Posted on 07/16/2006 12:40:15 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
Top News Story
Iran's war with Israel and the US becomes clear to the MSM.
- The New York Times finally reported that the expansion of the Gaza crisis into southern Lebanon, confronting Israel with a conflict on its northern and southern borders, has demonstrated that the central issue at stake is regional, not local. It is the broader problem of radical Islam and of Iran.
- The Telegraph reported that Israeli commanders regard the northern border as their "front line" with Iran.
- New York Sun in an editorial argued the risks of 'Restraint' in the present Middle East conflict.
- The Boston Globe in an editorial argued that the purpose and the timing of Hezbollah's attack on Israel yesterday should be transparent to all concerned. It plays into am Iranian propaganda campaign, conflating the issue of Iran's nuclear program with what he has condemned as the intolerable existence of Israel.
- John Gibson, Fox News argued that Iran attacking Israel is really an attack on the U.S.
The Experts Weigh in. We are at war with Iran.
- Michael Ledeen, National Review Online reminded us that Israel's present war in the Middle East is just an extension of Iran's 27 year declared war on the US.
- Yossi Klein Halevi, The National Review Online argued that the next Middle East war--Israel against genocidal Islamism--has begun. He argued that the goals of the war should be the destruction of the Hamas regime and the dismantling of the Hezbollah infrastructure in southern Lebanon.
- David Twersky, The New York Sun argued that the war on Iran has begun.
- Kenneth M. Pollack, Reader's Digest while reminding us that Ahmadinejad has declared that a world "without America and Zionism" is "attainable and surely can be achieved." He then argues that the best option for the West is to negotiate its way out of the nuclear crisis. I respond.
Iran responds.
- Reuters reported that Iran's Foreign Ministry denied suggestions that Hezbollah could take two captured Israeli soldiers to Iran.
- YNet News reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said an Israeli strike on Syria would be considered an attack on the whole Islamic world that would bring a “Fierce response.”
- Yahoo News reported that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned that Tehran could halt UN inspections and quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty if subjected to increased pressure over its disputed nuclear program.
Zogby releases a poll of Iranians.
- Zogby International released a survey which reports that Iranians (41%) said reforming their national economy so it operates more efficiently is more important than nuclear capability. I also made a few observations.
Here are a few other news items you may have missed.
- Rooz Online reported that Iranian Ayatollah Gorbani said: “We do not accept these human rights and announce that the US and Israel are among countries that violate human rights."
- Rooz Online reported that at the moment ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi - the intellectual leader of the extremists - and his students are not on the list produced by the traditional right-wing groups in Iran who are finalizing their list of candidates for the critical forthcoming Leadership Experts Assembly elections in Iran.
- RIA Novosti reported that Russia's foreign minister said possible UN sanctions against Iran will not affect Russian-Iranian military cooperation.
- Cox & Forkum published another cartoon: Black Wedding.
"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin
Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!
"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”
Jews on the left are joining conservatives on the right in the support for Israel (one wonders about possible growing support for Lieberman in the Rat Party), the MSM now sees that radical islam and terrorists are not their friends, sectarian divisions in Iraq's Parliament are healed by their collective and unified hatred of Israel (and love for Hezbollah).
Even Newt (on Meet the Press) said loudly and clearly, "this is the beginning of WWIII."
BTW, "Plugs" Biden was there also and had the temerity to disagree about this being WWIII (but the fact that his right eye was twitching nervously calls into question his sincerity).
Wait till the end of the week... their tune will change.
The only conviction they have is to do away with people like you and I.
************************************************************
There is a book,:
Unholy Alliance : Radical Islam and the American Left (Hardcover)
*******************************
And a review:
****************************************
Communism is dead. Long live Islam!, September 30, 2004
It sounds absurd: why would Leftists make common cause with a religion that is diametrically opposed to everything the Left stands for? David Horowitz explains that it is really quite logical given the Left's first principle: America is evil and anything or anyone opposed to America is good.
Reviewer:
Kevin Beckman (Sacramento, CA) - See all my reviews
Part I of the book is a brief history of 9/11 through the end of major combat operations in Iraq, and the Left's behavior during this time. Horowitz includes the reaction of Katha Pollitt of The Nation magazine: "The flag stands for vengeance, and jingoism, and war." Anthropology Professor Nicholas De Genova of Columbia University said he hoped for "a million Mogadishus." His colleagues objected, not to the despicable sentiment, but because of the bad publicity it brought their "teach-in." Our tax dollars at work!
Part II is the heart of the book: a history of the American and international Left. Horowitz calls them Neo-Communists or Neocoms. The Neocoms of old believed in the Soviet Union the way religious people believe in God. Those who spied for the USSR didn't see themselves as traitors to their country, but rather loyalists to humanity and an ideal of America that's never existed. When the Soviet Union fell, a few of them stopped for some introspection but most pressed on as if nothing happened. Communist historian Eric Hobsbawm put it nicely: "Without the Revolution, my life and my work are meaningless."
Now that they no longer have to defend an indefensible regime, modern Neocoms are simply nihilists. They know what they oppose but they have no plans for the aftermath of the revolution which they still believe will happen. They don't know what they want, but they know what they hate: the United States, capitalism personified.
So why are they allying with radical Islam? Horowitz says that the Neocoms still believe in Marx's dictum that "religion is the opiate of the masses." Once private property is abolished, the need for religion will vanish, and Islamic radicals will stop being Islamic and radical. The only thing standing in the way is the United States.
Sound insane? It is. They are. I highly recommend this book. Horowitz makes the insanity understandable.
Thanks for the post.
Given that the Mullahs, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas are cowards (by historical standards of conduct in wartime), I just don't see this going much further. These groups are no doubt pulling all of their intl diplomacy strings to get this situation to "cool down." A cease-fire. Whatever they can do.
Having to back up their endless boasts is not the goal or intent. Making noise and projecting an image of Defender of the Faith is the goal.
Even nuclear armed I don't see Iran wanting an overt or hot war. Not when most Iranians don't like them or believe in their cause. War would be catastrophic. Being perceived as the Defender of the Faith . . . now that would be worthwhile.
Really, people, have you ever seen more cowardly "men" always hiding, changing their stories, refusing to openly admit their involvement -- while at the same time being so obsessed with honor and pride?
Iran? President Bush, NOW is the time.
"The Red Jihad"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.