaza

UN condemns ‘war crimes’ in Gaza

Israel condemns UN Gaza report

Key excerpts: UN Gaza report

"The tragic consequences have been suffered by generations… We must break this obscene cycle," the minister added.

Mr Malki’s comments represent a sharp policy reversal, says the BBC’s Barbara Plett at UN headquarters in New York.

Under US pressure, the Palestinians had earlier agreed to defer action on the UN report by veteran South African judge and war crimes prosecutor Richard Goldstone, but that led to a public outcry, our correspondent says.

Meanwhile, Israel’s envoy to the UN, Gabriela Shalev, said the UN report was biased and favoured terrorism.

"For those of us who seek to resume the peace process in the Middle East, debating the Goldstone in the Security Council is but a tale full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

"If Israel is asked to take further risks for peace, the international community must recognise our right to self-defence," Ms Shalev said.

The Americans also said the report had an unbalanced focus on Israel, and opposed it being taken up by the Security Council, our correspondent says.

Separately, the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon urged "credible" investigations by both sides into the conduct of the Gaza conflict "without delay".

"He [Mr Ban] hopes that such steps will be taken wherever there are credible allegations of human rights abuses throughout the world," UN Undersecretary General Lynn Pascoe told the Security Council.

Libya, a rotating member of the 15-seat Council, had been seeking a special session of the UN’s top decision-making body to discuss the report, but agreed to bringing the monthly session on the Middle East ahead by one week.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is seeking a special session of the UN Human Rights Council to vote on the report.

Report’s findings

The Goldstone report accuses Israel of using disproportionate force and deliberately harming civilians during the 22-day conflict which began on 27 December 2008.

Hamas militants are accused of indiscriminate rocket fire at Israeli civilians.

The report urges the Security Council to refer allegations to the International Criminal Court if either side failed to investigate and prosecute suspects.

Israel has rejected the evidence, saying it has already investigated its troops’ conduct, clearing most of the subjects of wrongdoing. Hamas also denied committing war crimes.

Israeli military action destroyed thousands of homes, hundreds of factories and 80 official buildings in Gaza.

Palestinians and human rights groups say more than 1,400 people were killed in the violence between 27 December 2008 and 16 January 2009, more than half of them civilians.

Israel puts the number of deaths at 1,166 – fewer than 300 of them civilians. Three Israeli civilians and 10 Israeli soldiers were also killed.