‘Sparks fly’ over US policy on Iran at meeting between Netanyahu and US envoy

Prime minister bashes Obama’s ineffectual stance, US Ambassador Shapiro says he’s misrepresenting president’s position, newspaper claimsTensions between the Israeli and United States governments reached fever pitch over the issue of Iran’s nuclear program in a recent high-level meeting between the prime minister and the American ambassador, Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Friday.

Last week Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened a closed-door meeting with visiting Congressman and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers and American Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro. Netanyahu opened the discussion by lambasting the Obama administration for what he considered its ineffectual policy vis à vis Iran.

Netanyahu then expressed his belief that the US should be pressuring Iran to stop its nuclear program rather than pressuring Israel not to attack.

“Instead of effectively pressuring Iran, Obama and his people are pressuring us not to attack the nuclear facilities,” he reportedly said. He concluded by saying that the time for diplomacy had run out, the Yedioth report said.

At one point during the meeting, Shapiro grew enraged by Netanyahu’s remarks, broke diplomatic protocol, and snapped at the PM, saying he was misrepresenting Obama’s position on Iran.

According to a source at the meeting, “sparks and lightning were flying.”

The US embassy did not comment on the Yedioth Ahronoth report.

More stores relying on hologram models instead of women..

 

Share 

EMAIL PRINT

NEW

Portfolio Relevance

LEARN MORE

By Quentin Fottrell

Looklet

Virtual models.

These days, bending the truth in advertising goes well beyond the usual light airbrushing and color enhancement.

To save on costs—and perhaps assembly time—Swedish retailing giant IKEA created computer-generated images of its furniture for the new catalog, rather than hiring a photographer. By next year, a quarter of the scenes depicted in IKEA’s print and online advertising will be digitally drawn rather than photographed, The Wall Street Journal reported last week. In fact, IKEA says it is able to better depict its products with computer images than actual photography.

IKEA is not alone. Hollywood filmmakers increasingly create characters—and not just special effects—with CGI animation. And some fashion lines are finding that it’s less expensive to create the perfect specimen digitally than to track down America’s Next Top Model. These computer-generated realities may be cheaper, more appealing, and more versatile than the genuine articles. But experts say they could distort consumer expectations. “I worry that it will create an unrealistic picture that customers will not be able to copy,” says Earl Spurgin, professor of philosophy and director of Applied Ethics at John Carroll University in Cleveland.

Of course, the technology does have its limits. And it’s becoming so commonplace that some advertising agencies are dialing back their use of Photoshop and trading “scarily perfect” images for those with more authenticity, says Martin Lindstrom, author of “Brandwashed.” Cosmetic giant Dove has a long-running campaign for “real beauty” and, last June, Seventeen magazine announced a “body peace treaty” —a pledge to its young, female readers to be more open about how images get cleaned up or distorted. But such efforts at honesty remain very much the exception.

Aside from IKEA, here are four other examples of technology taking advertising even further from reality:

Virtual models

Bad news for supermodels: They’re being upstaged by computerized versions that look just like them--except even more perfect. Swedish fashion retailer H&M and French flash-sale site Vente-privee--which recently launched in the U.S. in partnership with American Express—both use computer-generated models in their advertising. The perfectly sculpted vision of the female body remains the same from image to image--but the skin tone and clothing vary. It saves companies from having to pay models to pose in different outfits, but some experts worry that it puts more pressure on young women to live up to unreal standards of perfection. “It’s airbrushing on steroids,” Spurgin says.

Industry pros say cutting costs should ultimately help keep prices competitive for the consumer and, as such, will become more prevalent in the fashion industry. “It’s like the classic paper doll but we do it with a really high quality,” says John Kock, co-founder and CEO of Looklet, a technology company in Stockholm that supplies the software to H&M and Vente-privee. He says he’s been approached by other brands—and one major U.S. department store. “This is just the beginning,” Kock says. A spokeswoman for H&M says it continues to use “virtual mannequins” online and real life models in its outdoor and print advertising. (Vente-privee did not respond to request for comment.)

3-D dream homes

Real estate agents often employ CGI for more than just a little virtual fluffing with vases of flowers and fancy cushion arrangements. “Rarely do many new constructions live up to the promise of the image,” says Michael Corbett, lifestyle consultant for real estate portal Trulia.com. He says 3-D images are often generated with pictures of the most expensive accessories available and can make rooms look even larger than the usual wide-angle shots long relied on by real estate photographers. “It’s a very subtle but effective enhancement,” he says. The landscaping is also not always finished to the standards seen in brochures, he says, especially if the developer needs to cut the budget. “They can throw beautiful mature maple trees in the front yard to create perfect landscaping,” he says.

To be fair, developers and real estate agents often have little choice but to sell their properties with digital recreations, experts say, especially when condos and homes are being sold off the plans. And the computer-generated advertisements can also inspire would-be homeowners by showing them what’s possible. Take a piece of prime CGI real estate in central London with a price tag of 75 million ($119 million). The listing makes it clear that the photos are computer-generated images, and that they project what the property could look like if money were no object--not what it actually looks like today.

Movie enhancements

Hollywood has been known as a “dream factory” since the beginning of motion pictures in the early part of the last century, but Warner Bros. Pictures managed to raise eyebrows in 2007 with a movie poster for the IMAX 3-D widescreen version of “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.” The studio wizards magically increased the size of actress Emma Watson’s breasts in the IMAX 3-D poster. No silicone was used--just some subtle computer enhancements. They didn’t go unnoticed. The poster quickly went viral on the Internet among Harry Potter fans. One online commenter called it “slightly disturbing.” Another wrote on a film website: “When you go to the IMAX theater, you go in expecting to see bigger and better. But who knew that was also true in the marketing?”

Warner Bros. Pictures released a statement at the time denying that it was an intentional play for a bigger male audience, as some critics suggested. “Unfortunately this image was accidentally posted on the IMAX website,” the studio said. “The mistake was promptly rectified and the image taken down.” Some experts say the use of CGI to further sexualize images in the fashion and entertainment industries is on the rise. “This does seem like the inevitable endgame to what has been an escalating amount of photo-retouching to create an idealized notion of beauty,” says Hany Farid, a professor of computer science at Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H. The ability to create highly realistic digital images of people further degrades our trust in what people are being sold, he says.

Simulated driving

Car makers also increasingly rely on CGI to make their four wheels look out of this world. As a video for Lexus shows, it can make a car look like it belongs in a Batman movie. Barbecue Design, which made the ad, has also done CGI for Mercedes, Toyota and Volkswagen. Los Angeles-based studio Blue Sky CGI has done work for Ford, Buick, Audi and BMW. “The use of CGI in car commercials accelerated since Ridley Scott directed the first memorable car mini-movie in the 1990s,” says Scott Oldham, editor in chief at Edmunds.com. The special effects are also designed to appeal to a younger market, experts say. “A lot of 20- and 30-year-olds like this stuff,” says Jesse Toprak, analyst at car-buying site TrueCar.com.

CGI car ads don’t always impress, however. Last year, Fiat produced a commercial featuring Jennifer Lopez driving around her old neighborhood in the Bronx. One problem: The ad was filmed in L.A. As we reported, some people were not impressed. Despite the kerfuffle, the ad boosted brand awareness for the Fiat 500 to 30% versus 9% before Lopez spun around in front of a blue screen, according to a Fiat spokeswoman. David Thomas, managing editor at Cars.com, says companies must disclose when the CGI car stunts cannot be replicated in real life. Nissan’s snowboarding truck came with a disclaimer: “Trucks can’t snowboard. Do not attempt.” “They’re just fighting for attention,” Thomas says. 

Iranian Child Brides Get Younger — And More Numerous

As Iranian lawmakers now seek to lower the legal age of marriage for girls to nine-years-old, the number of Iranian brides already under 10 years of age is sharply rising.

The Iranian decision to allow nine-year-old girls the legal opportunity to be married to fully grown men wasannounced by Mohammad Ali Isfenani, chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee.

Isfenani called Iran’s current civil legislation, which sets the minimum legal age of marriage for girls at 13-years-old, “un-Islamic and illegal,” saying, “We must regard nine as being the appropriate age for a girl to have reached puberty and qualified to get married. To do otherwise would be to contradict and challenge Islamic Sharia law.”

Isenfani’s clarion call for prepubescent marriage comes at the same moment a new report from the Union for the Protection of Children’s Rights (UPCR) found 75 Iranian girls less than 10-years-old were forced to marry in the past two months, part of a sharp rise in the overall number of Iranian child brides under the age of 10.

According to UPCR, of the 342,000 Iranian marriages among girls under 18-years-old registered in 2010, at least 713 marriages involved girls under 10-years-old, more than twice as many as were registered in the prior three years. Moreover, of these underage marriages, 42,000 involved girls between the ages of 10 to 14.

The Iranian appetite for child brides led Farshid Yezdani, an activist with UPCR, to note, “It is a worrying trend to see and something that we are all working hard to end. The best way to end this kind of practice is to give information on how to better one’s life without infringing on a child’s ability to have a childhood.”

Tragically, a lost childhood is not just the providence of Iranian girls but rather for a distressingly large and ever-expanding number of little girls worldwide. To that end, there are now more than 50 million child brides, a number that is growing by 10 million each year and which is expected to reach 100 million young victims over the next decade.

These unfortunate children are married off for a bevy of cultural and religious reasons, ranging from ensuring familial alliances to economic necessities, such as settling debts or overcoming natural disasters to ensure a family’s survival.

In that latter example, drought-stricken Africa has witnessed the emergence of so-called “drought brides” who are being sold for as little as $170. As one NGO worker explained, “Some households have 10 children and feeding those children is really hard,” so marrying off one young girl ensures “that the rest of the family does not die from lack of food.”

While the reasons behind these human transactions may vary, the one commonality is that the younger the girl, the better the deal. Specifically, it is important that these girls be sold off at a young enough age to better ensure their virginity, thus increasing their economic value and protecting the honor of their families.

Not surprisingly, once handed-off, these child brides are then consigned to a terrifyingly nasty, brutish and short-lived existence at the hands of men who ostensibly should be looking out for their well-being and not using them as sexual toys for their own perverse enjoyment.

For starters, these young brides rarely continue their education, denying them any hope of independence, the ability to earn a livelihood or of making an economic contribution to their households, thus condemning them to a grim life of ignorance and poverty.

Moreover, the life expectancy of their frightful existence is likely to be cut exceedingly short given the multitude of health risks inherent in being a child bride, not the least of which is the high mortality rate from childbirth injuries, where an estimated 70,000 girls under 15 die each year from complications during pregnancy or childbirth.

South Africa’s Boycott of Israel Is Mandela’s Legacy

The South African government instructed that products made in Judea and Samaria not be labeled as “products of Israel.” Israel’s deputy foreign minister, Danny Ayalon, vehemently declared that South Africa “remains an apartheid state,” which is now turning its discrimination against Israel.

A post-apartheid Pretoria boycotting Jerusalem is one of the more powerful victories for the boycott and divestment campaign. And it’s Nelson Mandela’s legacy.

On March 30, 2001, the anti-apartheid icon Mandela sent a letter to the American journalist Thomas Friedman. Israel, said Mandela, is “not a country that was established normally.”

Rather, it had “occupied another country.” He accused Israelis of indulging in “a vulgar racism.” And then came the peak of his anti-Jewish hatred: “Israel has deprived millions of Palestinians of their liberty and property. It has perpetuated a system of gross racial discrimination and inequality.” This is “an apartheid system.”

Since then, the definition of the Jewish State as an “apartheid state” has become the code word for evil. The labeling of Israel as an “apartheid state” is the embodiment of the new anti-Semitism.

Historically, black leaders in South Africa such as Desmond Tutu viewed the Jews as a part of the “capitalist camp,” and therefore exploitative of the blacks. Neo Mnumzama, chief representative of the ANC (Mandela’s party) at the United Nations, called Zionism an “ally of apartheid” and “an accomplice in the perpetuation of the crimes of Pretoria against the South African people.”

Mandela fabricated the comparison between Israel and South Africa. In his twisted version: both are small bastions of Western values and interests surrounded by a larger and non-Western people; both govern hostile majorities, using force and denying rights to subjugate them; both are run by nationalistic, racist governments unwilling to grant rights to these people but anxious to exploit labor.  However, Mandela concealed the truth: in South Africa’s apartheid, there were 26 million blacks and 6 million whites, while in Israel there is a Jewish majority and a minority of Arabs who attack the Jews.

The special relationship between Israel and South Africa, according to Mandela, was an unholy alliance between pariah states (during the apartheid era, most of the black African states broke relations with Israel). The truth was another thing, however: like blacks in America before the civil rights movement, or in South Africa under apartheid, Israeli Jews and their connection to the holy land have been erased from the environment by the Arabs. It’s Palestinian anti-Semitism, not Israel’s Jewish democracy, which must be compared to apartheid’s Aryanism.

In 2000, the American Jewish Committee canceled a Washington luncheon scheduled to honor Mandela after he said that 13 Jews tried for “espionage” (read: Judaism and Zionism) in Iran were receiving a “fair trial.” While Jews — including community leaders and a rabbi — were presented as agents of Israel and the US, Mandela was laying a wreath on the grave of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the father of the Iranian revolution, and warmly greeting his successor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Book by U.S. Navy SEAL raises questions about Osama bin Laden's death

U.S. officials fear book may include classified information, as it did not undergo formal review required by Pentagon; Al-Qaida sites call for author's murder.

By The Associated Press | Aug.29, 2012 | 12:33 PM

Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. Photo by AP

Text size

 Comments (0)

 Print Page

 Send to friend

 Share on Facebook

 Share on Twitter

 Share

THIS STORY IS BY

The Associated Press

RELATED ARTICLES

Timeline: Life and Death of Osama bin Laden

By Reuters | Aug.29,2012 | 12:33 PM |  5

U.S. had no choice but to kill bin Laden, says U.S. defense official

By Natasha Mozgovaya | Aug.29,2012 | 12:33 PM | 12

Israel lauds bin Laden death; Hamas mourns ‘holy Arab warrior’

By Barak Ravid and Haaretz Service

Aug.29,2012 | 12:33 PM

A firsthand account of the Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden contradicts previous accounts by administration officials, raising questions as to whether the terror mastermind presented a clear threat when SEALs first fired upon him.

Bin Laden apparently was hit in the head when he looked out of his bedroom door into the top-floor hallway of his compound as SEALs rushed up a narrow stairwell in his direction, according to former Navy SEAL Matt Bissonnette, writing under the pseudonym Mark Owen in "No Easy Day." The book is to be published next week by Penguin Group (USA)'s Dutton imprint.

Bissonnette says he was directly behind a "point man" going up the stairs. "Less than five steps" from the top of the stairs, he heard "suppressed" gunfire: "BOP. BOP." The point man had seen a "man peeking out of the door" on the right side of the hallway.

The author writes that bin Laden ducked back into his bedroom and the SEALs followed, only to find the terrorist crumpled on the floor in a pool of blood with a hole visible on the right side of his head and two women wailing over his body.

Bissonnette says the point man pulled the two women out of the way and shoved them into a corner and he and the other SEALs trained their guns' laser sites on bin Laden's still-twitching body, shooting him several times until he lay motionless. The SEALs later found two weapons stored by the doorway, untouched, the author said.

In the account related by administration officials after the raid in Pakistan, the SEALs shot bin Laden only after he ducked back into the bedroom because they assumed he might be reaching for a weapon.

White House spokesman Tommy Vietor would not comment on the apparent contradiction late Tuesday.

"No Easy Day" was due out Sept. 11, but Dutton announced the book would be available a week early, Sept. 4, because of a surge of orders due to advance publicity that drove the book to the top of the Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble.com best-seller lists.

The Associated Press purchased a copy of the book Tuesday.

In another possibly uncomfortable revelation for U.S. ¬officials who say bin Laden's body was treated with dignity before being given a full Muslim burial at sea, the author reveals that in the cramped helicopter flight out of the compound, one of the SEALs called "Walt" was sitting on bin Laden's chest as the body lay at the author's feet in the middle of the cabin.

The publisher says the author used pseudonyms for all the SEALs.

Bissonnette also writes disparagingly that none of the SEALs were fans of U.S. President Barack Obama and knew that his administration would take credit for ordering the May 2011 raid. One of the SEALs said after the mission that they had just gotten Obama re-elected by carrying out the raid.

But he says they respected him as commander in chief and for giving the operation the go-ahead.

Bissonnette writes less flatteringly of meeting Vice President Joe Biden along with Obama at the headquarters of the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment after the raid. He says Biden told "lame jokes" no one understood, reminding him of "someone's drunken uncle at Christmas dinner."

Beyond such embarrassing observations, U.S. ¬officials fear the book may include classified information, as it did not undergo the formal review required by the Pentagon for works published by former or current Defense Department employees.

Officials from the Pentagon and the CIA, which commanded the mission, are examining the manuscript for possible disclosure of classified information and could take legal action against the author.

In a statement provided to The Associated Press, the author says he did "not disclose confidential or sensitive information that would compromise national security in any way."

Bissonnette's real name was first revealed by Fox News and confirmed to The Associated Press.

Jihadists on Al-Qaida websites have posted purported photos of the author, calling for his murder.
 

MSU Student Knocked Unconscious, Mouth Stapled Shut In Alleged Hate Crime

EAST LANSING (WWJ) - A Michigan State University student is recovering after he was beaten up and had his mouth stapled shut during what investigators are categorizing as a brutal hate crime.

Zachary Tennen, a 19-year-old sophomore in MSU’s journalism program, said he was at a house party on the 500 block of Spartan Avenue early Sunday morning when two men approached him and asked if he was Jewish. When he responded “Yes,” the two men raised their arms into a Nazi salute and said “Heil Hitler” before knocking him unconscious, according to Tennen’s mother, Tina.

About 20 people reportedly watched as the men proceeded to staple Zachary Tennen’s mouth shut at the lips and gums. His jaw was broken in two places during the attack.

“They knocked me down really hard … and I assumed someone would help me,” Zachary Tennen said in a statement. “But after some guys at the house basically kicked me out, I had to get a cab.”

Tina Tennen told the Detroit Free Press her son took a cab to Sparrow Hospital in East Lansing for initial treatment, but underwent surgery in metro Detroit Monday night to have his jaw wired shut. He is now recovering at his home in Franklin.

“It almost seemed like they tried to kill me, and to think about that in my brain, physically — it isn’t very pleasant,” Zachary Tennen told campus newspaper The State News.

Tina Tennen said they have filed a report with East Lansing Police in hopes of finding her son’s attackers and have contacted the Anti-Defamation League, as well as the FBI.

“I just heard from our detective bureau that they had found some people that had witnessed it. They were going out to get statements from them, but we haven’t heard anything that there was people standing by that didn’t do anything to aid him. In fact, just the opposite, that after he was assaulted, some people helped him to get a ride to the hospital. Unfortunately, nobody called police or an ambulance or anything,” East Lansing Police Capt. Jeff Murphy told WWJ’s Marie Osborne.

Murphy said East Lansing police only learned of the incident after they were contacted by the school, which was contacted by Zachary Tennen’s father late Sunday.

After becoming aware of incident, which occurred about a half-mile north of the school’s campus, Michigan State’s Student Affairs and Services released the following statement:

“Michigan State University’s Student Affairs and Services office has reached out to the family of the student assaulted in East Lansing to provide the academic and other support the student needs. MSU will work with the student and his professors to ensure he can fulfill his academic requirements, as we would with any student in need. As the incident occurred off campus in East Lansing, all questions about the police investigation need to go the East Lansing Police Department.”

Zachary Tennen hopes to return to MSU in about a week, eating only liquids through a straw while his jaw heals.

“I want everyone to know how severe this is. They could have killed me. I’m going to try my best to make sure they don’t get away with this,” he said.

Anyone who may have witnessed or has information on the incident is asked to call the East Lansing Police Department at 517-351-4220.

Sununu: "This President is Not a Nice Guy"

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/08/28/sununu_this_president_is_not_a_nice_guy

Leftists Are Intellectually Dishonest by Mychal

Liberals are a dishonest, disingenuous lot and none more so than left-wing wacko minions who subscribe to a variant form of Neo-Leninism. What I find particularly insulting about them is their intellectual dishonesty when it comes to dealing with persons such as myself. I’m speaking of both the ruling elite of their Erebusic politics and their minions the next level down.

Out of their mouths they pretend to espouse concern for the individual (especially if the individual is a person of color and/or from some third world pissoir). But, while these persons are their greatest assets pursuant to accomplishing their goals, they are also cause for their greatest fear.

That fear is the liberation of the minds of those referenced above. The Neo-Leninists have been successful because they have been able to divide people based on skin color and because they have been able to portray themselves as the champions of oppressed persons of color worldwide.

But to accomplish that, it was necessary for them to have a beachhead to establish an anatomy of polarization, i.e., a great satan – and no country better served their need than America – and no single group of people fit better into their plans than Americans of color.

The authors of this evil and Barmecidal ideology hate America because America represents a freedom that has at its core a belief that God Himself has endowed us with inalienable rights.

America was identified as the enemy because America was God’s beacon of truth and freedom to the world. The first generation of freed slaves were singled out because they and their progeny could be inculcated with an inferiority mentality based on skin color and a belief that white America (white conservative America, specifically), had essentially robbed them of their birthright. They expanded that mentality to portray (white) America as the imperialist conqueror engaging in worldwide colonialism.

The greatest threat to their goal of global conquest is persons of color whose minds are and/or have been liberated from the paralyzing shackles of their ideology. That is why they set upon conservatives of color with such rabid savagery. It must also be said that the reason persons of color display such raw hostility toward those of us who have not allowed our minds to be imprisoned in the inspissated mire of resentment – is because, although they will not admit it, they resent our being free of said shackles.

Which brings me to Obama. While he hates Jesse Jackson, and is willing to use Al Sharpton, he views persons of color as useful only to further his Neo-Leninist, anti-colonialist worldview.

And therein lies the intellectual dishonesty that suffocates those I labeled above as minions. They refuse to realize that they, like the persons of color who embrace victimology and despair, are guilty of perpetuating the very racism and conquest that they decry.

Obama has no loyalty to persons of color, despite what they absurdly have convinced themselves to believe. They are simply useful idiots in his grand plan. The leftist minions I address are nothing more than modern day slave hunters looking to keep persons of color on their ideological plantation.

Obama has been anything but truthful about his real intentions, but for those who are willing to factually assess what he has done thus far, his intentions are crystal clear.

But, those leftists who believe themselves to be wise and all-knowing, have bought the Neo-Leninist lies that America is evil as they espouse views critical of our capitalist free-market economy and foment class warfare.

All of this being said, I believe Obama aspires to accomplish three primary objectives: fundamentally change America, collapse America’s economic system to the point that we fall under a world rule, and redistribute America’s wealth in the way and manner that pleases him, consistent with his Neo-Leninist philosophy.

What I’ve said may be difficult for some to believe, but that makes my assertions no less true. If one listens to what he says and observes what he does as being consistent with what he believes, it is there for all to see.

We have yet to witness the total reality of the road to ruin he has conspired to set us on. Specific to that point, I disagree with those who opine that four more years of Obama and we won’t have a country left. But I will say this without hesitation – four more years of Obama without a Congress willing to hold him in check and we’ll have an America we neither recognize nor like.

U.S. Army Solution to Afghan Attacks: ‘Avoid Arrogance,’ ‘Respect Islam’

The new plan for halting “green on blue” attacks blames the U.S. victims.

The U.S. Army has issued a pocket reference guide – ”Inside the Wire Threats – Afghanistan Green on Blue” – to help troops protect themselves from the increasingly common phenomenon of attacks from Afghans who are supposed to be allies. Men in the Afghan military and police force suddenly turn on and murder the Americans who are training them; there have been eight such attacks in just the last three weeks, and they are growing more frequent. The Army’s recommendations revolve around the central premise that such attacks are the U.S.’s fault.

According to Truthout.org, Commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan General John Allen “recently ordered U.S. forces to carry loaded weapons ‘around the clock’ following the recent spate of ‘green on blue’ attacks.” That they weren’t already doing so is insane, but true. According to Truthout, the pocket guide stipulates: “If U.S. soldiers are unarmed during a ‘green on blue’ attack they should ‘execute rehearsed actions on contact,’ and ‘have an escape route and plan in mind — hopefully two.’” They would be unarmed, of course, to show good will towards the Afghans. The fact that these instructions need to be included in the guide illustrate how these gestures of good will are all too often returned.

Further, the pocket guide states that American troops can try to prevent their gestures of good will from being answered with murderous rage by establishing a “bond of trust” with their Afghan counterparts. They can do this by being careful to “avoid arrogance, i.e., belief that ISAF [International Security Assistance Force] culture is superior to Afghan culture.” American military personnel must always “maintain professionalism, respect, and dignity of ANSF [Afghan National Security Forces] officers and soldiers.” This respect includes avoiding “public rebukes” of Afghan soldiers, and always demonstrating respect for “Islam, Koran or a mosque,” as well as “Afghan women, elders and children.”

ADVERTISEMENT

It tells troops to apologize and to offer “compensation” if they anger the Afghans in some way.

What if American soldiers do not labor assiduously at establishing a “bond of trust” with their Afghan counterparts? What if they dodemonstrate “arrogance,” perhaps even disapproving of thepoisoning of girls who dare to go to school, or the honor killing of women, or the jihad/martyrdom suicide bombing, or the execution of adulteresses, or the beheading of converts out of Islam? What if the ANSF forces who witness this arrogance consider it a lack of respect and an affront to their dignity? What if the Americans even go so far as to point out the Koran’s verses mandating warfare against unbelievers and the subjugation of women? Would that constitute an arrogance and lack of respect for Islam so intolerable as to warrant a green-on-blue attack?

By focusing on what the Americans must do in order to forestall such attacks, the guide leaves the unmistakable impression that such attacks are triggered by American behavior. The message: if the Americans were just a bit less arrogant, a bit more respectful, then all would be well. The pocket guide thus engages in the same patronizing of Muslims that characterizes so much of today’s discourse: Muslims are never responsible for their actions but are only passive reactors to the actions of the big bad West, which carries all the responsibility. It’s striking how ethnocentric these people who profess to believe in the equality of all cultures really are.

The denial, dhimmitude, and subservience of the pocket guide are drearily familiar. Last February, General Allen issued a notoriously weak, pusillanimous video repeating abject apologies to “the noble people of Afghanistan” for the burning of Qur’ans that had been used by jihadists to communicate with one another. For all his “respect for Islam” and avoidance of “arrogance,” Allen has not learned enough about Islamic culture to know that it respects strength and sees apologizing and conciliation as weakness to be despised.

Just last week, Allen attributed the rise in green-on-blue attacks to the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan. Fasting made the Afghans tense and irritable, you see, and who wouldn’t grab a rifle and commit mass murder in such a situation? When Allen attributed the attacks to Ramadan, he obviously did not have in mind the words of Muslims in Bulgaria, who said: “Ramadan is a month of holy war and death for Allah. It is a month for fighting the enemies of Allah and God’s messenger, the Jews and their American facilitators.”

The noble people of Afghanistan couldn’t possibly think that, could they?

In reality, no amount of “respect for Islam” and humility from American troops will prevent green-on-blue attacks, because the imperative for them doesn’t stem from American behavior. American troops could be the most respectful, humble, deferential people on the planet, and still Afghans would sometimes turn on their trainers and benefactors and start shooting. They are motivated to do so by Islam’s doctrine of warfare against unbelievers, which calls for war against non-Muslims simply because they are not Muslim. It does not take into account arrogance or disrespect.

But since the U.S. Army prefers to pretend those doctrines don’t exist, we get ridiculous farragoes like the pocket guide. Our troops, and the American people they are ostensibly protecting while on this fool’s errand in Afghanistan, deserve better.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book, Did Muhammad Exist?, is now available.

Israel's Clock Is Running Out on Iran

Last February Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said "Israel is a true cancer tumor on this region that should be cut off." Khamenei promised to support any groups fighting Israel anywhere in the world. On about August 17, Iranian President Ahmadinejad said Israel's existence is an insult to humanity. There has been an almost steady stream of Iranian provocations like these. Meanwhile, Iran's nuclear weapons program proceeds unabated.

This week, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon will attend a summit of the 120 UN "non-aligned" nations in Tehran giving the Iranian kakistocracy the legitimacy it craves, further isolating Israel and diminishing America's position in the Middle East.

What comes next will be a war between Israel and Iran. Unfortunately, there's a lot of fuzzy thinking going around about how that war could be prevented. In short, it cannot.

Too little and too much has been made of the conflicting statements by White House press secretary Jay Carney and Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren's statements on diplomatic efforts to stop Iran's development of nuclear weapons.

Carney, in a press briefing two weeks ago, said the Obama administration believed there was still "time and space" for sanctions to work. Shortly after that, Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren said Israel's clock "is ticking faster" than America's. Oren repeated the statement made by Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu late last month that sanctions have failed to stop Iran's nuclear program. Not that they are failing or are likely to fail. Netanyahu used the present perfect tense, not the future, and he is correct. That means Israel's moment to take military action has almost arrived.

Oren also said that while Israel appreciates the supporting rhetoric coming from Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, there are "structural differences between the United States and Israel which we can't ignore."

Too much has been made of this because most of the analysis is entirely wrong. Analysts have said this indicates that Netanyahu has decided to attack Iran before the U.S. election, which is almost certainly untrue. Too little has been made of it because it indicates how dire the Israelis believe the situation has become, and how little influence America will have at the onset or the end of what is likely to become the largest war the Middle East has ever seen.

Perhaps the most wrong-headed analysis came from the least likely source. Charles Krauthammer's August 24 column said that Israel was either engaged in the "most elaborate deception since the Trojan horse or it is on the cusp of a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities." Krauthammer proceeds from that assertion to adopt CSIS analyst Tony Cordesman's three points to forestall the conflict.

Cordesman, as Krauthammer relates, says there should be a statement of "clear U.S. red lines" that Iran cannot cross, that we must make it clear to Iran that it has no successful options for developing nuclear weapons and that we need to give the Iranians a "face-saving way out."

But Israel isn't required to choose between deception and imminent war. In fact, any successful strategy would have to combine the two and give flexibility to the term "imminent." Because America's influence on both Iran and Israel has been significantly diminished by Obama's hostility toward Israel -- and his comprehensive weakness in dealing with Iran -- we lack the credibility of posting "clear red lines" or imposing a non-nuclear option on Iran.

Lastly, and most obtusely, the idea Cordesman poses for a "face-saving way out" for Iran assumes something entirely disconnected from the realities of Tehran's decades-long nuclear program: that there is any path away from nuclear weapons that Iran could conclude is more attractive to it than the path it is on.

We believe that Iran is accelerating its uranium enrichment program and may already have enough to construct three or four nuclear warheads. We know that Iran has been developing nuclear weapons triggers as well as the technology for delivering warheads by missile. But what we don't know far outweighs what we do, which is only one of the reasons we can't declare "clear red lines" or impose any non-nuclear option on Iran. We haven't had accurate, reliable intelligence on Iran's nuclear program for at least a decade. No matter what "red lines" we may theoretically declare, there's no way for us to know when they've been crossed short of Iran conducting an underground nuclear test.

In order for us to impose any non-nuclear option on Iran we'd have to have a level of influence in Iran -- and in Israel and across the Middle East -- that we now lack. Both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama repeatedly declared that Iran will not be permitted to obtain nuclear weapons, but neither took any action to prevent it from doing so.

When Obama announced the imposition of major sanctions against Iran, he also -- almost simultaneously -- exempted most European and Far Eastern nations from them. No wonder that Israel's ambassador said there were "structural differences" between our approach to Iran and Israel's: Israel is serious, and we're not. We used to be Israel's strongest ally, but it now has little reason to believe it can rely on us.

Israel doesn't want to be accused of interfering in our election, so any attack on Iran will wait until after the November election. The hostility Obama has shown to Israel already could be nearly matched by alienation of Israel's American allies if Israel is seen to interfere with the election. That's a risk that Israel won't take unless there is a threat so great and so imminent that it demands action. Israel will wait until the election is over.

The offer of a successful alternative to Iran would have to pose an option more attractive to them than their pursuit of nuclear weapons. In determining if such an alternative exists we need to remember that the Iranian regime has evolved into a joint theocratic-military autocracy. Members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps -- which is Iran's terrorist arm as well as in control of its missile forces and nuclear program -- hold many political positions within the regime. The IRGC and the ayatollahs believe that nuclear weapons are not only a deterrent, but also a way of asserting their hegemony over all the Middle East and achieving their desire for restoration of a caliphate over all nations. No policy that denies them nuclear weapons can be as attractive as their current path, far less more so.

Some will object to this conclusion, saying that Ayatollah Khamenei has said that nuclear weapons are prohibited by Islam. But this is, quite evidently, another falsehood crafted for western consumption, just like Iran's frequent declarations of innocence of terrorism, which is also supposedly banned by Islam. In Reliance of the Traveller, the most authoritative book on Islamic law available in English, there is a prohibition of using weapons that cause general destruction in a conflict with fellow Muslims. There is no such prohibition in wars against infidels. (Reliance is a book of Sunni Islamic law, but there is no reason to suspect that Shiite "law" would be any different.)

Israel will decide for itself when it must strike to prevent Iran from achieving its nuclear weapon ambitions. Israelis -- and Iranians -- know that Israel cannot survive a single nuclear weapon delivered to Tel Aviv or another major Israeli city. When Israel strikes, it will have to do a great deal more than strike at Iran's reactors and uranium enrichment facilities. It will -- as I outlined two years ago -- have to strike first at Iran's missile bases, the IRGC command and control structure, and at the regime itself.

When it does, Iran will respond with everything it has, ranging from its intact missiles to launching terrorist attacks around the world at Israeli -- and probably U.S. -- targets. As some Israelis have said, the war may go on for a month or more. Hizballah Leader Hassan Nasrallah threatened an attack on Israel with thousands of rockets. Earlier this month, he said, "We can transform the lives of millions of Zionists in occupied Palestine to a real hell."

If Israel suffers major casualties or other significant setbacks in the war, there's every chance that its Arab neighbors would join in the fight not to help Iran but in war against a common enemy. Whether Israel survives will then depend on whether we fight quickly and effectively enough to defend it and end the Iranian threat. On that point Israel -- and the rest of us-- will remain in doubt as long as Obama is in office.

About the Author

Jed Babbin served as a Deputy Undersecretary of Defense under George H.W. Bush. He is the author of several bestselling books including Inside the Asylum and In the Words of Our Enemies. You can follow him on Twitter @jedbabbin.