Printable View
Isn't there already a lot of international outrage at the Syrian security forces? :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
The teevee here just showed a short bulletin with the reconstructed face of the dude who blew up that bus with Israeli tourists, first time I've ever seen anything like that on tv.
http://af.reuters.com/article/worldN...BrandChannel=0
Driving a tank into the Israeli border fence is an incredibly efficient way of getting 72 virgins. :bored:
Actually, the stupider thing was killing the Egyptian soldiers. For now, Morsi has closed the Rafah crossing - and not at Israel's request - because of the increasing danger of terrorist infiltrators from Gaza into Egypt. Even with the tunnels, this would be disastrous for Hamas if Egypt sticks to their guns on this one.
I've seen articles where Israeli defense sources claim that they had concrete intelligence that an infiltration attempt was imminent, which is part of why they were able to so quickly take out the force that attempted to cross the border. No matter how subtle the terrorist plot, a missile through the windshield will seriously cramp their style.
It does, though, call into question the efficacy of the Israeli border fence. Fundamentally it's unlikely to be very effective at actually stopping infiltrators - between the sheer length of the border, the difficult terrain, and the relative ease of circumvention (either through blowing up/cutting a section or burrowing underneath it), it's questionable whether it will be very effective at stopping terrorism. Smuggling and illegal immigrants, perhaps, but probably not a determined terrorist. They have these remote weapons stations and sensors they're setting up that should help, but it's awfully hard to set up that kind of coverage for the entire border. Even worse, if they detect an infiltration attempt, it might be quite a while before a rapid-response unit could get into place to investigate - between the length, the difficult terrain, and the relatively small force assigned to securing the Egyptian border, they just don't have the manpower for real coverage. They'll call up reservists to fill in holes on occasion, but their active-duty strength is better spent keeping an eye on other areas.
So: at the end of the day, the only effective defense against this kind of attack is good intelligence and constant vigilance. It worked this time (helpfully, they attacked near a heavily-guarded crossing point, compared to the lightly controlled frontier), but who knows about next time? It might also help if Egypt stepped up their enforcement activities in the Sinai. Since the revolution, the deteriorating situation in the Sinai has been very much on the back burner for the military and the newly elected government - even though there's been increasing unrest, attacks, and criminal activity. Let's hope this is a wake-up call for Egypt to start fixing their security situation.
Apparently the Mossad did it.... says the bozos running Egypt's government:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...265316,00.html
Didn't they? If there was no Mossad, the terrorists wouldn't have to attack them.
Biting the hand the feeds you.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...265787,00.html
Clearly the Mossad caused his brother-in-law's illness as well, just to Israeli doctors could gain propaganda points and intelligence by treating him. :o
Something a bit lighter:
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?se...ork&id=8765952
:D
I was actually visiting an Orthodox relative a few days ago and saw this deal open on their computer screen, they were salivating over it. :haha:
These guys are a real class act:
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/...ducts-1.460781
The Democrat's platform didn't include language about God and (for the first time) omitted language insisting that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
Once noticed by the press, the Democratic elite moved to close these "gaps" via a voice vote at the convention. I actually feel bad for the folks who were against including God and Zionist Jerusalem language in the convention platform. At least based on the audio, it sounds like the room was pretty evenly split on the issue. I wonder if we'll see Zionist conspiracy theories on this one. :o
http://www.businessinsider.com/democ...ion-dnc-2012-9
I feel like the DNC dropped the ball on this one. The platform language was fine as it was (the Israeli press made some hay out of it, but they always do that), and the reality is that neither Obama nor Romney are actually going to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem. Similarly, God may not be mentioned in the party platform, but if "God Bless America" isn't in nearly every political speech in America, I'm Humpty Dumpty.
I think by calling for the vote and it ending up being quite contentious, they validated the critiques of their opponents (and reflexive Israel supporters) by demonstrating that there is indeed a lot of resistance on these two issues in the ranks of the Democratic Party. That's far more damaging IMO than being able to just brush aside concerns about the platform as it was originally written as politicians making a mountain out of a molehill. They should never have caved on this point.
A friend of mine who's the US correspondent for an Israeli publication hit the nail on the head:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/the-nig...srael-message/
I don't get why two parties in the US outsource the writing of their platform to a bunch of nobodies who clearly don't understand how politics works. In every other country that I know of, the platform is the most important document a party writes, and the leaders of the party make sure that the document both reflects their priorities and views of the party. In the US, both parties put all kind of insane crap in their platforms, including stuff that the leaders of the parties openly oppose. :bored:
Indeed, the idiosyncrasies of the Republican platform seem quite at odds with Romney's positions as well. Perhaps they figure no one reads it?
I imagine that's the case, but then why bother writing it? To just throw a bone to the insane grassroots activists? Isn't it a bit of a joke for Obama to be calling for the Jerusalem language to be put back in the document when he refused to make that a policy of the US in the 3.5 years he's been in power? Or for the Republicans to include a clause opposing abortion in the case of rape after most of the party came out and said that rape provides an acceptable exception?
Very well-written piece by your friend by the way.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/ny...locate.html?hp
Not nutty per se, but amusing on several different levels. :p
It's actually a very interesting social phenomenon, but I don't have time to comment in depth. (I also think I know the sister of the woman in the photo. Small world?)Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I'm probably distantly related to that family. :p
I'm somewhat amused that the Turkish word for "cheap" is pronounced roughly ooh-JOOZ.
They're just calling it like they see it. :o
http://972mag.com/breaking-haaretz-j...omorrow/56963/
Good job, reporters. What a more effective way of bankrupting your newspaper.
And some real Zionuts: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/...caust-1.468298
I love how it's okay if she only posted virulently antisemitic (and incredibly offensive) conspiracy theories to her personal Facebook page instead of to her organization's Twitter.
:haha: Unbelievable.
Ouch. Though I have to say it leaves a bad taste in my mouth to have a billionaire distributing a free newspaper that helps undermine the newspapers who are actually trying to build a business.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
NY Times has a story about Israeli newspapers: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/wo...papers.html?hp
I doubt the Free Gaza quote will make its way into the mainstream media.
the word “Nazi” combines the words “National Socialist” and “Zionist.” :haha:
There's certainly a difference between personal opinions and those accepted by an organization.Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggin
It doesn't say much for an organization led by someone who states these things privately. She's not just a foot soldier. And it's not like she meant this as a joke.
I didn't say it suddenly doesn't matter, but there is a difference between speaking your own mind and speaking for an organization.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
With small organizations that aren't institutionalized, there is very little difference between the views of the leaders and the views of the organization.
I always scan these ADL studies with a lot of skepticism, but then I see that their sample sizes are relatively large. Then again, how the fuck do you get someone to say this stuff to a pollster on the phone?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Meanwhile, this is an actual show in the UK and Ireland: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/j...um-of-the-year
Can't seem to figure out if this would ever get made in the US. On one hand, we have plenty of quasi-ethnic reality shows. But I sorta doubt this would really get made.