To Lift The Spirits (Sequel): Dancing with Matt...in Gaza

In January 2009, we posted a video made by Matt Harding, who filmed himself dancing --- sometimes by himself, sometimes with others --- in locations around the world. (It's re-posted at the end of this entry.)

That life-affirming video now has more than 30 million hits, and Harding's second film has been viewed more than 15 million times.

But here is the ultimate sequel. "Dancing with Matt" has now gone to Gaza.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency, whose officials are relatively free from Israeli restrictions on entry into the Palestinian territory, invited Harding to "teach" his dancing to local children. An official explained, “This is an important message: kids in Gaza are like kids anywhere in the world. All they want is to have fun. If allowed to be, Gaza can be a normal place where children can thrive.”

And that for me is the most wonderful of ironies: the reason why I posted the first "Dancing with Matt" video in January 2009 was to offset the depressing, soul-sapping news of military operations taking civilian lives.

You can probably guess where that war was taking place.

Go Matt. Go Gaza. Go UNRWA.

The 2008 Video

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlfKdbWwruY&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

Afghanistan LiveBlog: Wikileaks & The Truth About the US Occupation

UPDATE 2010 GMT: Nick Schifrin at ABC follows up on the angle that the Wikileaks documents show officials from Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence aiding the Afghan insurgency.

Al Jazeera interviews the former head of ISI, General Hamid Gul, who denies the claims:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqkQKk9S_8E&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]

Afghanistan: At Least 45 Civilians Killed in Rocket Attack
Afghanistan: The Wikileaks “War Diary” of 91,000 Documents
General Kayani’s “Silent Coup” in Pakistan: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (Mull)

UPDATE 1655 GMT: And how is Afghan President Karzai using the Wikileaks "War Diary"? To turn attention to Pakistan: "The recent documents leaked out to the media clearly support and verify Afghanistan's all-time position that success over terrorism does not come with fighting in Afghan villages, but by targeting its sanctuaries and financial and ideological sources across the borders. Our efforts against terrorism will have no effect as long as these sanctuaries and sources remain intact."

UPDATE 1515 GMT: Amy Davidson in The New Yorker starts from one incident revealed in the Wikileaks document:

The Obama Administration has already expressed dismay that WikiLeaks publicized the documents, but a leak informing us that our tax dollars may be being used as seed money for a protection racket associated with a narcotics-trafficking enterprise is a good leak to have. And the checkpoint incident is, again, only one report, from one day. It will take some time to go through everything WikiLeaks has to offer—the documents cover the period from January, 2004, to December, 2009—but it is well worth it, especially since the war in Afghanistan is not winding down, but ramping up...."

And reaches this conclusion:

After more than eight years at war, how carefully are we even looking at Afghanistan? The [New York] Times had a piece in Sunday’s paper on the strange truth that our expenditure since 9/11 of a trillion dollars on two wars has barely scraped our consciousness. Fifty-eight Americans have died in Afghanistan so far this month; one of them—Edwin Wood, of Oklahoma—was eighteen years old. Maybe the WikiLeaks documents will make those numbers less abstract."

UPDATE 1455 GMT: Andrew Bacevich assesses in The New Republic:

"The real significance of the Wikileaks action is...[that] it shows how rapidly and drastically the notion of 'information warfare' is changing. Rather than being defined as actions undertaken by a government to influence the perception of reality, information warfare now includes actions taken by disaffected functionaries within government to discredit the officially approved view of reality. This action is the handiwork of subversives, perhaps soldiers, perhaps civilians. Within our own national security apparatus, a second insurgent campaign may well have begun. Its purpose: bring America’s longest war to an end. Given the realities of the digital age, this second insurgency may well prove at least as difficult to suppress as the one that preoccupies General Petraeus in Kabul."

And Andrew Sullivan on his Daily Dish blog:

When one weighs the extra terror risk from remaining in Afghanistan, the absurdity of our chief alleged ally actually backing the enemy, the impossibility of an effective counter-insurgency when the government itself is corrupt and part of the problem, the brutality of the enemy in intimidating the populace in ways no civilized occupying force can counter, the passage of ten years in which any real chance at success was squandered ... the logic for withdrawal to the more minimalist strategy originally favored by Obama after the election and championed by Biden thereafter seems overwhelming.

When will the president have the balls to say so?

UPDATE 1445 GMT: Simon Tisdall in The Guardian of London uses the documents to write, "How the US is Losing the Battle for Hearts and Minds".

Meanwhile we have posted on a specific incident on Friday which demonstrates the complications of military intervention and that supposed battle for hearts and minds, "At Least 45 Civilians Killed in Rocket Attack".

UPDATE 1145 GMT: The BBC is working the angle, "Cases of Afghan civilians allegedly killed by British troops have been revealed among thousands of leaked US military documents....The records include references to at least 21 incidents involving UK troops. The Ministry of Defence said it had been unable to verify the claims and it would not speculate on specific cases."

UPDATE 1140 GMT: Wikileaks director Julian Assange is currently holding a press conference. Take-away quotes: "The course of the war needs to change. The manner in which it needs to change is not yet clear"; "It’s war, it’s one damn thing after another. It is the continuous small events."

UPDATE 0920 GMT: "The Afghan government is shocked with the report that has opened the reality of the Afghan war," said spokesman Siamak Herawi.

UPDATE 26 July 0910 GMT: The White House has issued a far-from-surprising response to the Wikileaks "War Diary". National Security Adviser General James Jones said such classified information "could put the lives of Americans and our partners at risk".

(Older readers may remember that the "national security" line was the response put out by the Nixon White House when the "Pentagon Papers" on the Vietnam War were published in 1971.)

And by the way, Jones added --- repeating a line put out by White House officials within hours of the story breaking --- the episode has little to do with us: the documents cover 2004 to 2009, before President Obama "announced a new strategy with a substantial increase in resources for Afghanistan".

UPDATE 2205 GMT: Simon Tisdall in The Guardian has a different approach based on the documents: "Iran is engaged in an extensive covert campaign to arm, finance, train and equip Taliban insurgents, Afghan warlords allied to al-Qaida and suicide bombers fighting to eject British and western forces from Afghanistan, according to classified US military intelligence reports contained in the war logs."

UPDATE 2155 GMT: Der Spiegel has posted a full package of articles. It also has an exposé of the Pakistan connection with the Taliban but also considers "German Naivety" with "trouble in the growing north" and profiles "Task Force 373", the US "black" unit hunting down targets for death or detention (the Guardian also has an article on the unit). It also has the first critiques of American operations: one on drones --- "the flaws of the silent killer" --- and one on "The Shortcomings of US Intelligence Services".

UPDATE 2145 GMT: The second New York Times article is a snapshot of Combat Outpost Keating:

"The outpost’s fate, chronicled in unusually detailed glimpses of a base over nearly three years, illustrates many of the frustrations of the allied effort: low troop levels, unreliable Afghan partners and an insurgency that has grown in skill, determination and its ability to menace."

UPDATE 2140 GMT: The first New York Times special report based on the Wikileaks documents focuses not on American but Pakistani involvement:

Americans fighting the war in Afghanistan have long harbored strong suspicions that Pakistan’s military spy service has guided the Afghan insurgency with a hidden hand, even as Pakistan receives more than $1 billion a year from Washington for its help combating the militants, according to a trove of secret military field reports to be made public Sunday.

The documents, to be made available by an organization called WikiLeaks, suggest that Pakistan, an ostensible ally of the United States, allows representatives of its spy service to meet directly with the Taliban in secret strategy sessions to organize networks of militant groups that fight against American soldiers in Afghanistan, and even hatch plots to assassinate Afghan leaders.

Taken together, the reports indicate that American soldiers on the ground are inundated with accounts of a network of Pakistani assets and collaborators that runs from the Pakistani tribal belt along the Afghan border, through southern Afghanistan, and all the way to the capital, Kabul.

Much of the information — raw intelligence and threat assessments gathered from the field in Afghanistan— cannot be verified and likely comes from sources aligned with Afghan intelligence, which considers Pakistan an enemy, and paid informants. Some describe plots for attacks that do not appear to have taken place.



But many of the reports rely on sources that the military rated as reliable."

UPDATE 2130 GMT: The New York Times has now posted a few of the documents and its first article on "The War Logs" of Wikileaks. The take-away points:

¶ The Taliban have used portable heat-seeking missiles against allied aircraft, a fact that has not been publicly disclosed by the military. This type of weapon helped the Afghan mujahedeen defeat the Soviet occupation in the 1980s.

¶ Secret commando units like Task Force 373 — a classified group of Army and Navy special operatives — work from a “capture/kill list” of about 70 top insurgent commanders. These missions, which have been stepped up under the Obama administration, claim notable successes, but have sometimes gone wrong, killing civilians and stoking Afghan resentment.

¶ The military employs more and more drone aircraft to survey the battlefield and strike targets in Afghanistan, although their performance is less impressive than officially portrayed. Some crash or collide, forcing American troops to undertake risky retrieval missions before the Taliban can claim the drone’s weaponry.

¶ The Central Intelligence Agency has expanded paramilitary operations inside Afghanistan. The units launch ambushes, order airstrikes and conduct night raids. From 2001 to 2008, the C.I.A. paid the budget of Afghanistan’s spy agency and ran it as a virtual subsidiary.

Over all, the documents do not contradict official accounts of the war. But in some cases the documents show that the American military made misleading public statements — attributing the downing of a helicopter to conventional weapons instead of heat-seeking missiles or giving Afghans credit for missions carried out by Special Operations commandos.



White House officials vigorously denied that the Obama administration had presented a misleading portrait of the war in Afghanistan.

---
Nick Davies and David Leigh write for The Guardian of London:

A huge cache of secret US military files today provides a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan, revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents, Taliban attacks have soared and NATO commanders fear neighbouring Pakistan and Iran are fuelling the insurgency.

The disclosures come from more than 90,000 records of incidents and intelligence reports about the conflict obtained by the whistleblowers' website Wikileaks in one of the biggest leaks in US military history. The files, which were made available to the Guardian, the New York Times and the German weekly Der Spiegel, give a blow-by-blow account of the fighting over the last six years, which has so far cost the lives of more than 320 British and over 1,000 US troops.

Their publication comes amid mounting concern that Barack Obama's "surge" strategy is failing and as coalition troops hunt for two US navy sailors captured by the Taliban south of Kabul on Friday.

The war logs also detail:

• How a secret "black" unit of special forces hunts down Taliban leaders for "kill or capture" without trial.

• How the US covered up evidence that the Taliban has acquired deadly surface-to-air missiles.

• How the coalition is increasingly using deadly Reaper drones to hunt and kill Taliban targets by remote control from a base in Nevada.

• How the Taliban has caused growing carnage with a massive escalation of its roadside bombing campaign, which has killed more than 2,000 civilians to date.

In a statement, the White House said the chaotic picture painted by the logs was the result of "under-resourcing" under Obama's predecessor, saying: "It is important to note that the time period reflected in the documents is January 2004 to December 2009."

The White House also criticised the publication of the files by Wikileaks: "We strongly condemn the disclosure of classified information by individuals and organisations, which puts the lives of the US and partner service members at risk and threatens our national security. Wikileaks made no effort to contact the US government about these documents, which may contain information that endanger the lives of Americans, our partners, and local populations who co-operate with us."

The logs detail, in sometimes harrowing vignettes, the toll on civilians exacted by coalition forces: events termed "blue on white" in military jargon. The logs reveal 144 such incidents. Some of these casualties come from the controversial air strikes that have led to Afghan government protests in the past, but a large number of previously unknown incidents also appear to be the result of troops shooting unarmed drivers or motorcyclists out of a determination to protect themselves from suicide bombers. At least 195 civilians are admitted to have been killed and 174 wounded in total, although this is likely to be an underestimate because many disputed incidents are omitted from the daily snapshots reported by troops on the ground and then collated, sometimes erratically, by military intelligence analysts.

The Latest from Iran (26 July): Behind the International Screen

2055 GMT: Moscow is Not Amused. Looks like President Ahmadinejad went too far in his shtick of "Russia is aiding and abetting the US-Israel plot to attack Arab allies of Iran".

The Russian Foreign Ministry has put out a statement, "For us the recent public statements of the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are categorically unacceptable....[They] distorted Russia's objective approach, our independent, constructive line towards the Iranian nuclear programme with the aim of finding a political and diplomatic resolution. We consider that instead of fruitless and irresponsible rhetoric, the Iranian leadership should take concrete, constructive steps towards the speediest regulation of the situation."

Iran Analysis: Re-Defining the Green Movement (Verde)
UPDATED Iran Media Follow-Up: War, War, War. Blah, Blah, Blah. No Facts. More War. Blah.
The Latest from Iran (25 July): The Re-Appearing Fatwa

2000 GMT: Academic Corner. Sima, the student newspaper at Ferdowsi University, has been banned.

1915 GMT: "Khamenei Must Go" (cont. --- see 1115 GMT). Ahmad Ghabel, seminary lecturer and author, has followed up his recent criticism of the Supreme Leader with a statement that arrests have happened with the approval of Ayatollah Khamenei and "the Iranian people are free on bail".

1910 GMT: Sanctions Watch. Canada has followed the European Union in imposing additional sanctions on Tehran, notably in the energy sector.

1630 GMT: The International Front. Forget the talking tough (see 1500 GMT): the theme today from Tehran is openness to discussions. Islamic News Republic Agency and Fars News are both highlighting the statement of Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran's nuclear organisation, "The clear message of this letter [to the International Atomic Energy Agency] was Iran's complete readiness to hold negotiations over the fuel for the Tehran reactor without any conditions."

1500 GMT: Talking Tough Time. The Iranian Foreign Ministry has criticised the latest measures adopted by the European Union (see 1430 GMT), "Sanctions… will only complicate matters and move away [the parties] from mutual understanding."

Yeah, yeah, whatever (the Iranians are actually angling for talks, via contact with EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and Turkey and Brazil's mediation, with the EU on the uranium issue). If you want some macho fire-breathing, you have to go to Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani, who reveals the Obama Administration is "one of lies":

You witnessed what they did to Palestinians; Israeli settlements in Palestine are expanding by the day and the Zionist regime destroys mosques and of course Gaza is still under siege....Americans wrongly perceive Lebanon as a toy but they should be more careful lest this toy severs their hand.

On the surface they condemn terrorism but behind the curtain they support terrorists… as it became clear, during [Jundullah ringleader Abdolmalek] Rigi's confessions, that he was linked to the US and NATO and they supported this terrorist cell.

1430 GMT: Sanctions Watch. The European Union has formally adopted a package of new sanctions against Iran, targeting foreign trade, banking, and energy.

1425 GMT: Oil Squeeze. Reuters reports, from a shipping document, that only three cargoes of gasoline have so far reached Iran in July, far less than the seasonal norm, because of the pressure of sanctions.

Traditionally during the summer season, with people driving on holidays, Iran needs 11-13 cargoes a month.

The three cargoes this month and were supplied by Turkish refiner Tupras and the trading arm of China's Sinopec, Unipec. Another cargo is expected to arrive from Venezuela.

1150 GMT: Mousavi's Latest. Mir Hossein Mousavi, in his most recent speech, has discussed the "untold story" of the war between Iran and Iraq from 1980 to 1988.

1123 GMT: Revolutionary Guard in Control? Mehdi Karroubi, in an interview with BBC Persian, has declared that there is now an effective "monopoly" by the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps and the Basij militia in the country.

1120 GMT: Parliament v. President. Reformist MP Hojatoleslam Qodratollah Alikhani has complained about President Ahmadinejad's "joy" at US and UN sanctions, saying that he hopes this has not increased the prospect of war.

1115 GMT: "Khamenei Must Go". Noted Iranian intellectual Abdolkarim Soroush, now living in exile, has complemented recent calls --- from Mohsen Kadivar and Ahmad Ghabel outside the country and Isa Saharkhiz inside it --- for the Supreme Leader to step down.

1040 GMT: Rumour of Day. Parleman News claims that the Hojjatieh Society has formally applied for a licence.

Hojjatieh has provoked much comment and speculation since its founding as a semi-clandestine Shi'a organisation in 1953. It was forced to dissolve after a speech by Ayatollah Khomeini in 1983, but stories circulate that it is connected to President Ahmadinejad and other senior figures in the Iranian regime.

1035 GMT: Energy Squeeze? Deputy Minister of Oil Alireza Zeighami has said,"We need $46 billion to finish our refinery projects." The funds will contribute to new capacity for 5 billion litres of liquid fuel.

Some numbers for comparison: the $46 billion is more than 15 times the $3.1 billion in Foreign Direct Investment in 2009 --- a number pushed by Iranian officials as a sign of the country's growth --- and 92 times the amount of the $500 million bond project announced today for the South Pars gas and oil field.

1015 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. Rah-e-Sabz reports that former President Hashemi Rafsanjani will visit Hamzeh Karami, the director of Jumhoriat website and a senior official at Islamic Azad University, in hospital. Karami, detained soon after the June 2009 election, is in intensive care with a heart condition.

Last summer, Karami's "confession" in a televised trial in Tehran was used to implicate Rafsanjani's son, Mehdi Hashemi, in alleged fraud and misconduct over the election.

1010 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Agence France Presse has picked up the story --- noted in our updates yesterday --- that journalist Emad Baghi, detained in December 2009 and recently released on bail, has been given a one-year sentence and banned for five years from political activities from charges in a 2008 case.

1000 GMT: Reviewing the Supreme Leader. An entry on an Iranian blog puts forth supposed reaction from clerics in Qom to Ayatollah Khameini's fatwa, "I am the Rule of the Prophet".

0955 GMT: Picture of Day. Mir Hossein Mousavi meets reformist politician Mohsen Armin, recently released from detention on $200,000 bail:



0950 GMT: Parliament v. Government. Vice Speaker of Parliament Mohammad Reza Bahonar has reiterated that the Majlis will stand up to the Ahmadinejad Government, rejecting its implementation measures.

0945 GMT: Concessions to the Villagers? Kalemeh claims that a new Government directive removes limits on social security for Sunni residents in rural areas.

0935 GMT: Setting the Record Straight. Fereshteh Ghazi interviews the family of Mohammad-Hossein Feiz, shot dead in protests on 30 June 2009. They reveal that Feiz was not a Basij militiaman, as the regime claimed, but a demonstrator.

0930 GMT: Economy Watch. Iran Negah posts a video interview with a girl living in poverty in Tehran. She says, "God only helps rich people." (Persian2English has an English translation.)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnT7xl5zYDM[/youtube]

0925 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Peyke Iran claims that student Vahid Asghari has had his nose and ribs broken in Bushehr Prison.

0920 GMT: Parliament v. Government. Members of Parliament are continuing to threaten impeachment of Minister of Agriculture Sadegh Khalilian over claims that imports are driving down rice prices received by Iranian farmers.

0800 GMT: Water Pressure. Amidst stories of impurities and shortages in Iran's water supply, Tehran's Yaft-Abad quarter has installed a temporary water filter.

0730 GMT: Music of Dissent. Shahin Najafi, an Iranian musician and poet now living in Germany, has released "Vay Koshte Maro", a song of protest against the current Government.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTrlthfbcHQ[/youtube]

0725 GMT: Parliament v. President. The influential member of Parliament, Gholam-Reza Mesbahi-Moghaddam, has emphasised that "not all hardliners accepted the elimination of reformists" in the post-election conflict.

0720 GMT: The Saharkhiz Criticism. Persian2English has now posted the first part of journalist Isa Saharkhiz's statement in court --- featured on EA last week --- with its direct criticism of the Supreme Leader.

0715 GMT: No, No, Talk about the War. Press TV keeps up the Iranian state line, "Shameful Defeats Awaits US in 3rd War". The article features the Sunday comments of Brigadier General Masoud Jayazeri, “The United States, which has already suffered two heavy, disgraceful defeats against Hezbollah and Hamas in the region, can start a new war with a third country to endure another defeat.”

0710 GMT: So what is happening inside Iran? Credit to two "Western" outlets for stories that defy the trend of Nukes and War.

The Los Angeles Times posts a summary of "New Series of Attacks on Members of the Bahai Faith in Iran".

The Guardian of London picks up on the story --- reported in our updates yesterday --- of the disappearance of prominent human rights lawyer Mohammad Mostafaei and the arrest of his wife and brother-in-law. Mostafaei represents Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, the Iranian woman whose death sentence for adultery has provoked international criticism of Tehran.

0630 GMT: The lead stories in the media this morning on Iran are far from what is happening inside Tehran.

From the Iranian Government's point of view, the weekend's meeting between the Turkish, Brazilian, and Iranian Foreign Ministers is the platform to focus attention on the uranium enrichment issue. Paralleling the rhetoric denouncing the West, notably in the speeches of President Ahmadinejad, the possibility of renewed discussions --- raised by Iran's statement to the International Atomic Energy Agency today --- comes to the fore. The head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, says, "The Tehran nuclear declaration on a possible nuclear fuel swap is a good base for the sides to build confidence. Iran has prepared its response to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Vienna group which will be sent within the next two or three days."

And from the US --- not from the Government, I hasten to add, but from the chattering classes --- the topic is not resolution but war. CNN's Sunday interview with Michael Hayden, the head of the CIA in the Bush Administration, is the latest pretext to take speculation from someone far from the centre of developments and turn into a Most Important Prediction.

Indeed, there is a convenient symmetry here. On one side, those who desire regime change in Iran can do so with little reference to politics, society, religion, or any other matter inside the country --- it's always and only the spectral "imminent threat" that is featured. On the other, those who support the Iranian Government --- irrespective of what it does inside the country --- can avoid troubling themselves with human rights, justice, and legitimacy. Instead, they can raise the speculative and unsupported to a clear-and-present danger and argue that the avoidance of a US-Iran war takes priority.

UPDATED Iran Media Follow-Up: War, War, War. Blah, Blah, Blah. No Facts. More War. Blah.

UPDATE 26 July: Today's surprise winner of the War Drum? It's the BBC....

Paul Reynolds, in a special analysis "Iran Sanctions: Last Throw of Diplomatic Dice?", falls for the CNN interview with former Bush Administration official Michael Hayden (see Update 25 July) as Very Important to proclaim, "Already, the distant drum beats heralding war talk are beginning to sound."



UPDATE 25 July: Here We Go Again....

CNN, apparently short of significant news coverage, whipped up the war talk in its Sunday interview with General Michael Hayden, head of the National Security Agency and then Central Intelligence Agency during the George W. Bush Administration:

CNN'S CANDY CROWLEY: When you left the CIA about two years ago, you said the two biggest problems facing your successor would be the Iranian nuke program and the drug smuggling and the violence from Mexico. Would you change either one of those?

HAYDEN: No, no. To be accurate, counterterrorism was job one. Beyond counterterrorism, I would put counterproliferation as job two. And within counterproliferation, it is inarguably Iran....

CROWLEY: Do you think, though, there is any answer?

I mean, Iran doesn't seem to be paying much attention to the sanctions. As far as we know, they are still trying to get nuclear capability. If it should, is there any alternative to taking out their facilities?

HAYDEN: It seems inexorable, doesn't it?

We engage. They continue to move forward. We vote for sanctions. They continue to move forward. We try to deter, to dissuade. They continue to move forward.

My personal view is that Iran, left to its own devices, will get itself to that step right below a nuclear weapon, that permanent breakout stage, so the needle isn't quite in the red for the international community. And, frankly, that will be as destabilizing as their actually having a weapon.

When I was in government, what we would used to mystically call "the kinetic option" was way down on our list. In my personal thinking -- in my personal thinking; I need to emphasize that -- I have begun to consider that that may not be the worst of all possible outcomes.

Look, Michael Hayden is no more than a hanger-on in Washington these days, his main function to show up in places like The Wall Street Journal to give a weak defence of the Bush Administration's dubious and possibly illegal programmes in "enhanced interrogation", rendition, and surveillance. He has next to no influence in any discussions over Iran policy.

CNN, however, will big this up as a definite sign of possible War, War, War. And The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post and Associated Press are already helping by running this as featured news.

UPDATE 24 July: Oh, this should be helpful....

Republicans in the US House of Representatives, the lower body of Congress, have introduced Resolution 1553 supporting Israel's recourse to "all means necessary" against Iran "including the use of military force".

Nearly a third of the 178 House Republicans have signed the resolution, publicly promoted by its lead sponsor, Louie Gohmert of months.

Iran's Press TV is already circulating and exaggerating the news, "House OK's Possible Israeli Raid on Iran".

UPDATE 1750 GMT: Unfortunate Juxtaposition of the Day....

Sometimes you just have to smile. The National Iranian American Council posts a concise opinion piece, "War is Bad for Democracy", knocking back thoughts of military action against Iran because of "the damage it would do to the indigenous democracy movement".

The Google Ad at the bottom of the page?




It appears that some journalists have missed our coverage this week --- in a dissection of Joe Klein's lightly-sourced hyperbole and in Marc Lynch's comment on the danger of hyperbole becoming received wisdom --- over the hyping of Israeli military action against Tehran.

First, Bret Stephens put out the question, "Why Hasn't Israel Bombed Iran (Yet)?" and then offered four "theories", all of which were void of any information on Israel's current planning and strategy.

Fair enough. Mr Stephens is a staunch defender of Israel over all, and the real point of his piece was to bump any Obama official who might be reading into support of military action:

There is now talk that the Obama administration may be reconsidering its military options toward Iran. Let's hope so. Israel may ultimately be willing to attack Iran once it reckons that it has run out of other options, as it did prior to the Six Day War. But its tactical margin for error will be slim, particularly since an effective strike will require days not hours. And the political risks it runs will be monumental. As Mr. Doran notes, in 1956 it could at least count on the diplomatic support of two members of the U.N. Security Council. Today, the U.S. is its last significant friend.

Then, however, The Atlantic Wire --- positioning itself as the mediator of all stories Great and Good and Very Important --- paid tribute (ripped off?) Stephens by turning his question into a Fact, "4 Reasons Israel Hasn't Bombed Iran". Sweet irony: the summary actually had no Facts, only a series of other speculations from other writers.

Then the paradox: Marc Lynch, who had carried out valuable service with his knock-down of the war chatter, did his part to validate the war chatter, "Atlantic Wire: 4 reasons Israel hasn't bombed Iran, rounding up yesterday's debate".

No, this is not a debate. It's a media cluster --- the Daily Show has a Not-Suitable-for-Work term for it --- that feeds off each other's hopes, fears, and thoughts off the top of the head.

And sometimes I fear that this cluster --- pretty much closed off to outside consideration and, yes, inconvenient Facts --- will carry on oblivious to any consequences.

Israel-US Connect the Dots: Iran, Palestine, & Billions in Military Aid

On Sunday, Israel's Defense Ministry announced that Israel and the United States signed an agreement over the  Arrow III ballistic mssile shield, "The Arrow III will allow Israel to deal with the threat of ballistic missiles with long range and will give it the ability to shoot down weapons of mass destruction outside the atmosphere."

The step is a further consolidation of Israel's security institutions against the "existential threat" from Iran's long-range missiles.

However, this is not the end of the story. Two weeks ago US Assistant Secretary of State Andrew J. Shapiro said Washington intended to expand imilitary aid to Israel in the hope that West Jerusalem could reach tough decisions in its peace talks with the Palestinians. Speaking at the Brookings Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington D.C., Shapiro said, " In 2010, the administration requested [from Congress] $2.775 billion in security assistance funding specifically for Israel, the largest such request in U.S. history."

Gaza Latest: Hamas Response to EU & UN, Israel Ponders No Cooperation

Israel receives approximately $3 billion annually in foreign aid from Washington, equivalent to 2 percent of Israel's GDP and an extra $500 to every Israeli citizen. The second-largest recipient in the region, Egypt gets $20 per its citizen.

Before the 1998 Wye River Treaty, Israel received $1.2 billion for a partial withdrawal from the West Bank. Israel also received $1 billion in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to prepare for a possible Iraqi missile bombardment in 2003 (and to be silent about that possibility).

Now, thanks to the "existential threat" of Iran, Washington is handing out billions more "incentives" for the Netanyahu government to show "real" gestures towards Palestinians, especially on the borders of a future Palestinian state, before direct negotiations.