Thursday, August 30, 2012

Rebels claim to shoot down jet

The Free Syrian Army rebel group today said it shot down a Syrian military fighter jet in Idlib province (al-Arabiya), near the Turkish border, while claiming to have destroyed military helicopters and tanks by the Tiftiaz military airport in Aleppo. The apparent attack comes as Syrian security forces continue a deadly assault on rebel strongholds throughout the country. Meanwhile, foreign ministers of member countries of the UN Security Council (al-Jazeera) are set to meet today to discuss the worsening humanitarian situation in Syria after eighteen months of conflict. Not only is the international community divided over Syria, but even those countries most supportive of the rebellion have not settled on a common strategy, while the disarray among the Syrian opposition further deepens disquiet over intervention. Whether by design or luck--or the failures of the opposition--the Assad regime may well have created a situation in which it survives for quite some time, even if in considerably diminished form," writes TIME's Tony Karon. "Turkey has been one of the Assad regime's most vehement critics. As the number of refugees pouring across its borders has surged amid spiraling violence inside Syria--there are now more than 80,000 Syrian refugees in Turkey, according to the foreign ministry--the government in Ankara has pushed to make the refugee issue an international one," writes Newsweek's Mike Giglio. lict, though no new resolutions are expected.

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Syrian Refugees Flee To Jordon

The number of Syrian refugees fleeing political unrest (NYT) to Jordan more than doubled to more than ten thousand people last week from the week prior, while refugees escaping to Turkey have reached around five thousand per day, the United Nations refugee agency said yesterday. The influx of Syrian refugees to neighboring countries comes amid a Syrian military assault on opposition strongholds in and around the capital of Damascus that has left hundreds of people dead, including many civilians. Meanwhile, a coalition of Syrian opposition activists presented a report--The Day After Project--in Berlin, outlining a democratic transition of power if President Bashar al-Assad's regime were to collapse. "So Iran is playing for keeps. It is ironic that while so many in the West derided the notion of a 'Shia crescent' when it was first raised by Jordan's King Abdullah, that notion is believed in Tehran--and believed to be worth killing and dying for. It is true that Iran's backing for the bloody Assad regime will increase its unpopularity in the Arab world, but Tehran's rulers must have concluded that power in Damascus is worth whatever it costs," writes CFR's Elliott Abrams on his blog Pressure Points. "Our collective excitement at the possibility that the Assad regime will be destroyed, and the Iranian ayatollahs weakened in the process, is blurring our vision and preventing us from seeing the rise of al-Qaeda in Syria. In March of this year, jihadis mounted seven attacks against Assad. By June, they had led 66 "operations," and over half of these were on Syria's capital, Damascus," writes CFR's Ed

Monday, August 27, 2012

Syrian Helicopter Down

A Syrian military helicopter went down in a ball of fire Monday after it was apparently hit during fighting between government forces and rebels in the capital Damascus, activists said. A video posted on the Internet showed the chopper engulfed in flames and spinning out of control shortly before it hit the ground amid bursts of gunfire near a mosque. Rebels shout "Allahu Akbar!" or God is great, as the helicopter goes down. The authenticity of the video could not be independently verified. Syria's lightly armed rebels have grown bolder andk their tactics more sophisticated in recent months. There have been claims of fighters shooting down helicopter gunships in the past, though the government has never confirmed it.

Monday, August 20, 2012

Netanyahu praises IDF for preparedness, execution of battle

Thanks to Israel Hayom

Pinpointed intelligence allows Israeli troops to stage well-coordinated response when terrorists breach Egyptian border • The commander of the Bedouin battalion puts his life on the line by buffering between terrorist-controlled armored personnel carrier and civilians • Hot pursuit lasted only 15 minutes, with no Israeli casualties.
Lilach Shoval, Shlomo Cesana and Daniel Siryoti

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak beside a charred armored vehicle used in the failed terrorist attack on Sunday.
Rifles and other equipment used by terorrists found at the site of the thwarted terrorist attack on Sunday.
Photo credit: IDF Spokesperson's Unit
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak beside a charred armored vehicle used in the failed terrorist attack on Sunday.

Friday, August 17, 2012

Iran calls Israel's existence an 'insult,' as prominent rabbi warns it's more than rhetoric

Israel's existence is an "insult to all humanity," Iran's president said Friday in one of his sharpest attacks yet against the Jewish state, as Israel openly debates whether to attack Iran over its nuclear program.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said confronting Israel is an effort to "protect the dignity of all human beings."
"The existence of the Zionist regime is an insult to all humanity," Ahmadinejad said. He was addressing worshippers at Tehran University after nationwide pro-Palestinian rallies, an annual event marking Quds (Jerusalem) Day on the last Friday of the holy month of Ramadan.
The comments are "reminiscent" of a letter written about the Jews and signed by Adolf Hitler in 1919, Rabbi Marvin Hier, Founder and Dean of the Simon Wisenthal Center, says.
"Even though Ahmadinejad is attacking the state of Israel, we know what he means," Rabbi Hier said.
Israel considers Iran an existential threat because of its nuclear and missile programs, support for radical anti-Israel groups on its borders and repeated references by Iranian leaders to Israel's destruction.
Ahmadinejad himself has repeatedly made such calls, as has Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Rabbi Hier compares Ahmadinejad's comments to the notion found in Hitler’s letter referencing the "removal of Jews all together." "Twenty-two years later he implemented everything, and the same is true about Ahmadinejad," Rabbi Hier said.
"We assume it's only rhetoric, but we once paid a very high price for assuming Hitler was talking rhetoric," he said.
The leader of the Lebanese Shiite militant Hezbollah, which has ties to Iran, says his group will transform the lives of millions of Israelis to "hell" if Israel attacks Lebanon.
Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah says the group has a list of Israeli targets that it can hit with few rockets.
"We can transform the lives of millions of Zionists in occupied Palestine to a real hell," he said.
Israel and Hezbollah fought a deadly, inconclusive monthlong war in 2006, when Hezbollah fired about 4,000 rockets at Israel.
Iran has denied allegations that it is seeking to build nuclear weapons, saying its nuclear program is peaceful and aimed at producing electricity and radioisotopes used to treat cancer patients.
Israel has been carrying on an increasingly public debate about whether to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Israel's official position is to favor diplomatic and economic measures to persuade Iran to halt its uranium enrichment program, but Israel insists that Iran must not be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons. Israeli leaders say "all options are on the table," a clear reference to a military strike, if they determine that other measures have failed.
"You are not going to make a deal with the Iranians, not under their current leadership," Rabbi Hier said.
Iran has warned it would hit back at Israel if it is attacked, also threatening to strike at American interests in the region.
Ahmadinejad called Israel "a corrupt, anti-human organized minority group standing up to all divine values."
 "Today, confronting the existence of the fabricated Zionist regime is in fact protecting the rights and dignity of all human beings," said Ahmadinejad, with a black and white scarf many Palestinians wear around his neck.
Iran and Israel have been bitter enemies for decades. Khamenei has called Israel a "cancerous tumor" that must be wiped out.
"This is a threat to wipe out the state of Israel," Rabbi Hier said. "We should take these people at their word."
Tensions between Iran and Israel have intensified since 2005, when Ahmadinejad said in a speech that Israel will one day be "wiped off the map."
But Rabbi Hier said he does not "subscribe at all with those who say this is a legitimate form of rhetoric."
"The only way to stop what's happening in Iran is for at least the United States and her allies to say, 'How long are we going to sit by and take this threat?'" he said.
The Iranian president has also described the Holocaust, when 6 million Jews were killed by German Nazis and their collaborators during World War II, as a "myth."
"Most intellectuals in 1939 and 1938 did not think Hitler was serious, they thought they knew better, but they didn't know better, and we paid a dear price that we were not on the right side of history," he said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Read more:

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Iranian Issue More Complex Than It Seems

Former MI chief says discourse over Iran must emphasize that Israel is not the only one concerned; says diplomacy must be exhausted prior to strike, which at best can delay bomb by five years
Published: 08.16.12, 00:30 / Israel News

Politicians, military officials and pundits has been increasingly pondering in recent weeks whether the ramifications of a military operation in Iran outweigh the risks posed by a nuclear Islamic Republic, but a top security expert says that issue is far more complex than deciding whether to strike or not to strike.

Former Military Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin says that before Israel can consider striking Iran's nuclear facilities, it must exhaust all other alternatives – namely, the diplomatic route to stop Tehran from developing an atom bomb.

In an essay titled "A Conceptual Framework and Decision Making Model for Israel about Iran," Yadlin, who now heads the Institute for National Security Studies, notes that substantive sanctions must be employed in an effort to coerce Tehran into a "good agreement." Such a deal would force Iran to get rid of most of its enriched uranium, stop operations at the Fordo plant and allow for in-depth inspections of its facilities.

"A good agreement would be measured by its ability to stop the nuclear clock and even turn it back," Yadlin says. "A good agreement would keep Iran at least two years away from nuclear bombs."

'Israel can't do it alone'

But Yadlin also states that without a credible threat of military action, diplomacy and other strategies to block or delay Iranian nuclearization would be ineffective. In addition to sanctions, he lists negotiations, covert action and regime change as alternatives to a strike.
Meanwhile, the international community must ready for the possibility that no such agreement will be reached, Yadlin says: "It is also important to build up maximal legitimacy for a future strike should diplomacy fail."
Yadlin stresses that if the military option is chosen, it won't be an isolated incident, but would require a broader, long-term strategy that incorporates the entire international community.
"Theoretically, the best result of a military operation would be a five year delay. To turn those five years into ten – and then into many decades… – it is incumbent to ensure that the entire world is prepared to participate in the ongoing effort to stop Iran the day and the decade after the attack.
"Demonstrating the scope of losses to Iran from maintaining its military nuclear program, continuing the sanctions, blocking critical technologies and materials, threatening repeated attacks, and continuing diplomatic pressure are all part of a necessary next stage campaign in which Israel cannot succeed on its own.
"This manifests the importance of gaining legitimacy for an Israeli strike and international – or at least American – recognition that Israel acted only after all other attempts had failed."
And any effort to garner such legitimacy would have to begin with a transparent dialogue between Jerusalem and Washington.
"An open, in-depth dialogue between Israel and the United States may, to the extent there is trust between the two leaders, lead to the possibility of realizing the third option, i.e., neither 'the bomb' nor 'the bombing,'" Yadlin says.

"If the Iranian nuclear project is not blocked by agreement or covert activity and its nuclear clock does not stop ticking, military action against Iran would earn greater legitimacy, along with American support the day and the decade after. Without legitimacy allowing an international campaign over the subsequent decade, Israel faces the risk of finding itself opting for bombing and bearing its full cost, and still ending up with the Iranian bomb and its attendant dangers."

"Iran’s threats prior to an attack are an effective means of deterrence, but the Iranians have neither the capability nor the interest in setting fire to the entire Middle East," he writes. "It is almost certain that there would be an Iranian response after an attack, but calculated Iranian interests suggest that it would be measured and tolerable, especially in light of the achievement of stopping Iran’s nuclear program."

Furthermore, Yadlin stresses that the discussion of the Iranian issue must veer away from the notion that Israel alone is concerned.

"The Iranian nuclear issue is a strategic, security, and political challenge to the entire international community, and Israel must avoid leading the global charge against Iran," he emphasizes. "It behooves Israel to take a back seat and not assume exclusive responsibility for preventing Iranian nuclearization."

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

The Left, the Jews and Israel

This article was originally published on , We at IsraelAmerica are continually distressed and stymied by some of the Anti-Israel sentiment on the left. The left should be Israel's number one supporters...MBSR
Robert Wistrich, Hebrew University professor of European and Jewish History and director of the Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of anti-Semitism has just published his 29th book titled "From Ambivalence to Betrayal: The Left, the Jews and Israel".
It is an impressive tome of over 600 pages and follows his monumental seminal work "A Lethal Obsession: Anti-Semitism from Antiquity to the Global Jihad”, published in 2010 and now recognized as the definitive work on the world's oldest hatred and an indispensable text for scholars.
In a fascinating preface to his new book, Wistrich provides a brief autobiographical sketch. His father had originally been a supporter of the illegal Polish Communist Party in pre-war Cracow but became alienated from Stalinist communism after being arrested by the NKVD. He and his wife, who had experienced bitter Polish anti-Semitism, survived the Holocaust by fleeing to Kazakhstan where Robert was born.
Wistrich was educated in England, and to use his words, was “radicalized” in grammar school and later at Stanford University. He first visited Israel in 1961, returning in 1969 when he was appointed editor of the left wing Israeli journal, New Outlook. However his passion for the Jewish State led to a parting of the ways with the Israeli far left. Robert became increasingly engaged in academic scholarship related to anti-Semitism, received a senior appointment at the Hebrew University, and is now recognized as the world’s foremost scholar in the field.
From Ambivalence to Betrayal is an historic review and analysis of the abandonment of the Jewish people by the left from the early 19th century until the present. It also relates to the extraordinarily disproportionate number of socialist thinkers and leaders who were of Jewish origin and seeks to explain what motivated so many of them, in the course of their utopian and futile efforts to ‘repair the world’, to abandon their people and their heritage and frenetically seek to deny their kinsmen the right to self-determination.
The introductory essay is a brilliant overview of the contemporary Jewish political arena viewed in the context of the concurrent rise of Zionism, Communism, anti-Semitism and Nazism. It focuses strongly on the hypocrisy of the existing left which has become obsessed with demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish state. Wistrich demonstrates the extent to which today’s radical anti-Zionists, despite purporting to represent the left, often share the identical obsessions and delusions concerning the alleged malignant influence of the Jews in the modern world as classical fascist anti-Semites.
Wistrich provides fascinating and innovative insights on left-wing revolutionaries. He skillfully relates the connection of “the prefigured 19th century seabed of anti-Semitic socialism found in Marx, Fourier and Proudhon, extending through to the orthodox Communists and “non-conformist” Trotskyites to the Islamo-Leftist hybrids of today who systematically vilify the so called racist essence of the Jewish State”.
His analysis of the linkage of these revolutionaries with the left's contemporary abandonment of Israel is a major intellectual and scholastic achievement and provides an intriguing insight into the sources of the far left’s current application of double standards and anti-Israel venom.
Wistrich reviews in depth the attitude towards the Jews adopted by many of the great socialist revolutionaries of Jewish origin like Karl Marx, Bernard Lazare, Moses Hess, Ferdinand LaSalle, Karl Kautsky, Victor Adler, Rosa Luxemburg, Leon Trotsky, Bruno Kreisky, Isaac Deutscher and others.
Trotsky was ultimately forced by Stalin into assuming the traditional Jewish role in society: the reviled scapegoat.
His chapter on Leon Trotsky, entitled ‘A Bolshevik’s Tragedy’, is a masterly essay which breaks new ground on this extraordinary charismatic Jewish revolutionary who desperately sought to repudiate his Jewish origins. Yet, despite achieving the reputation of being “the most intransigent of revolutionary Bolsheviks”, Trotsky was ultimately forced by Stalin into assuming the traditional Jewish role in society and became reviled as the scapegoat for the failures of the Revolution.
Wistrich highlights the fact that many of today’s anti-Jewish Jews inherited the mantle of the 19th and early 20th century anti-Semitic Jewish radical revolutionaries. Yet he stresses that these renegade Jews have vastly exceeded the anti-Semitic tirades of their predecessors and even to the extent of allying themselves with reactionary clerical zealots and Jihadists, who represent the antithesis of their purported world outlook.
He points to their public support and endorsement of terrorists and religious fanatics, noting that even the most extreme early anti-Jewish revolutionaries like Marx, Engels, Kautsky, Rosa Luxemburg or Trotsky “would never have remained silent about sharia law, censorship, female genital mutilation, honor killings, suicide bombings, or making the world safe for Allah’s rule” and rarely resorted to outright racist outbursts like their current successors”. Nor would they have gone to the extreme of allying themselves with those explicitly committed to our physical destruction.
Wistrich asserts that Holocaust inversion, now a major component of the Left’s effort to besmirch Israel, whilst initially introduced by British historian Arnold Toynbee who referred to Zionists as "disciples of the Nazis”, was in fact institutionalized as the “Zionist-Nazi” nexus at the Prague Trials orchestrated from Moscow.
He reminds us that it was post war Jewish Marxists who encouraged the left’s current paranoia and “anti-racist” racism against Israel. As an example he quotes the Polish born Jewish biographer of Trotsky, Isaac Deutscher, who already in 1967 described Israel as the "Prussia of the Middle East" and a bastion of “racial Talmudic exclusiveness and superiority".
It was the Soviets who, in 1975, succeeded in passing a UN resolution bracketing Zionism and racism. Whilst this was ultimately rescinded in December 1991, it remains today the central plank in the Arab-Leftist efforts to criminalize Israel and brand it as a state engaging in war crimes.
The concluding chapters review the anti-Zionist myths, many of which seem to have been directly replicated from Nazi propaganda and are today enthusiastically promoted by the Marxist Islamist alliance who regard Israel as the "Jew of the nations" fulfilling a dark preordained fate as an eternal scapegoat.
Wistrich relates to the quasi-religious belief of these groups that “the world will only be “liberated” by the downfall of America and the defeat of the Jews. This chiliastic fantasy has today emerged as a notable point of fusion between the radical anti-Zionist left in the West and the global jihad. Revolutionary anti-Semitism has become an increasingly important factor in cementing the anti-capitalist populism much as it was during the birth pangs of modern socialism over 150 years ago.”
This is a magisterial work, providing a comprehensive understanding of the origins of the most pernicious challenges currently facing the Jewish people, especially those originating from the enemy within. It will be especially valuable to those directly engaged in the struggle to neutralize the evil efforts against Israel by the left-Islamic alliance and its acolytes of Jewish origin.

Monday, August 13, 2012

The IDF's Egyptian fiasco

By Caroline Glick 

“ Morsy completed the Egyptian revolution. Egypt is now an Islamic state.” So Muslim Brotherhood President of Egypt Mohamed Morsy just sacked the leaders of the military junta General Hussein Tantawi and the Egyptian Army's' Chief of Staff General Sami Enan. Morsy has also cancelled the constitutional protections that the Egyptian military has enjoyed and overturned their edicts circumscribing his control over foreign and military policy. That is, as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has declared, today Morsy completed the Egyptian revolution. Egypt is now an Islamic state. Its leaders drink from the same well as al Qaida, Hamas and all the rest. Egypt, with its US armed military has reemerged after 30 years as the greatest military threat that Israel has ever faced. According the Israel media, the IDF was surprised by Morsy's move. Clearly our esteemed generals believed reassurances they received from their Egyptian military counterparts that Israel had no reason to be concerned with the election of Hamas's big brother to Egypt's presidency. This reminds me of what former chief of the IDF's General Staff Gabi Ashkenazi said at the Jerusalem Post's conference in New York on April 29. In his remarks Ashkenazi said that no one in the IDF foresaw Mubarak's overthrow during the anti-regime protests in Tahrir Square. I began my remarks by mentioning that I had foreseen his overthrow and replacement by the Muslim Brotherhood already back in 2004. And like me, everyone paying attention to the internal make-up of Egyptian society -- rather than to the empty promises of generals with no popular support -- recognized that Israel's peace with Egypt was not long for this world.  I am not saying this to rub Ashkenazi's nose in his massive errors. I mention it because the same general staff that failed to foresee what was going to happen in Egypt, and fails to this day to understand the strategic implications of the Muslim Brotherhood takeover for the IDF, is the IDF that insists today that Israel can trust Obama to take care of Iran for us. Sadly, perhaps even devastatingly, it is not possible for Netanyahu and Barak to pull a Morsy and fire the General Staff en masse. All of these leftist strategic failures enjoy the unstinting support of the leftist media. But still, their failure to understand Egypt speaks all the more strongly for the full justification and necessity of Barak and Netanyahu's current media campaign to force the IDF to fall in line on attacking Iran.

Sunday, August 12, 2012

In Egypt, New Attitudes To Terror

The funeral procession honoring the 16 victims of a terrorist attack on an Egyptian border checkpoint this week was a turning point for the Egyptian people. Television commentators went on and on about the heroic new shahids (martyrs), laid out in coffins wrapped with Egyptian flags. Throngs of people accompanied the victims' coffins on their final journey from Al-Rashdan mosque, through the Unknown Soldier Memorial, to their final resting place. The ceremonial procession, which featured countless Egyptian flags — but no Islamist flags — was led by the victims' families, Defense Minister Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, Prime Minister Hesham Kandil, other government ministers, public figures and sheikhs. Only Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi was conspicuously absent from the funerals. His security team was concerned for his safety following attacks on Kandil's vehicle by protesters. Let us recall that during his swearing-in ceremony, Morsi bared his chest and defiantly declared that he did not need to wear a flak jacket. In failing to show up to the funerals, Morsi elicited dismissive criticism from his opponents.
Despite the raw emotions and the displays of rage, this was a sensitive, stately funeral procession, unlike any of the agitated horror shows staged by Egyptian crowds in the town squares.
Listening to spokespersons and media commentators describe the event, it was very evident that something had changed. After all, throughout Egypt's history, the country's army has sustained losses far worse than this one, but this was a unifying national event that brought people together, reflecting a tremendous emotional burden. It was evident in the eulogies, in the vows of revenge, and in the style the commentators used to describe the funerals and the circumstances of the terrorist attack. The saintly status of the fighters who gave their lives to protect their country was given a lot of emphasis, as was the place in heaven reserved for them.
Special attention was paid on the fact that the Egyptian soldiers had been killed specifically as they sat down to break the Ramadan fast. The month of Ramadan is considered to be a holy month during which Muslims are not allowed to engage in battle. The climax of this religious drama was when the victims were described as having been trained by their commanders, namely Tantawi himself, to risk their lives fighting enemies on the front lines, but not to be killed at home by their brothers' swords stabbing them in the back — a treacherous Islamic sword.
Rallying public opinion
The deaths of the Egyptian soldiers, the funerals and the way the Egyptian media approached the terrorist attack, all prepared the ground for a military operation aimed at eliminating Islamist terror strongholds in Sinai. The Egyptian media reflected the sentiment that the army, which had already gained popularity points thanks to its restraint during the course of the Arab Spring protests, had now regained its position at the heart of the Egyptian consensus following the vicious attack by Islamist extremists on Egyptian soldiers in the city of Rafah.
The army's popularity only soared when faced with criticism over anti-democratic moves directed at Morsi's government. In fact, the latest series of events served to elevate the army in the context of Egyptian unity. The Egyptian people, faced with the intelligence failure that led to the deadly attack, and with the fact that Israel had warned the Egyptian authorities in advance, felt immensely frustrated. But that frustration is slowly beginning to dissipate as reports emerge of the blows that the army is dealing the Islamist terrorists both from the air and on land.
The media made sure to emphasize that despite the varying political views and the disparate social and economic statuses, the Egyptian people were one. The different spokespeople stressed the growing cooperation between Morsi and the army commander on the scene. Since the attack, all the Egyptian analysts that described it have agreed that the radical Islamist groups based in Sinai must be crushed. Before this attack, the kind of operation that the army launched in Sinai would have been impossible.
As expected, the lawless situation in Sinai was explained as a product of the discriminatory and tough attitude that deposed President Hosni Mubarak had taken toward the Sinai Bedouin. Mubarak's treatment of the Bedouin included torture, arrests and unwarranted abuse, which led to radicalization and the accumulation of weapons. It was mentioned further that it was the economic neglect that pushed the Bedouin to align themselves with Islamist terror organizations, motivated by foreign interests, against Egypt.
Egyptian media outlets interviewed excited residents of Sinai earnestly asking the authorities to restore order in the region. It is already obvious that Egyptian authorities will have to improve the quality of the manpower in Sinai. Currently, both the poor residents and the security personnel are vulnerable to recruitment by the various wealthy terror organizations. The power of the material temptations stem from the terrible poverty in the area, the alienation and the low wages paid to soldiers and military officers.
Who is the mastermind?
The harsh words that characterized the hours immediately following the deadly confrontation between soldiers and terrorists slowly dissipated. The waves of typically vicious accusations characterized, as usual, by the Islamist rhetoric coming from Morsi's movement — the Muslim Brotherhood — have continued, but have been reduced.
Already, there is growing fury and frustration over the Egyptian authorities' colossal intelligence and operational oversight. The anger is only intensifying as more details emerge from the attack, and more testimonies indicate involvement of Islamist terrorists from Gaza. As the bodies of the attackers are uncovered as well as their identities, the evidence suggests that radical Islamists and Sinai based groups were manipulated like marionettes, or cultivated like protégés, by Hamas.
The media commentators kept asking again and again, in shock, why the Egyptian soldiers had been targeted precisely during the breaking of the Ramadan fast; the questions reverberated over and over asking which country had orchestrated the attack; what was the agenda that prompted Islamist terrorists to kill Egyptian soldiers, commandeer military vehicles and attack Israel across the border in such a treacherous manner. Other questions were directed at the international forces deployed in Sinai — what is their true purpose? Are they doing their jobs properly?
The Egyptian media began collecting testimonies regarding the early warnings Israel issued: on the frustrating absence of Egyptian defense mechanisms; on the mortar fire targeting the Egyptian checkpoint prior to the attack coming from the Gaza side of Rafah — meant to provide backup to the terrorists coming into the checkpoint from the other side of the fence; on the movement of terrorists via underground tunnels from the Gaza Strip into Egypt as they were planning the attack. According to the various commentators' analyses, it is very clear that the timing, the location and the modus operandi of the attack were designed to draw Egypt into a conflict with Israel. The question is: Who is the mastermind?
Where is Egypt headed?
An Islamist Egypt is vulnerable to extensive weapons trafficking from within its territory to its neighbors. At any minute, another Khalid Islambouli (a radical Egyptian army officer who planned and participated in the assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat in 1981) could pop up and burn the house down from within. In light of the unstable economic and political arenas, especially following the attack, Morsi is now faced with a difficult dilemma.
Those who share Morsi's ideology, the members of the Muslim Brotherhood as well as the more extreme Salafi movement, expect his highness to implement the very ideology they have all been taught in that radical hothouse of theirs. Much to their embarrassment, it was the same Muslim ideology that motivated the terrorists who perpetrated this attack.
Hamas members were also pleased to see Morsi assume the presidency of Egypt, and to them, the vision of a liberated Palestine seems closer than ever. But the reality that has emerged indicates that there is an enormous gap between their vision and what is really happening, and this is a huge threat to Hamas. Egypt is dependent on America for funding and supplies, as well as Saudi aid. Egypt's diplomatic and security stability is a prerequisite for any economic advancement or foreign investment. So, from a geo-strategic perspective, Egypt's security is existentially linked to a Western agenda, dictated first and foremost by the U.S. The American agenda reflects that of most Western nations, including Israel and Turkey as well as the Sunni Arab nations in the Middle East. This Western coalition was formed mainly as a response to the Shiite coalition it opposes, which includes Iran — as it pursues nuclear weapons and eyes Arab oil and territory — Iraq, Syria and the Hezbollah satellite terror entity, all under a Chinese-Russian umbrella.
In this Cold War-style situation, Israel serves a key role. Morsi, almost against his will, has to choose the Egyptians' best interests and take action to combat Islamist terror, because he cannot support terrorist organizations that target the American coalition and its allies. Now that the Islamist terrorists have targeted Egypt itself, it will be easier for him to promote anti-terror policies both against Hamas and against the other terrorist organizations operating in Sinai under the auspices of Iran. Morsi can now do it under the guise of preserving Egyptian security without being suspected of cooperating with the enemy or being an "agent of American and Zionist imperialism."
The Hamas circus
The terror leadership of the "polite" Hamas rushed frantically to deny any involvement in the deadly incident: Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh convened a security coordination meeting between the Egyptian government and the Gaza leadership, and declared a halt to tunnel smuggling. All the signs indicated that Egyptian security officials were not going for the usual Hamas method of excuses — laying the blame on other Islamist front organizations (cultivated by Hamas) and distancing themselves from the said group despite the contact they maintain after attacks. This loathsome method is not even seen as a joke by the Egyptian intelligence establishment.
Following the attack, Haniyeh led an emotional solidarity demonstration in front of the Egyptian Embassy in Gaza. The threatening voices coming out of Egypt, however, have begun communicating to Hamas that it has been deluding itself into thinking that it could toy with Egypt's fate while advancing the narrow interests of the insolent Gaza group.
With overt criticism, Egyptian media spokespeople declared defiantly that it was unthinkable, within the framework of diplomacy, that a neighboring entity like the Gaza Strip, even if it is not a formal state, would maintain "criminal" relationships at the expense of its neighbor Egypt. It was unthinkable that Gaza would export terror into Egypt through underground tunnels full of guns, drugs and contraband, thus jeopardizing the public security of the nation.
The Egyptian media blamed the de facto Hamas government and insisted that Hamas knew of the terrorists' plans and did not warn Egyptian authorities. This stance assumes that the organization that rules the Gaza Strip is also responsible for what happens in its territory, and everything that comes out of it. These media spokespeople demanded that the Egyptian army obliterate the smuggling tunnels and institute instead above ground border crossings, under strict Egyptian supervision.
The "Israeli enemy"
Egyptian television conducted a marathon of interviews with scientists, military men and social experts. The editor of The Seventh Day newspaper in Egypt voiced deep dissatisfaction over the fact that a military analyst from the ranks of the "Israeli enemy" appeared on one of the television networks and spoke about the attack. "Who can you make peace with if not the enemy," innocently argued another interviewee, who was asked about how the attack would affect Israeli-Egyptian relations. "Israel is the enemy, but we will now have to make changes and renegotiate the peace treaty that Egypt signed with Israel at Camp David, while simultaneously bolstering cooperation on the security front," he added.
Despite all that, Israel was portrayed by the Egyptian media as a legitimate partner for a peace agreement. The Camp David Accords were presented as a product of a partnership that, though signed grudgingly, must be honored.
Most of the speakers in the media argued that the agreements in the treaty regarding the deployment of troops were mainly in favor of Israel, but that the necessary change in Sinai deployment, as well as the deployment in facing Gaza, must be done with Israel's blessing.
The Egyptians are taking the new reality very seriously. The media has been reporting air patrols and deployments coordinated with Israel. The Rafah checkpoint has been closed until further notice, and the Egyptian investigation of the incident revealed that the bodies of several of the terrorists showed them to be Gazans. Hamas is in for quite a few surprises along the route of the burned armored vehicle that the terrorists commandeered, deep into the terror tunnels.


Friday, August 10, 2012

Islam: A Religion Custom Made For Men

By Amil Amani

Muslims, by belief and practice, are the most blatant violators of human rights. We hardly need to detail here Muslims’ systemic cruel treatment of the unbelievers, women of all persuasions, and any and all minorities across the board. To Muslims, human rights have a different meaning, and its protective provisions are reserved strictly for Muslims—primarily for Muslim men. Just a couple of examples should suffice for now.

Oppression of women, for one, is so systemic in Islam that to this day women are, at best, second-class citizens under Islamic law. Saudi Arabia, the custodian of Islamdom, denies women the right to drive, vote or hold elective offices—the most basic rights of citizens in democratic societies. Arabs and Muslims are masters of double-acts. They do all things in private, yet the public display of morality, decorum, and even piety is something you wear as you would your Keffiyeh even under the sizzling sun.
In model Islamic states such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, for instance, women do not dare complain about their Allah-decreed chattel status. If they protest in the least, they are beaten by their husbands. And if they dare to demonstrate in public for equal family rights with men, they get severe beatings by the police and are hauled to jails for additional indignities and violence.

One may wonder then why is it that millions of Muslim women meekly submit to their subservient rank and thank Allah for it. These women are virtually imprinted by their parents and the clergy from birth to adopt the gender inequality as well as the entire pathological Islamic ethos.

Islam can be a “forgiving” religion, specifically for the male. If you neglect to say your prayers or you simply don’t want to, you can hire someone, preferably an imam or a mullah, to pray on your behalf. Going to the Hajj is too onerous and takes you away from the pleasures and comforts of your life? You can deputize someone else to go in your stead. You have a few drinks of the forbidden brew and it is time to say your prayer? Simply rinse your mouth and go ahead with praying. But, always remember the will of Allah and serve him. Do your duties to vanquish the unbelievers, promote the rule of the Sharia, and make the earth Allah’s.

In Islamic societies, freedom of expression, worship, and assembly are taken away. Women are indeed treated as chattel. Young girls are subjected to barbaric genital mutilation to make them sex slaves and birth channels without the ability to enjoy intercourse. Minors are executed, adulterers are stoned to death, thieves have their limbs amputated, and much much more. Isn’t that everyone’s idea of paradise?

Women, by the very nature of their second-class status expressly stipulated in the Quran, are occasionally allowed a token high position in government, while non-Muslim minority citizens are virtually barred from securing any positions at all.

“Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the others and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you take no further action against them. Allah is high, supreme.” Quran 4.34

This misogynist religion of Allah is custom-made for the savage male. A faithful follower of Allah is allowed to have as many as four permanent wives-and replace any of them at any time he wants-as well as an unlimited number of one night or one-hour-stands that he can afford to rent. But, woe unto a woman if she even has a single love affair with another man. Nothing less than death by stoning is her just punishment.

In the Islamic Republic of Iran and under the Islamic Sharia that became the unofficial law of the land, a religiously sanctioned ceremony immediately filled the void. Many mosques provided the service of Seeghe—temporary marriages—. Women interested or forced by circumstances beyond their control to seek this type of ‘marriage’ would register with a local Mullah. Men seeking a temporary wife would contact the Mullah and specify what kind of woman they desired and for how long. Depending on the marketability of the candidate woman, a fee is levied on the man and the Mullah pronounces them husband and wife for a stipulated duration. Once the patron satisfies his urges, the same Mullah simply annuls the marriage. Viola. No problems. The pair parts company and the Mullah, a replacement for the former pimp or madam, pockets his fee.

Thanks to Western technology, the Seeghe business has also joined the 21st century world. In some of the bigger cities and Tehran, a man can pick up a woman and call in for a Seeghe authorization which is granted over the phone and the fee is charged to the patron’s credit card. Islam is a custom-made religion for men. Well, as long as men rule and the rule serves them, the horrific plight of women plays out. It is a great deal for men.

What is incredible is the gall and audacity of Muslims in demanding that Western and other democracies legalize Sharia in their societies. Due to large populations of Muslims, mostly recent arrivals, in countries such as Canada, Great Britain, and Sweden, these countries are experiencing the insistent demands by Muslims to have Sharia rule their Islamic communities. This is just the beginning and it may seem relatively harmless to the simpletons in our midst. Yet, once Sharia is recognized to any extent, it will reach out to rule not only on matters that concern Muslims, but also those that may involve a Muslim and non-Muslim. Under Sharia, a Muslim man married to a non-Muslim woman is able to divorce the woman at will, automatically have custody of the children, and literally toss the wife out of “his” home with practically no compensation.

“Death to the Islamic Republic, Stop stoning women, Death to the Criminal Mullahs and Democracy for Iran, are the banners read almost routinely in most European countries by the Iranian ex-patriot sympathizers condemning the Islamic Republic’s brutality against women. They demand equal rights and treatments for the largest oppressed minority in the world.

As the world turns, we become convinced that the Islamic system is custom-made for men, by men and for the pleasure of men. And the men in power, the clergy, the prime beneficiary of the system, do not intend to voluntarily relinquish their privileged status.

There is a hope that Muslims themselves may leave this Bedouin slaveholder religion. Yet, the hope is slim. Islam has a stranglehold on its slaves and will neither let them go, nor do the Muslims seem to have the insight or the will to leave it in large numbers. But hope, as slim as it is, keeps me sounding the alarm before the fire of Islam engulfs us all.

Amil Imani is the author of the riveting book “Obama Meets Ahmadinejad”

Real Liberals Should Support Israel

With gay rights, green technology, and national health care, Israel should be a utopia to progressives.
At the end of my three-week stay in Israel, made possible by the generous folks at Eagles Wings Ministries’ Israel Experience program, I realized that Israel is a model of liberalism, a country that embodies progressive values and every cause American liberals champion.
The moment when this point hit me was when I was on Ben Yehuda Street in Jerusalem, taking a break from enjoying the night life on a bench, when a loud group with flags marched past me and handed me a flier. The group, called the Coalition of Pink Communities, was rallying in support of equal rights for those with alternative lifestyles, with the flier specifically mentioning “lesbians, homosexuals, transgenders, bisexuals, queer, intersex.”
The fact that this even occurred, in the holy city of Jerusalem no less, is proof that such equal rights have been granted. The demonstrators were not harassed, attacked, or even approached in any way, despite the presence of Orthodox Jewish onlookers. This stands in sharp contrast to anywhere in the Palestinian territories or Arab world, where such actions would be met with brutality of the highest order. Israel, which stands alone as the country most derided by human rights advocates daring to call themselves liberals, has upheld freedom of speech and shown a tolerance of homosexual lifestyles in a way deserving of far-reaching liberal praise, allowing openly gay centers to operate and known homosexual soldiers to serve. This scenario alone should dispel the notion that Israel’s status as a Jewish state makes it theocratic, but this democratic country is still frequently referred to as “apartheid” on college campuses, an insult that denigrates the true victims of apartheid, both in the past in South Africa and those suffering from true oppression in the Arab world. Rarely is the gender apartheid in major parts of the Islamic world or the oppression of gays, dissenting political voices, non-Muslims (especially Jews), and Muslim minorities in such areas a cause for a fuss.
The apartheid comparison is so wrong on so many levels that using it should disqualify the users from being termed “academics” or “experts.” Few seem to know that twenty percent of Israeli citizens are Arabs, given the same rights as their fellow Jewish countrymen. They are provided with social services, serve in the military, and even are elected to the Knesset.
The security “wall,” 97% of which is chain-link fence, is often touted as proof of Israel’s racism, but it is not designed to separate Jewish and Palestinian communities. In fact, the barrier intrudes through Jewish communities as well and anyone passing through it can see Jew and Muslim alike having to pass through. Nor is it an act of oppression. It was erected in response to unrelenting, unacceptable attacks on innocent Israelis which resulted in necessary, retaliatory strikes that harmed Palestinians. Since its creation, suicide bombings have dramatically dropped by over 90%. This wall is far from an act of racism; it is an appropriate security measure that, while annoying to the Jews and Palestinians that have to travel through it, has allowed economic progress, security, and a better life for both sides.
Of particular interest to those on the Israel Experience trip was the Israeli concern for human rights. During a presentation by Joe Hyams of Honest Reporting, we saw videos of Israeli pilots redirecting missiles targeting Hamas operatives at the last moment to stop from killing civilians, even if those civilians were opening their doors to the terrorists. The Israelis also sent automated messages and text messages to areas before strikes during Operation Cast Lead in an attempt to get civilians to flee. The Israelis haven’t even cut off the Ashkelon power station that provides the Gaza Strip with 70% of its electricity. Hamas, on the other hand, has frequently targeted it with its missiles.
In academia, I’ve noticed that the discussion almost always centers on some sort of moral equivalence between the two sides, as if the conflict stems from both sides’ equal dose of hatred and unwillingness to compromise. Such discussion erases the Israeli handovers of territory to the Palestinians and fails to account for the lengths to which Israel goes to defend itself humanely, whereas Hamas, al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, and other terrorist groups see inhumanity as a weapon of war and diplomatic tool.
There will be haters no matter what, but on the Israeli side, such hatred is not mainstream or institutionalized. In every conversation I can remember I had with an Israeli, the suffering of the Palestinians was always mentioned as part of the equation. While discussing their own suffering, they’d always turn and say something along the lines of: “You know, the Palestinians don’t deserve what they’re going through either; it’s unacceptable.”
Israel has adopted virtually every liberal cause. The Jewish state has taken in 1,700 refugees from Darfur, giving Africa the attention Hollywood has demanded. Israel does not do so for recognition, as surely they know by now they will never get any, but because it’s simply the right thing to do.
Environmentalists should be hailing Israel as a model. Twenty percent of the water used by Israel will be desalinated by 2010 and, according to Israel @ 60, “Israel treats 92 percent of its wastewater and reuses 75 percent in agriculture, the highest rate in the world.” Israel stands nearly alone as having more trees today than at the beginning of the last century and “is one of two countries in the world in which deserts are shrinking rather than expanding.”
Investing in electric cars and other forms of alternative energy, bacteria that can dissolve oil spills, and other green technology, Israel is taking a leading role in helping the environment. With the current health care debate in the U.S. raging, liberals should also take notice that Israel provides national health insurance — or, as conservatives would say, socialized health care. When we visited a hospital, our guide articulately defended the concept and criticized the American health care system in a way that would have made any Democratic Party operative proud.
Whether it’s protecting and respecting human life or preserving the rights of citizens despite the highest temptation to restrict them, Israel is a bastion of liberalism and progressivism. For liberals to not support Israel is to not support the very issues they fight for at home.

Ryan Mauro is the national security analyst of, the founder of and a frequent guest on Fox News Channel. He can be contacted at
All Rights Reserved. v1.30
PJ Traffic Control

Thursday, August 9, 2012

The Dark Night is Rising

Thanks to  Israel Advocacy for this excellent and informative article. MFBSR

YOUR MEDIA IS SILENT!  What are YOU going to do about Jew Hatred?  New York Times, Huffington Post, Washington Post, CNN, Los Angeles Times, BBC, all of them are silent  because they support the destruction of the Jewish state.  Supporting terror by omitting news that citizens of the world need to know, distorting public opinion with bias against Israel, slander, libel and hiding the truth of the global Jew Hatred, coexistent with the global Islamification of our world.  Politicians and public voices ridicule the obvious as they profit - through votes, through finances or through the false security they feel in denying the obvious, the mind numbing, terrifying obvious.  Consider the news of 10 and 20 years ago - of how we accept murder and rape daughters and babies and bombs in Sbarros and cafes and homeland security and terror plots...while we do not even whisper of the sacrifices and the threats incurred daily by the Israelis - We celebrate Israel inventions and scientific breakthroughs and inventions that save and improve lives but we do not credit Israel or Jews with these miracles of the lucent, genius, generous mind.  We have great orators debate the obvious - with those against Israel far out numbering her supporters - Evidence shredded, buried, denied to convict her as overwhelming evidence in support of her claims, her morality, her history, her integrity and the crimes, the SINS of her enemies are ---- covered up.  Kept silent.  Buried. Denied.  Look again at our country then...and now.  Consider the polarization created by our leaders and our media.  Consider the blatant lies that your president (don't gasp) and his administration are handing you.  The absurdity of what is being accepted is at critical mass. Do you not see thorough and complete contemporary parallel with the early 20th century rise of Naziism - the denial, the contempt of the far left and far right as they are complicit in the rising crescendo of injustice and hatred? The world revels in its hatred and hypocrisy, it revels drunk in its fear and edges closer to blood lust.  No proof, no history, no truth is sacred or safe or potent enough to substantiate the claims of the sane - Every red line is eradicated with boisterous, inflammatory denial held high as the holy grail; arrogant, salacious accusations are boiling the blood of our world citizens as leaders and media lead us toward a conflagration ecstatically forged.   What can come of this?  What can come of this?

Wednesday, August 8, 2012

Western Europe will soon be“Judenrein” - Norway now is. God have mercy!

 In a few weeks Norway will  be“Judenrein”.  The last 819 Jews still living in Norway are now leaving the country due to the rise in antisemitism.
Europe again “Judenrein”02-08-2012Thus Norway becomes the first European country in which Jews will no longer live.  A similar development can be observed in all the European countries.
When one hears nowadays reports regarding the terrorist attack against Jews in Bulgaria one does not know that Jews in Europe are subject to antisemitic manifestations daily. The Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten reported In February 2012 about the departure of Jews from the country. Anne Sender, the head of the Jewish community in Norway, once said: “Many immigrants brought antisemitism from their countries. The shame is in that nobody speaks out against them.”
The waves of Muslim immigrants bring antisemitism back to Europe.  A similar development is taking place in the neighboring country, Sweden, and in all the European countries. The Muslims are the ones who drive away the Jews everywhere. The information agency, Kopp Exklusiv, is one of the few to talk about this subject.
It started in France.  A day doesn’t go by without Muslim attacks of Jews. The press hardly reports it. There are too many incidents. In the first five months of 2012, there were 268 attacks against Jews. France today is an extremely antisemitic country. The socialist Government under the leadership of Hollande does nothing to protect the Jews – on the contrary. The numerous Muslims are a very important part of the electorate for the elected officials and they are under the auspices of the socialists. On July 5, 2012, a 17 years-old Jewish youngster was nearly beaten to death near Toulouse by two Muslims of North-African descent because he was wearing a chain with the Star of David. The police were unable to collect evidence. The Jews are publicly encouraged to leave the country.
The situation is not much different in Italy. Every Jew must fear for his life and live under the protection of a security unit. The media channels in Britain too, have been reporting for six years about the emigration of Jews from Britain. In 1990 there were 340,000 Jews. Today there are 240,000 left. The Muslim immigrants turn their life into hell and chase them away. They have also succeeded in driving away the Jews of Jewish Antwerp. In the Netherlands, former politicians advised the Jews to leave the country soon. The former European  Commissioner, Frits Bolkestein, said that Dutchmen of Moroccan descent are antisemitic and that it would be best if the Jews left of their free will. They can immigrate to the United States (not for long! -BL) or to Israel.
Dutch politicians from the Social Democratic circles marched together with the Muslims who called for the construction of gas chambers in order to burn the Jews. In the German-speaking countries this is not reported in the press. The German journalists think that the Muslims are decent people who have no connection whatsoever to the extreme right . With this approach, journalists are helping to drive the Jews away from Europe. They suppress the nightmare of the Islamic immigration.
I feel sick, reading this... so sad for the Jewish people of Europe, that they again have to fear for their lives - even in lands that were supposedly 'safe' -  and I am absolutely devastated that Norway of all countries should lead the way in this!  They know better - just one generation ago, they were a truly Christian nation that supported Israel!  But when they forsook their precious spiritual heritage (there were several amazing revivals in Norway's history), and embraced left-wing secularism and "pluralism" instead, they reaped an unexpected harvest: a flood of illiterate Muslim immigrants that has destabilized their society and pushed Norway over the edge from 'merely' anti-Israel to anti-Semitic!  This should not come as a surprise at all... it is happening everywhere.  When the anti-Semitism that is endemic in Islam is combined with the political anti-Israel attitudes of the Left (propagated among the youth via the universities), this is the result!
So once again, the pattern is being repeated that we saw in Europe in the last century: a hateful, radical minority (whether of the Right or the Left - or Islamic) is able to influence and overtake a soft, liberal, open society to the point that it inflicts its prejudices unimpeded, while the silent majority looks the other way, or even cooperates.
God help Norway and the rest of Europe!  And may He have mercy on the few remaining 'safe refuge' nations for the Jewish people - ie, Canada, USA, and Australia (are there any others?!!) - if they should allow this tragedy to happen there as well! 
The awful attack a year ago by the crazy Norwegian right-wing extremist, Breivik, was an example of the pent-up frustration felt by many Norwegians who don't want to see their lovely little country 'transformed' by Muslim immigration into a third-world, anti-western, anti-Israel nightmare.  But because of his own personal demons & psychoses, instead of working to change things in a rational, effective, political way, he became a violent 'vigilante'.  We MUST all guard against this - it's not only immoral - it backfires!  Of course, the Enemy has used the incident to discredit and silence all discussion about where Norwegian society is going, and what should be done about it while there is time. 
As a result, everyone who has eyes to see what is going on, and tries to help, feels threatened by the label of "Islamophobe"...  And the result?  Emboldened Muslim demands and harassment, increasing, wide-spread hatred of Israel... and then, inevitably, attacks against local Jews.  So now they are leaving - hopefully for Israel, so they won't have to run again!  May Adonai guide, protect and bless them! 
But what about Norway, my 'homeland'?!  What will become of it?!  Well what happens when the Jews who have lived in a nation are persecuted and forced to leave?  We have so many examples in history -  Spain, the Arab world, Iran, Russia, Turkey, Germany, etc.  The country loses its brightest and best, and goes into decline!  Most of all, the BLESSING and PROTECTION of GOD is lifted!  (I realize Germany now has a fairly good economy, but it went thru many years of turmoil and trouble after WWII - and the only reason it is prospering now is because a) they distanced themselves from their Nazi past, repented, and made restitution and b) the US helped them get back on their feet. 
So what will become of Norway? Unless there is a great repentance, beginning in the Church, but also in the government, and a change in attitude toward Israel, I fear for what is coming... I cannot escape the memory of the dramatic, terrible dream I had when we were there visiting relatives in the summer of 2000.... When I awoke, I sensed a great danger to the oil rigs in the North Sea, as well as the pipelines from them... and knew that if these were attacked by terrorists, it would be catastrophic to Norway - economically and ecologically.  That was before 9-11, when such things were fairly rare.   
I don't wish a tragedy on that beautiful country; I pray it won't happen!  But since Norway is the ONLY remaining pro-western nation left in OPEC, and since it has continued to permit massive Muslim immigration into the tiny country, it is certainly an 'item of interest' and a target.  Once there was a sort of canopy (chuppah) of God's protection over the land, I believe, as a result of the many devout Bible-believers there - but now, I fear that is dissipating, as the last fearful Jews leave their shores, and instead of standing up for them, they again avert their eyes.
The word that came to me today was this:  MENE, MENE, TEKEL U PARSIN!"
It is from Daniel 5... the "writing on the wall" story.  If you don't know it. read it.
“But you, Belshazzar, his son,[d] have not humbled yourself, though you knew all this. 23 Instead, you have set yourself up against the Lord of heaven. You had the goblets from his temple brought to you, and you and your nobles drank wine from them. You praised the gods of silver and gold, of bronze, iron, wood and stone, which cannot see or hear or understand. But you did not honor the God who holds in his hand your life and all your ways. 24 Therefore he sent the hand that wrote the inscription. 25 “This is the inscription that was written:
mene, mene, tekel, parsin
26 “Here is what these words mean:
Mene[e]: God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end.
27 Tekel[f]: You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting.
28 Peres[g]: Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.”

The Chomsky Hoax

The Chomsky Hoax
Exposing the Dishonesty of Noam Chomsky