“Wait, so he made a really awful choice with far-reaching negative
consequences and now he’s just stepping down to let someone else take
over? What?” said Colorado Springs, CO resident Evan Austin, echoing the
sentiments of citizens across the United States who were left
struggling to understand why a democratically elected head of government
would relinquish control simply because they had been shown to have
made a spectacularly bad judgment call. “So he jeopardized the future of
his country, and instead of spending the next several years remaining
in power while trying to paper over his mistakes, he’s just gone?
Where’s the part where he denies any wrongdoing or tries to blame
somebody else? This is absolutely crazy.”
Yes, of course that was The Onion, and you can read the whole thing here.
#ThanksObama... for making America's former allies into our allies
It's not just Israel that doesn't trust Barack Hussein Obama. And in one of the best examples of countries having interests rather than friends, a group of previously irreconcilable American allies has joined together look out for their own interests in the waning days of the Age of Obama. Bret Stephens reports.
I’ve spent the better part of a week talking to senior officials,
journalists, intellectuals and politicians from across Israel’s
political spectrum. None of it was on the record, but the consistent
theme is that, while the Jewish state still needs the U.S., especially
in the form of military aid, it also needs to diversify its strategic
partnerships. This may yet turn out to be the historic achievement of Benjamin Netanyahu’s long reign as prime minister.
On Sunday, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon publicly shook hands with former Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki al-Faisal at the Munich Security Conference. In January, Israeli cabinet member Yuval Steinitz
made a trip to Abu Dhabi, where Israel is opening an office at a
renewable-energy association. Turkey is patching up ties with Israel. In
June, Jerusalem and Riyadh went public with the strategic talks between
them. In March, Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi told the Washington Post that he speaks to Mr. Netanyahu “a lot.”
This
de facto Sunni-Jewish alliance amounts to what might be called the
coalition of the disenchanted; states that have lost faith in America’s
promises. Israel is also reinventing its ties to the aspiring Startup
Nations, countries that want to develop their own innovation cultures.
In October, Israel hosted Indian President Pranab Mukherjee
for a three-day state visit; New Delhi, once a paragon of the
nonaligned movement that didn’t have diplomatic ties to Israel for four
decades, is about to spend $3 billion on Israeli arms. Japanese Prime
Minister Shinzo Abe, who is personally close to Mr. Netanyahu, sees
Israel as a model for economic reinvention. Chinese investment in Israel
hit $2.7 billion last year, up from $70 million in 2010. In 2014,
Israel’s exports to the Far East for the first time exceeded those to
the U.S.
Then there is Europe—at least the part of it that is
starting to grasp that it can’t purchase its security in the coin of
Israeli insecurity. Greece’s left-wing Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras
used to lead anti-Israel protests. But Greece needs Israeli gas, so he
urges cooperation on terrorism and calls Jerusalem Israel’s “historic
capital.” In the U.K., Prime Minister David Cameron’s government is moving to prevent local councils from passing Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) measures against Israel.
All
this amounts to another Obama administration prediction proved wrong.
“You see for Israel there’s an increasing delegitimization campaign that
has been building up,” Mr. Kerry warned grimly in 2014. “There are
talks of boycotts and other kinds of things. Today’s status quo
absolutely, to a certainty, I promise you 100%, cannot be maintained.”
Except when the likely alternatives to the lousy status quo are worse.
Maybe we need to say #ThanksObama after all. Just not the way he expected. Heh.
Ed Miliband of Labour was supposed to become the first Jewish Prime Minister of the UK. But it doesn't seem like it's going to happen. David Cameron and the Conservatives have apparently retained power.
Obama invents new US policy to avoid meeting with Netanyahu, meets and endorses Cameron for UK Prime Minister
Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech to a joint session of Congress has been moved to March 3, when he was supposed to be in Washington anyway for AIPAC's annual convention (a trip that the Obama administration had approved). But Obama has invented a new policy and will use it to avoid meeting with Netanyahu during his trip.
The decision, said the White House, is in line with US policy not to meet foreign leaders on dates that are close to national elections in their countries.
"The president will not be meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu
because of the proximity to the Israeli election," said National
Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan
The date for Prime Minister Netanyahu's address to Congress has been
pushed back by a fortnight to March 3, House Speaker John Boehner
announced Thursday on his Twitter feed.
Boehner said that Netanyahu asked that the speech be rescheduled so that he can participate
in the annual AIPAC conference as well. This means that the speech to
Congress will be delivered just two weeks before the Israeli elections
on March 17.
Netanyahu wrote
Boehner: "I am honored by this invitation, which reflects the special
friendship shared by Israel and the United States as well as the strong
bipartisan support for Israel across America.
"Just last week I
discussed with President Obama the common challenges we face from
Islamist extremism, including resurgent terrorism and Iran's pursuit of
nuclear weapons.
"I look forward to
being able to share with the joint session Israel's vision for working
together to address these threats and to reiterate Israel's commitment
to the bond that unites our two democracies."
But an out-and-out endorsement of another country's candidate for Prime Minister is okay in Obama's book.
US President Barack Obama today handed David Cameron an extraordinary pre-election endorsement, hailing the British Prime Minister as a 'great friend'.
With less than four months until voters go to the polls in the tightest UK election for years, Mr Obama used a press conference in the White House to give the strongest possible backing to a fellow world leader.
...
Mr Cameron has been in Washington for a high profile visit just months before the British general election. The two men dined together in the White House last night, on mushrooms, lamb and warm pear cake.
Images of Mr Cameron with the US President, who is more popular in the UK than in America, will be seen as a huge boost to Tory hopes of contrasting Mr Cameron with Labour's Ed Miliband to be PM.
But the highly unusual personal support from a Democrat President will delight Tory strategists and cause dismay for Labour, who hoped a visit to Washington last year had bolstered his image as a potential statesman.
Mr Cameron revealed in an interview this month that Mr Obama often calls him 'bro' when they meet.
'Yes, he sometimes calls me 'Bro',' the PM said.
The US President today said commentators had got into a 'tizzy' about he meant meant by it and sparked a debate about even the definition and origin of the word 'bro'.
Seeking to clear up the confusion, Mr Obama said: 'Put simply, David is a great friend. He is one of my closet and most trusted partners in the world. On many of the most pressing challenges that we face we see the world the same way.
'Great Britain is our indispensable partner, and David has been personally an outstanding partner - and I thank you for your friendship.'
In response, Mr Cameron told the President: 'You are a great friend to Britain, and me personally.'
Why Europe won't learn the lesson of Charlie Hebdo
Melanie Phillips (writing before Friday's attack on the Kosher supermarket in Paris) explains why last week's Charlie Hebdo attack will not awaken the West.
The fact is that Islamic terrorism and intimidation against the West
have been going on for decades, matched by displays of Western weakness
which merely encourage an enemy it refuses properly to identify.
Over
and over again, the West denies that these attacks have anything to do
with Islam. First it blamed poverty and exclusion among Muslims. Then
it blamed grievances around the world – Bosnia, Chechnya, Kashmir,
Palestine.
Then it blamed isolated madmen whose Muslim identity was irrelevant.
In
France before Christmas, attacks in which cars were used as battering
rams against crowds amid shouts of “Allahu akbar” were said by French
authorities to be unconnected with each other.
Yet Muslim
violence in France has clearly been out of control for years. Just look
at the repeated Islamic pogroms against French Jews, which have driven
thousands of them to emigrate. Yet none of those attacks provoked the
kind of outrage that followed this week’s atrocity. Is free speech more
important than the lives of French Jews? But the West refuses to join
up the dots. The Charlie Hebdo attackers shouted “Allahu akbar” and “We
are avenging the Prophet Muhammad.”
Yet Obama, Cameron, and
Hollande condemned the attack as merely “terrorism,” carefully omitting
to say what kind of terrorism this was.
This follows their
absurd statements that the Islamic State terrorist group has “nothing
to do with Islam” and that “no religion” condones that kind of
barbarism.
Really? What links Islamic State, al-Qaida, Hamas,
and Boko Haram? It’s a religion beginning with the letter I and ending
with M.
A very senior British civil servant once told me that
Islamist terrorism couldn’t be about Islam, because that would
“demonize” all Muslims. This absurd non-sequitur was like saying the
Inquisition had nothing to do with Catholicism, in order not to
demonize Catholics.
For sure, many Muslims are not only opposed
to Islamist terrorism but are its principal victims. But to pretend
that it is not rooted in a legitimate interpretation of the religion,
backed up by the historical evidence of centuries of aggressive and
violent Islamic conquest, is ridiculous.
If the West cannot even bring itself to acknowledge what it is up against, then it will surely be defeated by it.
British Labour party leader Ed Miliband is coming in for some sharp criticism within his own party for his handling of the vote in parliament last week not to participate in a US attack on Syria (Hat Tip: Gary P).
MPs have privately begun to voice concerns that their leader made a
catastrophic mistake by engineering the defeat of the Government’s motion in
the House of Commons on Thursday night.
Meanwhile senior figures inside the Government accused the Labour leader of
“stark raving hypocrisy”, “dishonourable behaviour” and “putting his party
before the national interest”.
Ministerial aides said that Mr Miliband consistently gave the impression of a
series of days that he would back a “consensual” approach with the
Government, only to suddenly change his mind.
Labour politicians have also acknowledged that Mr Miliband’s strategy faces
being undermined by every new atrocity committed by President Bashar
al-Assad’s regime.
One MP, who declined to be named publicly, said he began to regret his
decision to vote against military action within minutes of stepping out of
the Division Lobby – because television screens began to show new footage of
suffering Syrian innocents.
...
After they had left the Chamber, some of the more reflective Labour
politicians quickly found their consciences being pricked when, as if on
cue, television images of an apparent firebomb attack on children and adults
in a Syrian town near Aleppo began to appear on television screens inside
the Palace of Westminster.
“Just as we came out of the Chamber the news of that napalm attack was running
on the TV news, which looked like it could have only come from the regime,”
said one Labour backbencher.
“Horrific pictures, absolutely horrific. You’d help but wonder what on earth
we had just done.”
Another Labour MP admitted that every atrocity to emerge from Syria would now
give rise to a pang of doubt.
“We will all have this on our consciences,” he said. “It may have been the
right decision, but every time I see footage of another Syrian atrocity I
will wonder.”
Even Labour backbenchers who are normally supportive of Mr Miliband said the
party political approach adopted by their leadership had left them feeling
ashamed.
They admitted the catcalling and points-scoring which developed in the House
of Commons over a vote of such monumental, life-and-death importance had
been highly inappropriate.
“There were colleagues grinning, clapping, celebrating,” said one Miliband
loyalist.
...
When the Labour leader left Downing Street, Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg were
convinced the Opposition would largely back the Government’s motion.
“That was our biggest mistake – to trust Ed Miliband not to play party
politics with dead children,” said one senior Government source. “We were
genuinely astonished – shocked. The only thing we can think of is that the
Shadow Cabinet told him to u-turn and he did.”
Labour disputes this account of the Downing Street meeting. They say Mr
Miliband had made no final agreement to back the motion. A Labour source
said: “We were asked to a meeting. We attended and we listened to what was
said. That was the right and proper thing to do.”
When pressed why Mr Miliband gave no initial signal that he might not back the
motion, the source added: “If someone hands you a piece of paper at the end
of a meeting with a lot of words on it the proper thing to do is to read it
and consult with your party.”
At 4.30pm Mr Miliband chaired a 15-minute conference call of the Shadow
Cabinet, where Labour’s front-bench team unanimously agreed not to back the
Government motion.
A Labour spokesman said that the call was “business like”, but one party
insider admits that senior members of the Shadow Cabinet had been alarmed by
how little public support there had been for an attack on Syria.
At 5:15pm, the Labour leader called the Prime Minister back to say that he and
his party would not support the Government’s motion. A furious exchange
ensued between the two men.
“It was stark raving hypocrisy,” said a senior Government source. “Miliband
was putting his party before the national interest. It was thoroughly
dishonourable behaviour.”
A few minutes later the Leader of the Opposition posted a message on Twitter
announcing Labour’s position.
Miliband sounds like he'd fit right in with the American Democratic party.
These are not times for partisan politics nor are they times to make decisions based on polls. Unfortunately, with no great power to lead the world's democracies, that's exactly what's happening.
Overnight, both the United States and the United Kingdom indicated that they are putting off their attack on Syria for a few days (in line with a request made on Wednesday by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon).
President Barack Obama said he had not yet made his decision regarding a U.S. strike on Syria during an interview with PBS NewsHour senior correspondents Judy Woodruff and Gwen Ifill. The president said that Syrian president Bashar al-Assad's regime alleged use of chemical weapons would factor into his calculation and he warned that the Assad should be held accountable.
Here's President Obama. Let's go to the videotape.
Meanwhile, Britain's David Cameron also seems to be getting cold feet.
The permanent five members of the UN Security Council held an
emergency meeting on Wednesday morning to discuss the draft, at which
the UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant presented language
condemning "the attack by the Assad regime, and authorizing all
necessary measures under Chapter seven of the UN Charter to protect
civilians from chemical weapons."
Western powers assert that Assad used chemical weapons on civilians in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta on August 21, killing over a thousand and wounding thousands more.
Russia called the draft resolution "premature."
The
US now "does not see an avenue forward" through the Security Council,
State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf said on Wednesday after
the meeting adjourned. "We are not proceeding with a vote on this draft
resolution."
...
But in Britain, Prime Minister David Cameron was forced to change tack
on Wednesday evening in the face of growing opposition from members of
the UK Parliament.
He vowed to resubmit new language to the UN Security Council, wait until the UN investigation on the ground
in Syria completed its work over the weekend, and then call for a
second vote from Parliament for authorization of military force.
Britain's
opposition Labour Party, under Ed Miliband's leadership, threatened
late Wednesday to vote against the motion to participate in military
intervention in Syria without first exhausting UN procedures.
Facing
defeat in the pending Parliament vote on Thursday, Cameron-- after
reconvening its members for the crisis meeting-- shelved a military
response for now to avoid the standoff.
The move appeared to put the breaks on any immediate action in the coming days.
What does 'exhausting UN procedures' mean? Does anyone really believe that Russia and/or China is going to approve an attack on Syria? Jordan also says it's not going to get involved (except that it could be a target for Syrian retribution since it is housing thousands of Syrian refugees. But guess who does want to be involved in an attack on Syria....
Turkey placed its armed forces on alert
on Wednesday, in light of possible security threats from Syria as the
West continued planning military action against the Damascus regime in
response to the Ghouta attack, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
said on Wednesday.
Davutoglu asserted that "all options are on the
table" for Turkey to address the use of chemical weapons in Syria on a
massive scale.
Turkey's allies in Washington, London and Paris
have been weighing military intervention in Syria's harsh civil war
since last week. US and British navy destroyers have been deployed to
the eastern Mediterranean in the event President Barack Obama chooses to
order a strike.
"We are now at a more alert position... Turkey
will take whatever measures necessary within the framework of its own
strategic interests," Davutoglu told reporters.
"The Turkish armed
forces have the mandate to take every measure against any security
threat from Syria or elsewhere... and retaliate within the rules of
engagement."
Turkey has been bullish on Syria throughout its civil
war, openly supporting rebels fighting Assad-- including the al-Nusra
Front, an affiliate of al-Qaida.
On Monday, one senior Turkish
official told a local media outlet that his government was considering
making their Incirlik air base available to NATO should the Western
coalition, led by the United States, choose to proceed with military
intervention.
Incirlik was used by NATO in operations in Iraq and Kosovo.
British government sources said talks between Western leaders were
ongoing and that any agreed upon military action could be exercised in
the coming week.
Cameron and Obama were due to speak on Monday or Tuesday in a continuation of talks held on Saturday between the two about the Syria issue.
US
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey was also scheduled
to meet with his British counterpart General Nick Houghton on Monday in
Jordan to discuss viable options.
An unnamed British government source told the Times that
the leading option for such an attack would be a "very targeted attack"
launched from warships in the Mediterranean. According to the source,
the UK was pushing for a launch date within the next ten days with the
aim to "prevent and deter" the Syrian regime from any future WMD
attacks.
Meanwhile, the UK has reportedly been preparing naval vessels for a possible US-led attack on Syria, according to London-based The Daily Telegraph.
...
"We have moved from ‘should we respond?’ to ‘how do we respond?’” the Times quoted a spokeswoman for Cameron as saying.
There's just one small problem: Obama is incapable of making any decisions that might hurt Muslims. So he's gone to play golf instead. What could go wrong?
Back to 2009-11? Obama snubs Netanyahu in Maccabiah opening remarks
The 19th Maccabiah - the largest Jewish athletic event in the world - opened Thursday night at Teddy Stadium. The opening ceremony included videotaped remarks from President Hussein Obama who violated protocol by 'forgetting' to mention Israel's Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu.
In a break from protocol, President Obama declined to mention Prime Minister
Netanyahu in his recorded remarks for the opening ceremony last night of the
Maccabiah Games in Jerusalem. Instead Mr. Obama wished, President Shimon Peres another happy birthday as he already did in President Obama's recorded
remarks when celebrations were held recently to mark Peres' 90th birthday.
Later that evening President Obama called PM Netanyahu on the phone to press
him to make further concessions to Mahmoud Abbas.
The recording of President Obama’s remarks begin at [2:27:22] in the recording of
the opening ceremony available on Youtube [the video starts in Hebrew but will switch to English when Obama comes on. CiJ] – they are followed by greetings
of the UK PM that, following protocol, do greet PM Netanyahu [ends at 2:29:12. CiJ].
British Prime Minister David Cameron called the beheading of a British soldier by the thuggish Muslim convert pictured above a 'betrayal of Islam.' Really?
"This was not
just an attack on Britain and on the British way of life, it was also a betrayal
of Islam and of the Muslim communities who give so much to our country. There is
nothing in Islam that justifies this truly dreadful act."
The British
Muslim community had been quick to condemn the attack, but Muslim leaders
speaking to the British media cautioned the British government against being
quick to brand the killing a terror attack. The appeal apparently fell on deaf
ears.
"This country will be absolutely resolute in its stand against
violent extremism and terror," Cameron said, on the steps of his Downing Street
residence. "We will never give in to terror or terrorism in any of its forms."
'We're not terrorists, and we'll behead any infidel who says we are.'
Cameron doesn't get it. It's not a betrayal of Islam. Murdering infidels is what Islam is all about.
Sounds like he and US Secretary of State John FN Kerry (see previous post) were trained at the same school for morons. And I thought Kerry was French....
With the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter languishing, and with the US-made F-22 scrapped, Britain is stepping into the vacuum, marketing its Typhoon fighter jets to countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE.Some people in Britain are not pleased.
Mr Cameron's candid stance on arms sales - which is unsual for Prime Ministers
- was criticised by human rights campaigners. Amnesty International UK's
head of policy and government affairs Allan Hogarth said: "Selling arms
to countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE should only be considered if there
are absolutely watertight guarantees over them not being used to commit
human rights violations.
"Saudi Arabia has been the recipient of record-breaking arms deals
involving the UK, yet these have been highly secretive and there's been
little or no follow-up over how the weaponry was used."
Amnesty said that in 2009 the Saudi air force used "UK-supplied Tornado
fighter-bombers in attacks in Yemen which killed hundreds -possibly
thousands - of civilians".
But speaking in Dubai before later visits to the United Arab Emirates and
Saudi Arabia, Mr Cameron said: "We have one of the strictest regimes
anywhere in the world for sales of defence equipment but we do believe that
countries have a right to self-defence.
“We do believe countries have a right to defend themselves. And we do believe
Britain has important defence industries that employ over 300,000 people and
so that sort of business is completely legitimate and right."
Of course, if God forbid those planes were used to bomb Israel, Amnesty would be among the first to stand up and cheer.
Turkey has denied a report in Haaretz that claimed that the UK is mediating a reconciliation between Turkey and Israel. This is from the first link (Hat Tip: Joshua I).
The report claimed British Prime Minister David Cameron had asked Netanyahu whether he wanted to deliver a message to Erdoğan ahead of a meeting between the former and Erdoğan in London on July 27. The daily did not report on the content of Netanyahu’s message, but confirmed that Cameron had delivered it.
However, a Turkish official denied the report, telling Today’s Zaman that “Israel already knows what it needs to do, and that is to apologize to Turkey. Mediation by another country is not required for that.”
Relations between the long-time allies in the Middle East deteriorated sharply after Israeli commandos killed eight Turks and one Turkish-American during the 2010 raid of an aid ship trying to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza. Turkey has sued Israel at international platforms and courts, demanding an official apology and compensation for the families of the victims.
Israel has rejected these demands and claims its soldiers acted in self-defense. Turkey has also expelled the Israeli envoy and cut military ties with Israel in protest of the Israeli refusal to apologize for the killings.
There are two inaccuracies here, which are repeated over and over again by the Turkish media. One is that 'all' Turkey wants is an apology and compensation. They've demanded much more than that.
Second, the article makes it sound like the problems between Israel and Turkey started with the Mavi Marmara. That's not true. The Mavi Marmara incident was orchestrated by Turkey to lead to a breakdown in relations with Israel.
So no, I don't expect a reconciliation anytime soon.
At Thursday night's state dinner in Washington, a groveling British Prime Minister, David Cameron, said that President Obama had ‘pressed the reset button on the moral authority of the entire free world’. Melanie Phillips looks at some of the ways in which Obama has done so. She comes up with quite a lengthy list, including the following:
Neutered American power abroad and extended the reach of the state at home
Appeased Iran while dumping on its designated target of annihilation, Israel
Appeased the Palestinians while dumping on the state they vow to destroy, Israel
Given Iran time to bring its genocide nuclear bomb to fruition
Helped consolidate in power the repressive and murderous Iranian regime by ignoring the plight of its political dissidents, women, gays and other victims of Iranian state terror
Allowed Iran to become the regional hegemon, thus in turn pushing moderate Arab states into its arms
Empowered the fanatical Islamist Muslim Brotherhood throughout the Arab world
Helped bring to power a regime in Egypt which is oppressive to its own people and hostile to Israel and the west
Melanie points out that Cameron's speech says a lot about David Cameron as well. Perhaps, Cameron should offer Obama a bust of Neville Chamberlain to replace the one of Winston Churchill that he sent back to England early in his Presidency.
British PM Cameron doesn't support military action now
In an interview with NBC’s Brian Williams, Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain expressed the need to continue placing ‘massive pressure’ on Iran without resorting to military action.
This is sad, but unfortunately a sign of the times. Anonymous 'Israeli officials' are calling President Obama 'soft' on Iran, and instead pointing to the leadership of the British and the French.
"The administration is still not acting in full force to impose significant sanctions against Tehran," one of the officials told Ynet Sunday night.
On the other hand, officials in Jerusalem lauded French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron. "France and the UK have begun to act determinedly, while Obama's administration has yet to formulate a policy that is sufficiently severe," another official said.
"While the House of Representatives and the Senate are promoting (anti-Iran) legislation, the White House is operating according to an ideology which could be defined as 'hesitant.' The Iranian issue calls for a clear stance, but the administration has yet to take the necessary measures to significantly hurt the ayatollahs' regime."
US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro told reporters Thursday Israel and the US enjoy close bilateral cooperation on the threat of a nuclear Iran.
"There is no issue that we coordinate more closely on than Iran," Shapiro told reporters in Tel Aviv.
"A nuclear Iran, he added, is "a real threat to Israeli security, ours and our allies', and that is why we are determined to prevent this from happening."
But officials in Jerusalem are not satisfied with Obama's policy on Iran. Defense Minister Ehud Barak said during a recent interview that the international community must impose harsher sanctions against the Islamic Republic in order to incapacitate the Iranian regime and force it to suspend its nuclear program.
Obama is a 'success.' The US is no longer the leader in international affairs. What could go wrong?
London's Daily Mail is reporting that the United States and the United Kingdom have drawn up a plan to go to war with Iran over its nuclear weapons program (Hat Tip: Jihad Watch).
The UK and U.S. are drawing up plans to attack Iran amid growing tensions in the Middle East, it was claimed last night.
Barack Obama and David Cameron are preparing for war after reports that Iran now has enough enriched uranium for four nuclear weapons.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s hardline regime in Tehran has been linked to three assassination plots on foreign soil, according to senior officials in Whitehall.
...
The UK would be likely to agree to any U.S. decision to invade, even though the Ministry of Defence are stretched to breaking point by swingeing budget cuts and wars in Afghanistan and Libya.
An MoD spokesman said: ‘The British government believes that a dual track strategy of pressure and engagement is the best approach to address the threat from Iran’s nuclear programme and avoid regional conflict.
‘We want a negotiated solution – but all options should be kept on the table.’
A special unit at the MoD has been instructed to work out the UK's strategy if the Army should invade Iran.
War planners will look at potential deployments of Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles and RAF fighter jets armed with precision-guided Paveway IV and Brimstone bombs and missiles, surveillance planes and air-to-air refuelling.
Senior Whitehall figures have expressed alarm that Iran appeared ‘newly aggressive – and we are not quite sure why’.
They go on to attribute some of the tension to 'sabre-rattling' in Israel, but let's face it: If there was nothing in these reports to back up Israel's claims, no one would be listening to us.
The United Kingdom has bowed out of the Durban III conference.
The Prime Minister is understood to have personally made the decision that the UK should not take part in the event at the United Nations headquarters later this month.
The JC understands that the Prime Minister did not want the UK to be seen to celebrate the anniversary of an event associated with antisemitism.
Australia and the United States have already announced that they would boycott the event, with the US condemning it for commemorating "ugly displays of intolerance and antisemitism".
The UK voted against the resolution establishing the conference "in light of" the events of 2009 but in June a Foreign Office spokesman said a decision about attendance had not yet been made.
However today Mr Cameron said that after "careful consideration" he had decided Britain should not attend.
Of course, this might be a bit of a Pyrrhic victory if Britain then turns around and votes in favor of the 'Palestinians' unilateral declaration of independence at the UN next week. But for now, we have something to celebrate.
You know things are going badly in Britain when Iran presses the Bobbies to 'show restraint' and Libya says that British Prime Minister David Cameron has lost legitimacy and should resign.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
