"I am not a Jew hater. I am a proud supporter of Israel, even if the policies I cheer for Israel and America to enact will hasten Israel's demise." ~ The Guesser
The Pathology of Jewish Anti-Semitism
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/steven-plaut/the-pathology-of-jewish-anti-semitism/
The Pathology of Jewish Anti-Semitism
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/steven-plaut/the-pathology-of-jewish-anti-semitism/
Now he's just unabashedly in Lying Ace Territory, claiming most US Jews agree with his warped views. That has been disproved time after time, poll after poll, and the last 2 National elections. Hopefully most Jews in Israel do the right thing in the elections, and give Israel the best chance they have for peace going forward.
Keep repeating yourself moron. I notice after you get home from stocking the shelves this is always the first thread you bump with your vacuous rhetorical nonsense.
"Iran can be trusted to honor agreements, so let's keep talking. But the prime minister of the ONLY JEWISH NATION in the world? He gotta go!" ~ The Guesser (not an anti-Semite)
"Iran can be trusted to honor agreements, so let's keep talking. But the prime minister of the ONLY JEWISH NATION in the world? He gotta go!" ~ The Guesser (not an anti-Semite)
Keep repeating yourself moron. I notice after you get home from stocking the shelves this is always the first thread you bump with your vacuous rhetorical nonsense.
"Iran can be trusted to honor agreements, so let's keep talking. But the prime minister of the ONLY JEWISH NATION in the world? He gotta go!" ~ The Guesser (not an anti-Semite)
You're getting closer and closer to full membership in the insane wingnut cult down here. You've got the lying down, you've got the meaningless insults down, you've got the intolerance of other views down, you've got putting things in quotes and crediting to the person that were never said down. You will have to drop your tolerance for other lifestyles, but once you do, you're in. You should be proud.
What an absolute surprise. Another Guesser Google search result is foiled by REALITY!
The Muslim ring around the Oslo synagogue was a fabrication. It wasn't 1,300 Muslims. It was 20 Muslims, one of whom is an out and out anti-Semite.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/…/organizer-of-muslim-peace-ri…/
Organizer of Muslim Synagogue “Peace Ring” Gave “Why I Hate Jews” Speech | FrontPage Magazine
A lot of media outlets have fallen for the story of Muslims organizing to protect a synagogue. It's a great media op scene, but it ignores the fact that synagogues...
frontpagemag.com
What an absolute surprise. Another Guesser Google search result is foiled by REALITY!
The Muslim ring around the Oslo synagogue was a fabrication. It wasn't 1,300 Muslims. It was 20 Muslims, one of whom is an out and out anti-Semite.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/…/organizer-of-muslim-peace-ri…/
Organizer of Muslim Synagogue “Peace Ring” Gave “Why I Hate Jews” Speech | FrontPage Magazine
A lot of media outlets have fallen for the story of Muslims organizing to protect a synagogue. It's a great media op scene, but it ignores the fact that synagogues...
frontpagemag.com
What a shock. Scott quoting from a Far Right Insane Website, and actually believing it. Luckily, sane folks(of Which Scott is getting further and further away from, as he tries to fit in with the Insane Sickos down here), report on the TRUTH, which again is more and more of a Foreign concept to Scott, while he lets Insane hatred consume him.
[h=2]Norway’s Muslims Protect Oslo Synagogue in Sabbath ‘Peace Ring’[/h] More than 1,000 young Muslims encircled the Oslo synagogue on Saturday in a symbolic 'peace ring' to protect Jews as they prayed on the Sabbath.
By: Hana Levi Julian
Published: February 22nd, 2015
The Oslo Synagogue, built in 1920. The congregation was established earlier, in 1892.
Photo Credit: Grzegorz Wysocki / Wikimedia Commons
A group of young Muslims organized a symbolic “ring of peace” to encircle the sole functioning synagogue in Oslo as Jew prayed within on Saturday.
At least 1,300 were inspired to join them in the initiative, which came in solidarity with Jews who were targeted last weekend by a radical Islamist terrorist in Denmark.
“This shows there are many more peacemakers than warmakers,” 37-year-old Zeeshan Abdullah, one of the organizers, told the crowd.
“There is still hope for humanity, for peace and love across religious differences and background,” he said.
Still, Norwegian sharp shooters were deployed on buildings around the synagogue. Police superintendent Steiner Hausvik told reporters, “It has been calm as we expected. We had no reason to expect any trouble but we were prepared.”
Jewish community spokesperson Ervin Kohn expressed gratitude and said it was “unique” that Muslims stood up “to this degree against anti-Semitism,” adding that “this fills us with hope, particularly as it’s a grassroots movement of young Muslims.”
Kohn advised the rest of the world to “look to Norway.”
There are only approximately 1,000 Jews left in Norway’s population of 5.3 million, while immigration of Muslims, about 3 percent of the population, continues to grow.
Last weekend two people died and five police officers were wounded in two attacks several hours apart by the same radical Islamist terrorist. The suspect, 22-year-old Omar el-Hussein, targeted a free speech event at a cafe and then a Bat Mitzvah at the Copenhagen Great Synagogue in Denmark.
Hussein, born in Denmark to Palestinian parents, had reportedly been released from jail only two weeks earlier after serving a two-year prison term for “grievous bodily harm.”
About the Author: Hana Levi Julian is a Middle East news analyst with a degree in Mass Communication and Journalism from Southern Connecticut State University. A past columnist with The Jewish Press and senior editor at Arutz 7, Ms. Julian has written for Babble.com, Chabad.org and other media outlets, in addition to her years working in broadcast journalism.
[h=2]Livni: Bibi Tearing US-Israel Relationship to Pieces[/h]On tour of northern border, Zionist Camp chairpersons Livni and Herzog attack Netanyahu for defense decisions and other 'failures.'
By Hezki Ezra, Cynthia Blank
First Publish: 2/23/2015, 7:01 PM
QUICK WATCH1:01
Zionist Camp Chairpersons Yitzhak Herzog and Tzipi Livni toured the northern border Monday, making it a point to continue their attacks on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
"Bibi's failure against Hamas in the Gaza envelope severely impairs our deterrence against Hezbollah on the northern border," Herzog charged.
"Bibi failed in security, just as he failed in housing, the cost of living, and reducing social inequalities," the Labor leader continued. "Netanyahu is running away from responsibility - we take responsibility - and your security is our responsibility."
Livni added that "Israel's security and our power to deter attacks is based on a strong army and our relationship with the United States, that the same Netanyahu would tear to pieces."
"I took part in the decision-making process for three wars and dozens of operations. I saw up close how important the international community is to give the IDF the scope to win," she added.
The Zionist Camp's choice for Defense Minister, Amos Yadlin, made similar comments recently, noting that Iran and Hezbollah saw Israel's hesitancy during Operation Protective Edge and decided to strike.
"Countries in the region saw that Hamas was not hit strongly enough, how Israel granted immunity to its leadership instead of hurting it, and how the government conducted negotiations for a ceasefire. This is a violation of Israel's deterrence and we need to restore it," the former IDF General said.
Bringing the discussion Monday to the future elections, Livni stressed that if Netanyahu is elected prime minister again, "he will send IDF soldiers to fight battles with their hands tied behind their backs - without legitimacy to fight, without freedom of movement, and with legal threats from the International Criminal Court at the Hague."
"This will significantly hurt our ability to win a war militarily and politically," she added.
Livni then addressed financial matters, forcefully stating that Labor-Hatnua "will also change Israel's priorities. All the money thrown down the drain to settlements, we will transfer to the periphery and the confrontation lines."
By Hezki Ezra, Cynthia Blank
First Publish: 2/23/2015, 7:01 PM
QUICK WATCH1:01
Zionist Camp Chairpersons Yitzhak Herzog and Tzipi Livni toured the northern border Monday, making it a point to continue their attacks on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
"Bibi's failure against Hamas in the Gaza envelope severely impairs our deterrence against Hezbollah on the northern border," Herzog charged.
"Bibi failed in security, just as he failed in housing, the cost of living, and reducing social inequalities," the Labor leader continued. "Netanyahu is running away from responsibility - we take responsibility - and your security is our responsibility."
Livni added that "Israel's security and our power to deter attacks is based on a strong army and our relationship with the United States, that the same Netanyahu would tear to pieces."
"I took part in the decision-making process for three wars and dozens of operations. I saw up close how important the international community is to give the IDF the scope to win," she added.
The Zionist Camp's choice for Defense Minister, Amos Yadlin, made similar comments recently, noting that Iran and Hezbollah saw Israel's hesitancy during Operation Protective Edge and decided to strike.
"Countries in the region saw that Hamas was not hit strongly enough, how Israel granted immunity to its leadership instead of hurting it, and how the government conducted negotiations for a ceasefire. This is a violation of Israel's deterrence and we need to restore it," the former IDF General said.
Bringing the discussion Monday to the future elections, Livni stressed that if Netanyahu is elected prime minister again, "he will send IDF soldiers to fight battles with their hands tied behind their backs - without legitimacy to fight, without freedom of movement, and with legal threats from the International Criminal Court at the Hague."
"This will significantly hurt our ability to win a war militarily and politically," she added.
Livni then addressed financial matters, forcefully stating that Labor-Hatnua "will also change Israel's priorities. All the money thrown down the drain to settlements, we will transfer to the periphery and the confrontation lines."
Ali Chishti once blamed Jews for 9/11. He spent Saturday guarding an Oslo synagogue.
Updated by Amanda Taub on February 23, 2015, 3:20 p.m. ET @amandataub
Don't miss stories. Follow Vox!
It did not take long for this weekend's uplifting news from Oslo, Norway, where a group of Muslims formed a symbolic ring of protection around a synagogue, to take on a tinge of controversy. Media reports revealed that one of the organizers, Ali Chishti, had previously made anti-Semitic and homophobic remarks in a 2009 speech.
But Chishti's past remarks — which he has expressly disavowed — don't undermine the message of the peace ring at all. Rather, his evolution from an angry younger man who embraced discriminatory, radical ideas to a more mature adult who has repudiated those views as wrong and "outrageous" makes the symbolism of the demonstration all the more powerful.
An organizer of the pro-Jewish solidarity demonstration once made an anti-Semitic speech
The peace ring was initially a straightforward story of co-existence and tolerance, of Muslims demonstrating support for Jews and a commitment to stopping anti-Semitic violence, with their own bodies if need be. The previous week's attack on a Copenhagen synagogue had deepened fears of violence in European Jewish communities, and Oslo's Muslims wanted to show solidarity with Norwegian Jews, and to publicly reject Islamist anti-Semitism. Over a thousand people reportedly locked arms around the Oslo synagogue on Saturday to send that message; and a local Jewish leader called it a message of hope for the world. A similar demonstration is planned in Stockholm.
But when it was revealed that Chishti, an organizer, had previously blamed Jews for the September 11 attacks, it was treated as having tainted or "marred" the peace ring and its symbolism.
In a 2009 speech, Chishti blamed Jews for the September 11 attacks and implied that they had been behind the Mumbai terrorist attacks of 2008 as well. His speech was entitled "why I hate Jews and gays," and while Chishti claims not to have chosen that title, he apparently did accept it. There is no contesting the hateful, anti-Semitic nature of the speech.
But Chishti himself has rejected the speech and the ideas it contained. He now calls those views "outrageous" and says that in the years since he gave that speech, he has developed a more nuanced relationship with Islam. Now, just six years after making his anti-Semitic speech, he is spending a Saturday night guarding an Oslo synagogue.
In other words, Chishti has done exactly what one would hope someone with radical and harmful views would do: he reconsidered them, came to the conclusion that they are wrong, and then reached out to the community he had hurt and tried to make amends.
Chishti's experience sends a powerful message of hope
Chishti's experience is a powerful reminder that radicalization is not a one-way path, and that extremist groups like ISIS are not the only model of Islam that can attract the Muslim youth of Europe.
In another time, that message might have been a banal foregone conclusion. But today, amid controversy over whether Muslims can or should assimilate into European communities, and whether they pose a threat to the safety of Europe's Jews in particular, it is an important, even controversial, message of hope.
That matters, because the possibility of progressions like Chishti's is a subject of political controversy in Europe right now. Many groups that oppose Muslim immigration do so by arguing that Muslims cannot or will not integrate into European culture, and that they are prone to dangerous radicalism. Conversely, Muslim communities have grown concerned about the appeal of groups like ISIS to young European Muslims, especially those who feel angry or alienated.
Chishti himself, and the protest that he organized, are counter-examples to those narratives. And this matters. If Western society's goal is one of tolerance and co-existence, it's important to recognize and honor Norwegian Muslims who have never said an anti-Semitic word and who gathered in support of Norwegian Jews at the Oslo synagogue. But it's also important to recognize that co-existence can sometimes be more complicated than that, and that people who reject their own intolerance are just as important as those who reject it in others.
Updated by Amanda Taub on February 23, 2015, 3:20 p.m. ET @amandataub
Don't miss stories. Follow Vox!
It did not take long for this weekend's uplifting news from Oslo, Norway, where a group of Muslims formed a symbolic ring of protection around a synagogue, to take on a tinge of controversy. Media reports revealed that one of the organizers, Ali Chishti, had previously made anti-Semitic and homophobic remarks in a 2009 speech.
But Chishti's past remarks — which he has expressly disavowed — don't undermine the message of the peace ring at all. Rather, his evolution from an angry younger man who embraced discriminatory, radical ideas to a more mature adult who has repudiated those views as wrong and "outrageous" makes the symbolism of the demonstration all the more powerful.
An organizer of the pro-Jewish solidarity demonstration once made an anti-Semitic speech
The peace ring was initially a straightforward story of co-existence and tolerance, of Muslims demonstrating support for Jews and a commitment to stopping anti-Semitic violence, with their own bodies if need be. The previous week's attack on a Copenhagen synagogue had deepened fears of violence in European Jewish communities, and Oslo's Muslims wanted to show solidarity with Norwegian Jews, and to publicly reject Islamist anti-Semitism. Over a thousand people reportedly locked arms around the Oslo synagogue on Saturday to send that message; and a local Jewish leader called it a message of hope for the world. A similar demonstration is planned in Stockholm.
But when it was revealed that Chishti, an organizer, had previously blamed Jews for the September 11 attacks, it was treated as having tainted or "marred" the peace ring and its symbolism.
In a 2009 speech, Chishti blamed Jews for the September 11 attacks and implied that they had been behind the Mumbai terrorist attacks of 2008 as well. His speech was entitled "why I hate Jews and gays," and while Chishti claims not to have chosen that title, he apparently did accept it. There is no contesting the hateful, anti-Semitic nature of the speech.
But Chishti himself has rejected the speech and the ideas it contained. He now calls those views "outrageous" and says that in the years since he gave that speech, he has developed a more nuanced relationship with Islam. Now, just six years after making his anti-Semitic speech, he is spending a Saturday night guarding an Oslo synagogue.
In other words, Chishti has done exactly what one would hope someone with radical and harmful views would do: he reconsidered them, came to the conclusion that they are wrong, and then reached out to the community he had hurt and tried to make amends.
Chishti's experience sends a powerful message of hope
Chishti's experience is a powerful reminder that radicalization is not a one-way path, and that extremist groups like ISIS are not the only model of Islam that can attract the Muslim youth of Europe.
In another time, that message might have been a banal foregone conclusion. But today, amid controversy over whether Muslims can or should assimilate into European communities, and whether they pose a threat to the safety of Europe's Jews in particular, it is an important, even controversial, message of hope.
That matters, because the possibility of progressions like Chishti's is a subject of political controversy in Europe right now. Many groups that oppose Muslim immigration do so by arguing that Muslims cannot or will not integrate into European culture, and that they are prone to dangerous radicalism. Conversely, Muslim communities have grown concerned about the appeal of groups like ISIS to young European Muslims, especially those who feel angry or alienated.
Chishti himself, and the protest that he organized, are counter-examples to those narratives. And this matters. If Western society's goal is one of tolerance and co-existence, it's important to recognize and honor Norwegian Muslims who have never said an anti-Semitic word and who gathered in support of Norwegian Jews at the Oslo synagogue. But it's also important to recognize that co-existence can sometimes be more complicated than that, and that people who reject their own intolerance are just as important as those who reject it in others.
Leaked cables show Netanyahu’s Iran bomb claim contradicted by Mossad
Gulf between Israeli secret service and PM revealed in documents shared with the Guardian along with other secrets including CIA bids to contact Hamas
• Read the leaked document here
Netanyahu’s Iran bomb claim contradicted by Mossad, leaked spy cables show Seumas Milne, Ewen MacAskill and Clayton Swisher
Monday 23 February 2015 13.06 EST Last modified on Tuesday 24 February 2015 01.47 EST
Binyamin Netanyahu’s dramatic declaration to world leaders in 2012 that Iran was about a year away from making a nuclear bomb was contradicted by his own secret service, according to a top-secret Mossad document.
It is part of a cache of hundreds of dossiers, files and cables from the world’s major intelligence services – one of the biggest spy leaks in recent times.
Brandishing a cartoon of a bomb with a red line to illustrate his point, the Israeli prime minister warned the UN in New York that Iran would be able to build nuclear weapons the following year and called for action to halt the process.
But in a secret report shared with South Africa a few weeks later, Israel’s intelligence agency concluded that Iran was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons”. The report highlights the gulf between the public claims and rhetoric of top Israeli politicians and the assessments of Israel’s military and intelligence establishment.
An extract from the document Photograph: The Guardian The disclosure comes as tensions between Israel and its staunchest ally, the US, have dramatically increased ahead of Netanyahu’s planned address to the US Congress on 3 March.
The White House fears the Israeli leader’s anticipated inflammatory rhetoric could damage sensitive negotiations between Tehran and the world’s six big powers over Iran’s nuclear programme. The deadline to agree on a framework is in late March, with the final settlement to come on 30 June. Netanyahu has vowed to block an agreement he claims would give Iran access to a nuclear weapons capability.
The US president, Barack Obama, will not meet Netanyahu during his visit, saying protocol precludes a meeting so close to next month’s general election in Israel.
The documents, almost all marked as confidential or top secret, span almost a decade of global intelligence traffic, from 2006 to December last year. It has been leaked to the al-Jazeera investigative unit and shared with the Guardian.
The papers include details of operations against al-Qaida, Islamic State and other terrorist organisations, but also the targeting of environmental activists.
The files reveal that:
• The CIA attempted to establish contact with Hamas in spite of a US ban.
• South Korean intelligence targeted the leader of Greenpeace.
• Barack Obama “threatened” the Palestinian president to withdraw a bid for recognition of Palestine at the UN.
• South African intelligence spied on Russia over a controversial $100m joint satellite deal.
The cache, which has been independently authenticated by the Guardian, mainly involves exchanges between South Africa’s intelligence agency and its counterparts around the world. It is not the entire volume of traffic but a selective leak.
One of the biggest hauls is from Mossad. But there are also documents from Russia’s FSB, which is responsible for counter-terrorism. Such leaks of Russian material are extremely rare.
Other spy agencies caught up in the trawl include those of the US, Britain, France, Jordan, the UAE, Oman and several African nations.
The scale of the leak, coming 20 months after US whistleblower Edward Snowden handed over tens of thousands of NSA and GCHQ documents to the Guardian, highlights the increasing inability of intelligence agencies to keep their secrets secure.
While the Snowden trove revealed the scale of technological surveillance, the latest spy cables deal with espionage at street level – known to the intelligence agencies as human intelligence, or “humint”. They include surveillance reports, inter-agency information trading, disinformation and backbiting, as well as evidence of infiltration, theft and blackmail.
The leaks show how Africa is becoming increasingly important for global espionage, with the US and other western states building up their presence on the continent and China expanding its economic influence. One serving intelligence officer told the Guardian: “South Africa is the El Dorado of espionage.”
Africa has also become caught up in the US, Israeli and British covert global campaigns to stem the spread of Iranian influence, tighten sanctions and block its nuclear programme.
The Mossad briefing about Iran’s nuclear programme in 2012 was in stark contrast to the alarmist tone set by Netanyahu, who has long presented the Iranian nuclear programme as an existential threat to Israel and a huge risk to world security. The Israeli prime minister told the UN: “By next spring, at most by next summer, at current enrichment rates, they will have finished the medium enrichment and move[d] on to the final stage. From there, it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb.”
He said his information was not based on secret information or military intelligence but International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports.
Behind the scenes, Mossad took a different view. In a report shared with South African spies on 22 October 2012 – but likely written earlier – it conceded that Iran was “working to close gaps in areas that appear legitimate, such as enrichment reactors, which will reduce the time required to produce weapons from the time the instruction is actually given”.
But the report also states that Iran “does not appear to be ready” to enrich uranium to the higher levels necessary for nuclear weapons. To build a bomb requires enrichment to 90%. Mossad estimated that Iran then had “about 100kg of material enriched to 20%” (which was later diluted or converted under the terms of the 2013 Geneva agreement). Iran has always said it is developing a nuclear programme for civilian energy purposes.
Last week, Netanyahu’s office repeated the claim that “Iran is closer than ever today to obtaining enriched material for a nuclear bomb” in a statement in response to an IAEA report.
A senior Israeli government official said there was no contradiction between Netanyahu’s statements on the Iranian nuclear threat and “the quotes in your story – allegedly from Israeli intelligence”. Both the prime minister and Mossad said Iran was enriching uranium in order to produce weapons, he added.
“Israel believes the proposed nuclear deal with Iran is a bad deal, for it enables the world’s foremost terror state to create capabilities to produce the elements necessary for a nuclear bomb,” he said.
However, Mossad had been at odds with Netanyahu on Iran before. The former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, who left office in December 2010, let it be known that he had opposed an order from Netanyahu to prepare a military attack on Iran.
Other members of Israel’s security establishment were riled by Netanyahu’s rhetoric on the Iranian nuclear threat and his advocacy of military confrontation. In April 2012, a former head of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, accused Netanyahu of “messianic” political leadership for pressing for military action, saying he and the then defence minister, Ehud Barak, were misleading the public on the Iran issue. Benny Gantz, the Israeli military chief of staff, said decisions on tackling Iran “must be made carefully, out of historic responsibility but without hysteria”.
There were also suspicions in Washington that Netanyahu was seeking to bounce Obama into taking a more hawkish line on Iran.
A few days before Netanyahu’s speech to the UN, the then US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, accused the Israeli prime minister of trying to force the US into a corner. “The fact is … presidents of the United States, prime ministers of Israel or any other country … don’t have, you know, a bunch of little red lines that determine their decisions,” he said.
“What they have are facts that are presented to them about what a country is up to, and then they weigh what kind of action is needed in order to deal with that situation. I mean, that’s the real world. Red lines are kind of political arguments that are used to try to put people in a corner.”
Gulf between Israeli secret service and PM revealed in documents shared with the Guardian along with other secrets including CIA bids to contact Hamas
• Read the leaked document here
Netanyahu’s Iran bomb claim contradicted by Mossad, leaked spy cables show Seumas Milne, Ewen MacAskill and Clayton Swisher
Monday 23 February 2015 13.06 EST Last modified on Tuesday 24 February 2015 01.47 EST
Binyamin Netanyahu’s dramatic declaration to world leaders in 2012 that Iran was about a year away from making a nuclear bomb was contradicted by his own secret service, according to a top-secret Mossad document.
It is part of a cache of hundreds of dossiers, files and cables from the world’s major intelligence services – one of the biggest spy leaks in recent times.
Brandishing a cartoon of a bomb with a red line to illustrate his point, the Israeli prime minister warned the UN in New York that Iran would be able to build nuclear weapons the following year and called for action to halt the process.
But in a secret report shared with South Africa a few weeks later, Israel’s intelligence agency concluded that Iran was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons”. The report highlights the gulf between the public claims and rhetoric of top Israeli politicians and the assessments of Israel’s military and intelligence establishment.
The White House fears the Israeli leader’s anticipated inflammatory rhetoric could damage sensitive negotiations between Tehran and the world’s six big powers over Iran’s nuclear programme. The deadline to agree on a framework is in late March, with the final settlement to come on 30 June. Netanyahu has vowed to block an agreement he claims would give Iran access to a nuclear weapons capability.
The US president, Barack Obama, will not meet Netanyahu during his visit, saying protocol precludes a meeting so close to next month’s general election in Israel.
The documents, almost all marked as confidential or top secret, span almost a decade of global intelligence traffic, from 2006 to December last year. It has been leaked to the al-Jazeera investigative unit and shared with the Guardian.
The papers include details of operations against al-Qaida, Islamic State and other terrorist organisations, but also the targeting of environmental activists.
The files reveal that:
• The CIA attempted to establish contact with Hamas in spite of a US ban.
• South Korean intelligence targeted the leader of Greenpeace.
• Barack Obama “threatened” the Palestinian president to withdraw a bid for recognition of Palestine at the UN.
• South African intelligence spied on Russia over a controversial $100m joint satellite deal.
The cache, which has been independently authenticated by the Guardian, mainly involves exchanges between South Africa’s intelligence agency and its counterparts around the world. It is not the entire volume of traffic but a selective leak.
One of the biggest hauls is from Mossad. But there are also documents from Russia’s FSB, which is responsible for counter-terrorism. Such leaks of Russian material are extremely rare.
Other spy agencies caught up in the trawl include those of the US, Britain, France, Jordan, the UAE, Oman and several African nations.
The scale of the leak, coming 20 months after US whistleblower Edward Snowden handed over tens of thousands of NSA and GCHQ documents to the Guardian, highlights the increasing inability of intelligence agencies to keep their secrets secure.
While the Snowden trove revealed the scale of technological surveillance, the latest spy cables deal with espionage at street level – known to the intelligence agencies as human intelligence, or “humint”. They include surveillance reports, inter-agency information trading, disinformation and backbiting, as well as evidence of infiltration, theft and blackmail.
The leaks show how Africa is becoming increasingly important for global espionage, with the US and other western states building up their presence on the continent and China expanding its economic influence. One serving intelligence officer told the Guardian: “South Africa is the El Dorado of espionage.”
Africa has also become caught up in the US, Israeli and British covert global campaigns to stem the spread of Iranian influence, tighten sanctions and block its nuclear programme.
The Mossad briefing about Iran’s nuclear programme in 2012 was in stark contrast to the alarmist tone set by Netanyahu, who has long presented the Iranian nuclear programme as an existential threat to Israel and a huge risk to world security. The Israeli prime minister told the UN: “By next spring, at most by next summer, at current enrichment rates, they will have finished the medium enrichment and move[d] on to the final stage. From there, it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb.”
He said his information was not based on secret information or military intelligence but International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports.
Behind the scenes, Mossad took a different view. In a report shared with South African spies on 22 October 2012 – but likely written earlier – it conceded that Iran was “working to close gaps in areas that appear legitimate, such as enrichment reactors, which will reduce the time required to produce weapons from the time the instruction is actually given”.
But the report also states that Iran “does not appear to be ready” to enrich uranium to the higher levels necessary for nuclear weapons. To build a bomb requires enrichment to 90%. Mossad estimated that Iran then had “about 100kg of material enriched to 20%” (which was later diluted or converted under the terms of the 2013 Geneva agreement). Iran has always said it is developing a nuclear programme for civilian energy purposes.
Last week, Netanyahu’s office repeated the claim that “Iran is closer than ever today to obtaining enriched material for a nuclear bomb” in a statement in response to an IAEA report.
A senior Israeli government official said there was no contradiction between Netanyahu’s statements on the Iranian nuclear threat and “the quotes in your story – allegedly from Israeli intelligence”. Both the prime minister and Mossad said Iran was enriching uranium in order to produce weapons, he added.
“Israel believes the proposed nuclear deal with Iran is a bad deal, for it enables the world’s foremost terror state to create capabilities to produce the elements necessary for a nuclear bomb,” he said.
However, Mossad had been at odds with Netanyahu on Iran before. The former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, who left office in December 2010, let it be known that he had opposed an order from Netanyahu to prepare a military attack on Iran.
Other members of Israel’s security establishment were riled by Netanyahu’s rhetoric on the Iranian nuclear threat and his advocacy of military confrontation. In April 2012, a former head of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, accused Netanyahu of “messianic” political leadership for pressing for military action, saying he and the then defence minister, Ehud Barak, were misleading the public on the Iran issue. Benny Gantz, the Israeli military chief of staff, said decisions on tackling Iran “must be made carefully, out of historic responsibility but without hysteria”.
There were also suspicions in Washington that Netanyahu was seeking to bounce Obama into taking a more hawkish line on Iran.
A few days before Netanyahu’s speech to the UN, the then US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, accused the Israeli prime minister of trying to force the US into a corner. “The fact is … presidents of the United States, prime ministers of Israel or any other country … don’t have, you know, a bunch of little red lines that determine their decisions,” he said.
“What they have are facts that are presented to them about what a country is up to, and then they weigh what kind of action is needed in order to deal with that situation. I mean, that’s the real world. Red lines are kind of political arguments that are used to try to put people in a corner.”
[h=1]Top Senate Democrats invite Netanyahu to meet[/h] Gallup poll indicates sharp drop in Democratic voters' support for Israel
Two senior Democratic senators have invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to a closed-door meeting with Democratic senators during his visit to Washington next week.
Senators Richard Durbin and Dianne Feinstein extended the invitation "to maintain Israel's dialog with both political parties in Congress," according to a letter to the Israeli leader obtained by Reuters.
Netanyahu has faced criticism at home and abroad for his plans to address Congress on Iran's nuclear program on March 3, just two weeks before Israeli elections. He accepted the invitation from Republican leaders in the US Congress, who consulted neither Democrats in Congress nor Democratic President Barack Obama's administration.
"This unprecedented move threatens to undermine the important bipartisan approach towards Israel - which as long-standing supporters of Israel troubles us deeply," the two senators wrote.
"It sacrifices deep and well-established cooperation on Israel for short-term partisan points - something that should never be done with Israeli security and which we fear could have lasting repercussions," they said.
Durbin is the No. 2 Democrat in the US Senate. Feinstein, who has been in the Senate since 1992, is the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
[h=4]'Horrific consequences'[/h] A Gallup Poll released Monday underscores the two lawmakers' concerns. The poll found a high level of American public support for Israel, with seven of ten people having a broadly favorable view. But Gallup said the dispute between Netanyahu and Obama did seem to have had an impact. The percentage of Democratic voters viewing Israel favorably fell to 60 percent from 74 percent a year ago.
Another leading US pollster warned on Monday that the Obama-Netanyahu dispute may cause long-term damage to Israel.
Frank Luntz, who has monitored Israel’s image on American college campuses for 13 years, conducted interviews with more than 800 students at 60 of America’s top universities, including Harvard, Cornell, and Northwestern.
He found that 37 percent of students believe anti-Semitism is a problem on their campus, one third believe their campus is hostile to Israel, and one quarter believe the situation for Jews on their campus is getting worse.
Luntz told The Jerusalem Post that the American public supports Israel’s policies, especially on Iran, but not the style by which they are being communicated in the United States.
“The Israeli government and elites need to understand that the growing division between the two governments could have horrific consequences on what Americans think of Israel,” Luntz warned. “We may not be able to count on the next generation of American leaders. A loss of American elite support, if it’s not turned around, is a real possibility going forward.”
Two senior Democratic senators have invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to a closed-door meeting with Democratic senators during his visit to Washington next week.
Senators Richard Durbin and Dianne Feinstein extended the invitation "to maintain Israel's dialog with both political parties in Congress," according to a letter to the Israeli leader obtained by Reuters.
Netanyahu has faced criticism at home and abroad for his plans to address Congress on Iran's nuclear program on March 3, just two weeks before Israeli elections. He accepted the invitation from Republican leaders in the US Congress, who consulted neither Democrats in Congress nor Democratic President Barack Obama's administration.
"This unprecedented move threatens to undermine the important bipartisan approach towards Israel - which as long-standing supporters of Israel troubles us deeply," the two senators wrote.
"It sacrifices deep and well-established cooperation on Israel for short-term partisan points - something that should never be done with Israeli security and which we fear could have lasting repercussions," they said.
Durbin is the No. 2 Democrat in the US Senate. Feinstein, who has been in the Senate since 1992, is the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
[h=4]'Horrific consequences'[/h] A Gallup Poll released Monday underscores the two lawmakers' concerns. The poll found a high level of American public support for Israel, with seven of ten people having a broadly favorable view. But Gallup said the dispute between Netanyahu and Obama did seem to have had an impact. The percentage of Democratic voters viewing Israel favorably fell to 60 percent from 74 percent a year ago.
Another leading US pollster warned on Monday that the Obama-Netanyahu dispute may cause long-term damage to Israel.
Frank Luntz, who has monitored Israel’s image on American college campuses for 13 years, conducted interviews with more than 800 students at 60 of America’s top universities, including Harvard, Cornell, and Northwestern.
He found that 37 percent of students believe anti-Semitism is a problem on their campus, one third believe their campus is hostile to Israel, and one quarter believe the situation for Jews on their campus is getting worse.
Luntz told The Jerusalem Post that the American public supports Israel’s policies, especially on Iran, but not the style by which they are being communicated in the United States.
“The Israeli government and elites need to understand that the growing division between the two governments could have horrific consequences on what Americans think of Israel,” Luntz warned. “We may not be able to count on the next generation of American leaders. A loss of American elite support, if it’s not turned around, is a real possibility going forward.”
Obama Parries Questions on Iran Deal from Arabs - Jay Solomon
Arab governments are privately expressing their concern to Washington about the emerging terms of a potential deal aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear program, according to Arab and U.S. officials. The direction of U.S. diplomacy with Tehran has added fuel to fears in some Arab states of a nuclear arms race in the region. The major Sunni states, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, have said that a final agreement could allow Shiite-dominated Iran to keep the technologies needed to produce nuclear weapons.
"At this stage, we prefer a collapse of the diplomatic process to a bad deal," said an Arab official who has discussed Iran with the Obama administration and Saudi Arabia in recent weeks. (Wall Street Journal)
Arab governments are privately expressing their concern to Washington about the emerging terms of a potential deal aimed at curbing Iran's nuclear program, according to Arab and U.S. officials. The direction of U.S. diplomacy with Tehran has added fuel to fears in some Arab states of a nuclear arms race in the region. The major Sunni states, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, have said that a final agreement could allow Shiite-dominated Iran to keep the technologies needed to produce nuclear weapons.
"At this stage, we prefer a collapse of the diplomatic process to a bad deal," said an Arab official who has discussed Iran with the Obama administration and Saudi Arabia in recent weeks. (Wall Street Journal)
