Rebuke Israel - Rebuke Us!

Blogmaster’s indignation: If after the more than 4000 American lives sacrificed, thousands more wounded and maimed for life, and the billions of our tax dollars invested to give Iraq the opportunity to be free and to enter the 21st Century, they wish to become just another Arab fiefdom who seeks Israel's destruction… Then Screw Them, their Mullahs, and their camels! Let's get our troops out of Iraq as soon as possible and let them slaughter one another & good riddance!


Iraqi MPs voice outrage after President shakes Barak's hand.

By Reuters

BAGHDAD - Several members of the Iraqi parliament called on President Jalal Talabani on Friday to apologize for shaking hands with Ehud Barak at a conference in Greece this week, saying that by shaking the Israeli defense minister's hand he had violated Iraqi law. Talabani, a Kurd, was introduced to Barak by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas at a Socialist International meeting near Athens on Tuesday, where the historic handshake took place. The handshake, largely ignored by Iraq's media but covered in the Israeli press, sparked heated debate in Iraq's parliament on Thursday.

Like many Arab countries, Iraq does not recognize Israel. Some members accused Talabani of breaking Iraqi law, although it was unclear what the law says about Israel. "I told the speaker it was a slap in the face for the Iraqi people," said Ahmed al-Massoudi, from the movement of anti-American Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. "[The handshake] was a violation of law," he told reporters.

Massoudi said he had received many complaints from Iraqis about the handshake and some members of parliament had called for an apology. Some had even urged Talabani to resign, he said. Under Iraq's political system the president is largely a figurehead. Ali al-Adeeb, a senior parliamentarian from Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's Dawa party, said the handshake was unacceptable. "The president is supposed to represent Iraqi policy? which means not recognizing Israel ... He must apologize." Perhaps sensing the handshake might cause anger, Talabani's office issued a statement on Tuesday saying he met Barak as a representative of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) party, not as Iraq's president.

The PUK is one of two main Kurdish parties in Iraq. Fellow Kurds defended Talabani. "He was welcomed by Abbas who introduced him to Barak. It would have been illogical to refuse. It doesn't mean relations are normal," said Fuad Masoum, a Kurdish member of parliament.

Abu Yahya al Libi: Next video following Bin Laden's diatribe.

Blogmaster's Observations: This video, albeit radical Islamic propaganda in the purest sense, has obvious intelligence value for us. The more we know our enemy, the more likely his destruction.

http://www.lauramansfield.com/allibi.wmv

(This video has not yet been released to the public)

There are other videos in the pipeline both from Al Qaeda and its sympathizers.

Last week, banner ads on Jihadist sites announced a video "coming soon" in the form of a "Second Interview" with an unnamed Al Qaeda leader.

That "second interview" should be releasing shortly. We've obtained a copy through Laura Mansfield, and it features Abu Yahya al Libi, who is trying to capitalize on his fame as an escapee from Bagram Prison in Afghanistan, and his reputation as a "mujahid sheikh", a battlefield preacher of sorts. Follow the above link to view this enemy video.

KISSING SAUDI TOUCHESES

http://www.drybonesproject.com/blog/D07805_2.gif

Clear and Present Danger

Clear and Present Danger

Irwin Cotler - Aug 01, 2007
World Jewish Digest

We are witnessing a state-sanctioned incitement to genocide, whose epicenter is Mahmoud Ahmadinezhad’s Iran, where the toxic advocacy of the most horrific of crimes is embedded in the most virulent of hatreds—anti-semitism.

This eliminationist hatred of Jews is propelled by a desire to acquire nuclear weapons for the stated purpose of eliminating Israel “in one single storm.” Iran’s leaders have not hid their intentions. Indeed, in any number of ways, they have already shown us the methods and means of their plan.

They have paraded in the streets of Tehran a Shihab-3 missile draped in the emblem “wipe Israel off the map.” They have denied the European Holocaust as they incite a new Middle Eastern one. They have espoused an eschatological fanaticism that seeks the “death of Israel” as an apocalyptical annihilationist precursor to the Messianic coming of the twelfth Imam.

Whatever the index of measurement—state-sanctioned incitement to genocide, nuclear proliferation, state support for international terrorism—Ahmadinezhad’s Iran constitutes not only an existential threat to Israel and the Jewish people, but also a threat to Middle East and international peace and security. Moreover, Ahmadinezhad’s Iran is also a major violator of the rights of its own citizens, reminding us of the principle that countries that do not respect the rights of their own citizens are unlikely to respect the rights of theirs neighbors.

The Iranian threat is as pervasive as it is persistent and as serious as it is substantial, threatening not only Israel and world Jewry but international peace and security. But it can be addressed and redressed. What is lacking is a comprehensive, sustained and multi-layered strategy led by the United Nations Security Council and the international community as a whole.

The Scope of the Iranian Threat
Since its nuclear enrichment program was revealed in 2003, Iran has rejected offers from the international community to cooperate in the development of the peaceful uses of atomic energy, including a range of economic incentives, while continuing to defy the international community. In particular, it has repudiated U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1696, 1737 and 1747 passed in July 2006, December 2006 and March 2007, respectively.

As Iran dismisses the U.N.’s authority, there have been a series of ominous developments. The most recent came on May 25, 2007, when the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (I.A.E.A.) reported that Iran sharply accelerated its uranium enrichment program, such that there were four times as many centrifuges on May 25 as had been reported in February 2007. Iran has also halted its cooperation with U.N. inspectors and the head of the IAEA, Mohamed El Baradei (who is normally circumspect in his remarks), said that Iran was proceeding at a pace at which it could enrich enough uranium to make atomic bombs by 2010. Other intelligence sources have said that Iran could have bomb-making capability as early as 2008.

On that same May day, Iranian President Ahmadinezhad said that “Iran will never retreat even one step” from its program to develop nuclear weapons and warned again about Israel being “uprooted” from the Middle East.

A nuclear-armed Iran would constitute a direct threat to the stability of the Middle East, as it may trigger a nuclear-arms race among other Middle Eastern states. What’s more, Iran’s pursuit of weapons increases the likelihood of terrorist non-state actors, including Iranian proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah, to seek or secure access to nuclear capability.

Even if such weapons are not used, the balance of power in the Middle East will be dramatically transformed. Iran’s temptation to obtain regional hegemony will increase; it could then seek to blackmail its neighbors and use the terrorist weapon more freely against Israel and Jewish targets around the world. Moreover, the regional nuclear-arms race will intensify, exacerbating the existential danger to Israel and the Jewish people.

Combating the Iranian Threat
There are a number of remedies that are authorized under United Nations institutions, such as the U.N. Security Council, and the U.N. Secretary General, as well as under U.N. Law, such as the U.N. Charter and the Genocide Convention.

First, state parties to the Genocide Convention, such as the United States, have not only a right, but a responsibility, to enforce the Convention, particularly as regards the prevention of genocide. It is astonishing that the horrific incitement to genocide by Ahmadinezhad has yet even to be addressed by the U.N. Security Council, the U.N. General Assembly, or any other body or agency of the United Nations.

Second, as a corollary, the U.N. General Assembly, meeting on September 18 for its 62nd session, should declare this genocidal incitement as a standing violation of the United Nations’ Charter, which prohibits such threats to the territorial integrity and political independence of any state.

Third, state parties should initiate in the International Court of Justice an inter-state complaint against Iran, also a state party to the Genocide Convention, for its “direct and public incitement to genocide” in violation of the Genocide Treaty.

Fourth, the situation of the international criminality of President Ahmadinezhad, and other Iranian leaders, should be referred by the U.N. Security Council to the special prosecutor of the International Criminal Court for investigation and prosecution.

Fifth, state parties to the Genocide Convention should prepare criminal indictments for President Ahmadinezhad, former President Hashemi Rafsanjani and other Iranian leaders on the basis of the “universal jurisdiction” principle embodied in the Genocide Convention.

Sixth, pursuant to the Genocide Convention and the Statute for the International Court, the U.N. Secretary General should refer the genocidal incitement of President Ahmadinezhad and other Iranian leaders to the U.N. Security Council, as a matter threatening international peace and security, pursuant to Article 99 of the U.N. Charter.

Finally, President Ahmadinezhad and other designated Iranian leaders should be placed on a “watch list” by concerned countries preventing their entrance as “inadmissible persons.”

A Comprehensive Security Council Resolution
While Iranian nuclear enrichment continues to accelerate, and a nuclear weapons capability may be only a year away, the international response proceeds in slow motion. Accordingly, given the continued defiance by Iran, the U.N. Security Council should now move to adopt an enhanced and targeted resolution that will include the following components.

1. Target the vulnerable oil and gas industrial sectors. International economic sanctions will only be effective if they have a impact on Iran’s lucrative energy sectors including, in particular, the Iranian engineering giant Khatam-ol-Anbia, the nerve center of the Iranian natural gas and oil pipeline industry.

2. Target the banking and military-industrial sectors. The previous U.N. Security Council Resolutions only froze the accounts of Sepah, Iran’s fourth-largest bank. However, several other Iranian banks, including Bank Melli, Bank Saderat and the Central Bank of Iran, should have their funds frozen overseas and sanctioned with a ban on doing business with them. The massive military-industrial complex must be targeted, as it is controlled by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, who are involved directly with Iran’s proliferation activities and increasingly in control of the economy.

3. Implement the sanctions regime adopted by the U.N. In particular, Europe should leverage its $20 billion in loans to Iran while member states of the international community should withdraw any export credits respecting the trading with and financing of the Iran economy.

4. Treat President Ahmadinezhad and the officers of his regime as “inadmissible persons,” unable to enter countries to spread their message of hatred beyond Iran’s borders. There should be no sanctuary for those who incite to genocide or commit crimes against humanity, or seek to acquire nuclear weapons for that purpose or other nefarious means.

5. Impose a two-way arms embargo. The flow of weapons, both into and out of Iran, must be stopped. A complete embargo would prevent the weapons entering Iran from being used for terror, just as cutting off the cash flow from arms sales would prevent its financing.

6. Establish a U.N. monitoring team to ensure compliance with these sanctions and to verify that member states obey what has been agreed upon. Without such follow-up, any new sanctions risk amounting to little more than words on paper, lacking any practical effect on their object.

7. Enforce the foreign asset forfeiture that has been imposed on 23 Iranian persons and entities by the European Union. The U.N. should incorporate this list into its own, putting an end to financial safe havens for those who bankroll genocide.

In a word, Iran needs to be shut out from the international financial system until compliance is achieved. The previous U.N. sanctions must be followed- up in the form of tougher sanctions that go after a broader range of banks, companies and industries that deal directly with nuclear capacity, energy, and financing of terror and those supporting it. Iran is well integrated into the world economy—and it has survived the symbolic sanctions unscathed. Real sanctions would leave the economy vulnerable, bringing the goals of such sanctions to fruition.

Divestment
As a complementary support system to comprehensive U.N.-sponsored economic and financial sanctions, it is a necessity to encourage divestment from companies, institutions and entities doing businesses in Iran. Such a campaign would exert considerable pressure on those in the Iranian leadership who are responsible for the public incitement to genocide, the acceleration of uranium enrichment to achieve nuclear capacity and its state-sponsorship of international terrorism.

The United States has taken the lead in developing concentrated divestment campaigns targeting specific Iranian entities. Indeed, in the U.S., the divestment campaign is part of a broader push to encourage divestment from companies doing business with countries that sponsor terrorism. For example, bills have been introduced in the U.S. Congress and individual states to order pension funds to divest themselves of any Iranian interests. A bill introduced on May 16, 2007, also seeks to protect fund managers from shareholder lawsuits should the funds divest interest in energy companies doing business with Iran.

An international divestment would send a clear message to the leadership in Iran: its state-sanctioned incitement to genocide, its uranium enrichment program and its terrorist financing are not only violations of international law and a threat to international peace and security, but also utterly prejudicial to the national interests of Iran and Iranians themselves.

Congressional and Other Parliamentary Initiatives
If the United Nations Security Council and other U.N. agencies do not act, on their own initiative, to bring Ahmadinezhad and the Iranian leadership to account, the developing initiatives in the U.S. Congress and other parliaments may yet prevail upon the U. N. to undertake the necessary actions.

For example, on June 20, 2007, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H. Con. Res. 21 by a sweeping 411-2 vote. Although nonbinding, this measure calls on the Security Council to charge Iranian President Ahmadinezhad with violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the U.N. Charter “because of his calls for the destruction of the State of Israel.” Similarly, Canada’s House of Commons’ Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on International Human Rights passed a motion to refer the “direct and public incitement to genocide” by Iranian officials, including President Ahmadinezhad, to the United Nations.

These legislative initiatives have not only an important symbolic value; rather, they signify a finding, a legal determination, that Iranian leadership is engaged in incitement to genocide. They are representative of a growing consensus that Iranian officials have violated prohibitions of the Genocide Convention and the Treaty for an International Criminal Court, and should be duly addressed through the U.N. system. Beyond North America, a similar motion is now before the United Kingdom’s Parliament and is moving forward in Australia.

Public Diplomacy
It is important not to conflate Ahmadinezhad’s Iran with the Iran many of its citizens wish to see established as a free, democratic state living at peace with its neighbors. Experts speak hopefully of the forces of change working within Iran, though, admittedly, there are also those who regard the authoritarian control and repression of the extremist Iranian leadership as overriding. Yet, Iranian scholars such as McGill Law Professor Payam Akhavan, a board member of the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center at Yale University, have stated that many of the fissures we are witnessing in Iran may well be the “dying gasp” of a regime that has lost touch with the majority of its Iranian citizens.

Accordingly, the appropriate public diplomacy should support the dynamic civil society struggling to have its voice heard, while reflecting the necessity of isolating, and holding accountable at the same time, the authoritarian regime of President Ahmadinezhad. The international community should support the Iranian civil society’s promotion of democracy, human rights, good governance and the rule of law in Iran.

The list of initiatives suggested here constitutes a necessary set of strategic actions in the interest of the protection of Israel, the promotion of international peace and security, and the long-term interests of the state and people of Iran itself. But let there be no mistake: time is running out. We must act now.

Irwin Cotler is a Canadian Member of Parliament and former minister of justice and attorney general of Canada


3965 W. 83rd. Street #292 Shawnee Mission, KS 66208 I Phone: 913.648.0022 I Fax: 913.648.7997
This site is designed for standards compliant browsers. If your browser is not standards compliant, download one here.
Website copyright © 2006. Unity Coalition for Israel.

U.S. MIDDLE-EASTERN POLICY WILL SPELL DISASTER FOR ISRAEL

THE STUPIDITY AND ARROGANCE OF U.S. MIDDLE-EASTERN POLICY WILL SPELL DISASTER FOR ISRAEL & THE WESTERN WORLD

Bill Maniaci, B’nai Elim Blogmaster
‏יום שלישי 31 יולי 2007

The forthcoming twenty-billion dollar arms sale to the Saudis and other Arab States in region will spell disaster for the defense of Israel. The arms deal will tilt the precarious balance of power in overwhelming favor to those who would rejoice in the destruction of Israel.

The time for decisions by the American people has arrived. The people of the United States must decide whom to support. This administration is blindly arming our enemies to insure the supply of crude. Israel, in the eyes of this administration, is becoming “expendable” and the fallout at home from an Arab victory over Israel is being considered as “manageable in light of what is at stake in the region”. Already, there are closed-door discussions about who will take the surviving Israelis after Israel is beaten and destroyed.

Why are we allowing this to happen? A school child can see where the mad policies of the U.S. will take the Middle-East and the World. We are on a wild, and soon to be out of control, policy which can only end in not only the destruction of Israel, but the beginning of the end for Western Civilization as we know it.

Are the Americans oblivious to what is happening in the world at the instigation of the U.S. State Department? The executive branch of our Government is out of control. The legislative branch, Congress, has never before in our history been so inept and short-sighted as it is today. The liberals are solidly moving towards American withdrawal from the Middle-East. They are racing down the path of appeasement and isolationism while the Conservative Republicans are blindly being led down a path that will result in an unnecessary and avoidable apocalypse. We are devoid of the proper leadership in the White House and on Capitol Hill. It is time for the American people to stand up for what is righteous or suffer an inevitable decline in power, prestige, influence, and security.

Others in this world are watching and biding their time, fully intent on assisting the demise of not only Israel, but the United States as well. One has only to look at the constant increase and development of the military might of China to recognize the enemy waiting in the wings. In addition, Russia, who has historically only befriended the United States when she needed something is becoming more openly belligerent towards America and our policies and is overtly supplying our enemies.

Only strength of purpose and the will of the American people can prevent the cataclysmic events that are looming on the horizon. If the developing catastrophe in the Middle-East isn’t enough… we cannot forget that we are deeply in a war of Civilized Ideology vs. a worldwide Islamic Jihad which seeks to destroy America’s abilities to influence world affairs.

The battle plans of our enemies are simple… they have only to destroy our financial infrastructure and force us into a situation where we must focus one-hundred percent of our resources on the preservation of the United States. They have the means and the ability to do just that and their plans have already been set into motion.

I have seen intelligence information clearly indicating that our enemies have imported into the United States, tactical nuclear weapons. They intend to simultaneously detonate those weapons in several industrial and population centers in America. The focus of these attacks will be our Financial Center in Manhattan. Secondary targets will be our National Power Grid, our Major Port Facilities, our Oil Refineries and Pipelines, and collaterally, our Food and Water supplies.

If these attacks are successful, or if only one or two detonations cannot be prevented, they will have accomplished what no one in the history of the United States has been able to do… they will have brought us to our knees.

Retaliation will be out of the question because these terrorists do not fly the flags of any other nation… they stand under the flag of Islam. Such a multi-level disaster would cause national panic. Credit cards would cease to function and only cash would be accepted for necessities, ATM’s would be useless, Gas Stations would be unable to pump fuel, delivery of necessities would grind to a snail’s pace, panic and massive civil disobedience would be unavoidable and un-controllable.

The United States Government would be forced to recall our forces world-wide, restore order to the country. On the world stage, the United States would be totally ineffectual and without influence. Such a strike, if successful, would take decades to overcome. While we concentrate on rebuilding, our enemies would advance like a tide of locusts. A new, Islamic Dark Age will have begun. If this sounds like science-fiction… just think about it.

At least seven tactical nuclear weapons are in place in the United States and our Government cannot find them. These devices are easily transported and hidden. Could it be that our Government is succumbing to nuclear blackmail? Why else would we send $20 Billion Dollars in the latest high-tech weaponry to our enemies? Why else would we be willing to feed Israel to the sharks?

We know that Syria has been armed to the teeth by Iran and Saudi Arabia and is intent on attacking Israel. We know that Saudi Arabia and Iran are arming and supporting insurgents in Iraq and are directly responsible for the deaths of American Soldiers. We know that Saudi Arabia will stop at nothing to preserve the Saudi monarchy; we know that the smaller Arab Countries and Emirates will totally follow and support the policies of larger Arab countries and that the countries that are ruled by the Shariah (Islamic Law) will also rise against the United States.

So, there you have a brief, thumbnail sketch of what we and the rest of Western Civilization is facing. The wheels are in motion and when these events will occur is anyone’s guess. The Islamic world is known for its patience and its brutality, ferociousness and savagery. We are unprepared for what is nearly upon us.

We may have some time left. What we are able to accomplish with the time given us is up to you. Obviously, Twenty Billion in weapons to our enemies is more than mere stupidity. Sacrificing Israel is unconscionable.

You must decide what it is, and do something about it… Now!!!

THE U.S. POLICY ON SYRIA - DRAW A LINE IN THE SAND AND WHEN CROSSED, PRETEND YOU DIDN'T NOTICE

Blogmaster's Notes: We should all be aware by now of little boy Assad's
determination to show himself as a "Real Man" in the Arab World, despite
his girlish tendencies. Israel is his intended victim and because of this,
Assad has the full support, urging and financial backing of his bedroom partner,
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The United States has known of Syria's intended
aggression against Israel and of its planned use of Weapons of Mass Destruction
on Israel, to include chemical and biological weapons targeting Tel-Aviv and other
large population centers for years. If you read the Congressional Act below, signed
into law by President George W. Bush in 2003, you would think that the United States
would, in no uncertain terms, block Syria's aggression. (Reminds me of the former
President Bush saying "Saddam - Read my lips!). The provisions and language below are
harsh... tough talk, and leave no room for misinterpretation. This document confirms
unequivocally, the existence and intended target of Syria's stockpiles of nerve-agents,
biological and chemical weapons, long-range and modern rockets and missiles, state
of the art anti-tank weapons, etc., etc., etc!!! The United States threatened Syria almost
4 Years Ago!.. To stand down, or face serious and severe repercussions. What has the
United States done to enforce the measures that were passed and signed into law????
Well let me see, Nancy Pelosi violated this law to visit "little boy" Assad and give him a
hug (boosted his confidence level about a thousand percent wouldn't you say?).
Reminds me of Hillary Clinton hugging and kissing Shua Arafat. The bottom line here is...
Israel will face Syria and Iran alone and if the U.S. intervenes at all, it will only be after Israel has suffered terribly. The Arab World has only to look at the history of the United States as a "Paper Tiger" and put the "Syrian Accountability Act" where they dip their left hands.
Israel... pray for peace, but prepare for war (and do it expeditiously). Blogmaster

Have you ever read this bill?.............

[DOCID: f:publ175.108]

[[Page 2481]]

SYRIA ACCOUNTABILITY AND LEBANESE
SOVEREIGNTY RESTORATION ACT OF 2003

[[Page 117 STAT. 2482]]

Public Law 108-175
108th Congress

An Act



To halt Syrian support for terrorism, end its occupation of Lebanon, and
stop its development of weapons of mass destruction, and by so doing
hold Syria accountable for the serious international security problems
it has caused in the Middle East, and for other purposes. <>

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, <>

SECTION 1. <> SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Syria Accountability and Lebanese
Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. <> FINDINGS.

Congress makes the following findings:
(1) On June 24, 2002, President Bush stated ``Syria must
choose the right side in the war on terror by closing terrorist
camps and expelling terrorist organizations''.
(2) United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373
(September 28, 2001) mandates that all states ``refrain from
providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or
persons involved in terrorist acts'', take ``the necessary steps
to prevent the commission of terrorist acts'', and ``deny safe
haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist
acts''.
(3) The Government of Syria is currently prohibited by
United States law from receiving United States assistance
because it has repeatedly provided support for acts of
international terrorism, as determined by the Secretary of State
for purposes of section 6(j)(1) of the Export Administration Act
of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2405(j)(1)) and other relevant
provisions of law.
(4) Although the Department of State lists Syria as a state
sponsor of terrorism and reports that Syria provides ``safe
haven and support to several terrorist groups'', fewer United
States sanctions apply with respect to Syria than with respect
to any other country that is listed as a state sponsor of
terrorism.
(5) Terrorist groups, including Hizballah, Hamas,
Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation
of Palestine, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine--General Command, maintain offices, training camps,
and other facilities on Syrian territory, and operate in areas
of Lebanon occupied by the Syrian armed forces and receive
supplies from Iran through Syria.

[[Page 117 STAT. 2483]]

(6) United Nations Security Council Resolution 520
(September 17, 1982) calls for ``strict respect of the
sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity and political
independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority
of the Government of Lebanon through the Lebanese Army
throughout Lebanon''.
(7) Approximately 20,000 Syrian troops and security
personnel occupy much of the sovereign territory of Lebanon
exerting undue influence upon its government and undermining its
political independence.
(8) Since 1990 the Senate and House of Representatives have
passed seven bills and resolutions which call for the withdrawal
of Syrian armed forces from Lebanon.
(9) On March 3, 2003, Secretary of State Colin Powell
declared that it is the objective of the United States to ``let
Lebanon be ruled by the Lebanese people without the presence of
[the Syrian] occupation army''.
(10) Large and increasing numbers of the Lebanese people
from across the political spectrum in Lebanon have mounted
peaceful and democratic calls for the withdrawal of the Syrian
Army from Lebanese soil.
(11) Israel has withdrawn all of its armed forces from
Lebanon in accordance with United Nations Security Council
Resolution 425 (March 19, 1978), as certified by the United
Nations Secretary General.
(12) Even in the face of this United Nations certification
that acknowledged Israel's full compliance with Security Council
Resolution 425, Syrian- and Iranian-supported Hizballah
continues to attack Israeli outposts at Shebaa Farms, under the
pretense that Shebaa Farms is territory from which Israel was
required to withdraw by Security Counsel Resolution 425, and
Syrian- and Iranian-supported Hizballah and other militant
organizations continue to attack civilian targets in Israel.
(13) Syria will not allow Lebanon--a sovereign country--to
fulfill its obligation in accordance with Security Council
Resolution 425 to deploy its troops to southern Lebanon.
(14) As a result, the Israeli-Lebanese border and much of
southern Lebanon is under the control of Hizballah, which
continues to attack Israeli positions, allows Iranian
Revolutionary Guards and other militant groups to operate freely
in the area, and maintains thousands of rockets along Israel's
northern border, destabilizing the entire region.
(15) On February 12, 2003, Director of Central Intelligence
George Tenet stated the following with respect to the Syrian-
and Iranian-supported Hizballah: ``[A]s an organization with
capability and worldwide presence [it] is [al Qaeda's] equal if
not a far more capable organization * * * [T]hey're a notch
above in many respects, in terms of in their relationship with
the Iranians and the training they receive, [which] puts them in
a state-sponsored category with a potential for lethality that's
quite great.''.
(16) In the State of the Union address on January 29, 2002,
President Bush declared that the United States will ``work
closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state
sponsors the materials, technology, and expertise to make and
deliver weapons of mass destruction''.

[[Page 117 STAT. 2484]]

(17) The Government of Syria continues to develop and deploy
short- and medium-range ballistic missiles.

(18) According to the December 2001 unclassified Central
Intelligence Agency report entitled ``Foreign Missile
Developments and the Ballistic Missile Threat through 2015'',
``Syria maintains a ballistic missile and rocket force of
hundreds of FROG rockets, Scuds, and SS-21 SRBMs [and] Syria has
developed [chemical weapons] warheads for its Scuds''.

(19) The Government of Syria is pursuing the development and
production of biological and chemical weapons and has a nuclear
research and development program that is cause for concern.

(20) According to the Central Intelligence Agency's
``Unclassified Report to Congress on the Acquisition of
Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advanced
Conventional Munitions'', released January 7, 2003: ``[Syria]
already holds a stockpile of the nerve agent sarin but
apparently is trying to develop more toxic and persistent nerve
agents. Syria remains dependent on foreign sources for key
elements of its [chemical weapons] program, including precursor
chemicals and key production equipment. It is highly probable
that Syria also is developing an offensive [biological weapons]
capability.''.

(21) On May 6, 2002, the Under Secretary of State for Arms
Control and International Security, John Bolton, stated: ``The
United States also knows that Syria has long had a chemical
warfare program. It has a stockpile of the nerve agent sarin and
is engaged in research and development of the more toxic and
persistent nerve agent VX. Syria, which has signed but not
ratified the [Biological Weapons Convention], is pursuing the
development of biological weapons and is able to produce at
least small amounts of biological warfare agents.''.

(22) According to the Central Intelligence Agency's
``Unclassified Report to Congress on the Acquisition of
Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advanced
Conventional Munitions'', released January 7, 2003: ``Russia and
Syria have approved a draft cooperative program on cooperation
on civil nuclear power. In principal, broader access to Russian
expertise provides opportunities for Syria to expand its
indigenous capabilities, should it decide to pursue nuclear
weapons.''.
(23) Under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons (21 UST 483), which entered force on March 5, 1970, and
to which Syria is a party, Syria has undertaken not to acquire
or produce nuclear weapons and has accepted full scope
safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency to detect
diversions of nuclear materials from peaceful activities to the
production of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive
devices.
(24) Syria is not a party to the Chemical Weapons Convention
or the Biological Weapons Convention, which entered into force
on April 29, 1997, and on March 26, 1975, respectively.
(25) Syrian President Bashar Assad promised Secretary of
State Powell in February 2001 to end violations of Security
Council Resolution 661, which restricted the sale of oil and
other commodities by Saddam Hussein's regime, except to the

[[Page 117 STAT. 2485]]

extent authorized by other relevant resolutions, but this pledge
was never fulfilled.
(26) Syria's illegal imports and transshipments of Iraqi oil
during Saddam Hussein's regime earned Syria $50,000,000 or more
per month as Syria continued to sell its own Syrian oil at
market prices.
(27) Syria's illegal imports and transshipments of Iraqi oil
earned Saddam Hussein's regime $2,000,000 per day.
(28) On March 28, 2003, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
warned: ``[W]e have information that shipments of military
supplies have been crossing the border from Syria into Iraq,
including night-vision goggles * * * These deliveries pose a
direct threat to the lives of coalition forces. We consider such
trafficking as hostile acts, and will hold the Syrian government
accountable for such shipments.''.
(29) According to Article 23(1) of the United Nations
Charter, members of the United Nations are elected as
nonpermanent members of the United Nations Security Council with
``due regard being specially paid, in the first instance to the
contribution of members of the United Nations to the maintenance
of international peace and security and to other purposes of the
Organization''.
(30) Despite Article 23(1) of the United Nations Charter,
Syria was elected on October 8, 2001, to a 2-year term as a
nonpermanent member of the United Nations Security Council
beginning January 1, 2002, and served as President of the
Security Council during June 2002 and August 2003.
(31) On March 31, 2003, the Syrian Foreign Minister, Farouq
al-Sharra, made the Syrian regime's intentions clear when he
explicitly stated that ``Syria's interest is to see the invaders
defeated in Iraq''.
(32) On April 13, 2003, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld
charged that ``busloads'' of Syrian fighters entered Iraq with
``hundreds of thousands of dollars'' and leaflets offering
rewards for dead American soldiers.
(33) On September 16, 2003, the Under Secretary of State for
Arms Control and International Security, John Bolton, appeared
before the Subcommittee on the Middle East and Central Asia of
the Committee on International Relations of the House of
Representatives, and underscored Syria's ``hostile actions''
toward coalition forces during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Under
Secretary Bolton added that: ``Syria allowed military equipment
to flow into Iraq on the eve of and during the war. Syria
permitted volunteers to pass into Iraq to attack and kill our
service members during the war, and is still doing so * * *
[Syria's] behavior during Operation Iraqi Freedom underscores
the importance of taking seriously reports and information on
Syria's WMD capabilities.''.
(34) During his appearance before the Committee on
International Relations of the House of Representatives on
September 25, 2003, Ambassador L. Paul Bremer, III,
Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq,
stated that out of the 278 third-country nationals who were
captured by coalition forces in Iraq, the ``single largest group
are Syrians''.

[[Page 117 STAT. 2486]]

SEC. 3. <> SENSE OF CONGRESS.

It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the Government of Syria should immediately and
unconditionally halt support for terrorism, permanently and
openly declare its total renunciation of all forms of terrorism,
and close all terrorist offices and facilities in Syria,
including the offices of Hamas, Hizballah, Palestinian Islamic
Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and
the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine--General
Command;
(2) the Government of Syria should--
(A) immediately and unconditionally stop
facilitating transit from Syria to Iraq of individuals,
military equipment, and all lethal items, except as
authorized by the Coalition Provisional Authority or a
representative, internationally recognized Iraqi
government;
(B) cease its support for ``volunteers'' and
terrorists who are traveling from and through Syria into
Iraq to launch attacks; and
(C) undertake concrete, verifiable steps to deter
such behavior and control the use of territory under
Syrian control;
(3) the Government of Syria should immediately declare its
commitment to completely withdraw its armed forces, including
military, paramilitary, and security forces, from Lebanon, and
set a firm timetable for such withdrawal;
(4) the Government of Lebanon should deploy the Lebanese
armed forces to all areas of Lebanon, including South Lebanon,
in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolution
520 (September 17, 1982), in order to assert the sovereignty of
the Lebanese state over all of its territory, and should evict
all terrorist and foreign forces from southern Lebanon,
including Hizballah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards;
(5) the Government of Syria should halt the development and
deployment of medium- and long-range surface-to-surface missiles
and cease the development and production of biological and
chemical weapons;
(6) the Governments of Lebanon and Syria should enter into
serious unconditional bilateral negotiations with the Government
of Israel in order to realize a full and permanent peace;
(7) the United States should continue to provide
humanitarian and educational assistance to the people of Lebanon
only through appropriate private, nongovernmental organizations
and appropriate international organizations, until such time as
the Government of Lebanon asserts sovereignty and control over
all of its territory and borders and achieves full political
independence, as called for in United Nations Security Council
Resolution 520; and
(8) as a violator of several key United Nations Security
Council resolutions and as a nation that pursues policies which
undermine international peace and security, Syria should not
have been permitted to join the United Nations Security Council
or serve as the Security Council's President, and should be
removed from the Security Council.

[[Page 117 STAT. 2487]]

SEC. 4. <> STATEMENT OF POLICY.

It is the policy of the United States that--
(1) Syria should bear responsibility for attacks committed
by Hizballah and other terrorist groups with offices, training
camps, or other facilities in Syria, or bases in areas of
Lebanon occupied by Syria;
(2) the United States will work to deny Syria the ability to
support acts of international terrorism and efforts to develop
or acquire weapons of mass destruction;
(3) the Secretary of State will continue to list Syria as a
state sponsor of terrorism until Syria ends its support for
terrorism, including its support of Hizballah and other
terrorist groups in Lebanon and its hosting of terrorist groups
in Damascus, and comes into full compliance with United States
law relating to terrorism and United Nations Security Council
Resolution 1373 (September 28, 2001);
(4) the full restoration of Lebanon's sovereignty, political
independence, and territorial integrity is in the national
security interest of the United States;
(5) Syria is in violation of United Nations Security Council
Resolution 520 (September 17, 1982) through its continued
occupation of Lebanese territory and its encroachment upon
Lebanon's political independence;
(6) Syria's obligation to withdraw from Lebanon is not
conditioned upon progress in the Israeli-Syrian or Israeli-
Lebanese peace process but derives from Syria's obligation under
Security Council Resolution 520;
(7) Syria's acquisition of weapons of mass destruction and
ballistic missile programs threaten the security of the Middle
East and the national security interests of the United States;
(8) Syria will be held accountable for any harm to Coalition
armed forces or to any United States citizen in Iraq if the
government of Syria is found to be responsible due to its
facilitation of terrorist activities and its shipments of
military supplies to Iraq; and
(9) the United States will not provide any assistance to
Syria and will oppose multilateral assistance for Syria until
Syria ends all support for terrorism, withdraws its armed forces
from Lebanon, and halts the development and deployment of
weapons of mass destruction and medium- and long-range surface-
to-surface ballistic missiles.

SEC. 5. <> PENALTIES AND
AUTHORIZATION.

(a) <> Penalties.--Until the President makes
the determination that Syria meets all the requirements described in
paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (d) and certifies such
determination to Congress in accordance with such subsection--
(1) the President shall prohibit the export to Syria of any
item, including the issuance of a license for the export of any
item, on the United States Munitions List or Commerce Control
List of dual-use items in the Export Administration Regulations
(15 CFR part 730 et seq.); and
(2) the President shall impose two or more of the following
sanctions:
(A) Prohibit the export of products of the United
States (other than food and medicine) to Syria.

[[Page 117 STAT. 2488]]

(B) Prohibit United States businesses from investing
or operating in Syria.
(C) Restrict Syrian diplomats in Washington, D.C.,
and at the United Nations in New York City, to travel
only within a 25-mile radius of Washington, D.C., or the
United Nations headquarters building, respectively.
(D) Prohibit aircraft of any air carrier owned or
controlled by Syria to take off from, land in, or
overfly the United States.
(E) Reduce United States diplomatic contacts with
Syria (other than those contacts required to protect
United States interests or carry out the purposes of
this Act).
(F) Block transactions in any property in which the
Government of Syria has any interest, by any person, or
with respect to any property, subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States.

(b) Waiver.--The <> President may waive the
application of subsection (a)(1), (a)(2), or both if the President
determines that it is in the national security interest of the United
States to do so and submits to the appropriate congressional committees
a report containing the reasons for the determination.

(c) Authority To Provide Assistance To Syria.--If the President--
(1) <> makes the determination that
Syria meets the requirements described in paragraphs (1) through
(4) of subsection (d) and certifies such determination to
Congress in accordance with such subsection;
(2) determines that substantial progress has been made both
in negotiations aimed at achieving a peace agreement between
Israel and Syria and in negotiations aimed at achieving a peace
agreement between Israel and Lebanon; and
(3) determines that the Government of Syria is strictly
respecting the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and
political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive
authority of the Government of Lebanon through the Lebanese army
throughout Lebanon, as required under paragraph (4) of United
Nations Security Council Resolution 520 (1982),

then the President is authorized to provide assistance to Syria under
chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (relating to
development assistance).
(d) Certification.--A certification under this subsection is a
certification transmitted to the appropriate congressional committees of
a determination made by the President that--
(1) the Government of Syria has ceased providing support for
international terrorist groups and does not allow terrorist
groups, such as Hamas, Hizballah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Popular
Front for the Liberation of Palestine--General Command to
maintain facilities in territory under Syrian control;
(2) the Government of Syria ended its occupation of Lebanon
described in section 2(7) of this Act;
(3) the Government of Syria has ceased the development and
deployment of medium- and long-range surface-to-surface
ballistic missiles, is not pursuing or engaged in the research,
development, acquisition, production, transfer, or deployment of
biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons, has provided credible
assurances that such behavior will not be undertaken

[[Page 117 STAT. 2489]]

in the future, and has agreed to allow United Nations and other
international observers to verify such actions and assurances;
and
(4) the Government of Syria has ceased all support for, and
facilitation of, all terrorist activities inside of Iraq,
including preventing the use of territory under its control by
any means whatsoever to support those engaged in terrorist
activities inside of Iraq.

SEC. 6. <> REPORT.

(a) <> Report.--Not later than 6 months after the
date of the enactment of this Act, and every 12 months thereafter until
the conditions described in paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 5(d)
are satisfied, the Secretary of State shall submit to the appropriate
congressional committees a report on--
(1) Syria's progress toward meeting the conditions described
in paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 5(d);
(2) connections, if any, between individual terrorists and
terrorist groups which maintain offices, training camps, or
other facilities on Syrian territory, or operate in areas of
Lebanon occupied by the Syrian armed forces, and terrorist
attacks on the United States or its citizens, installations, or
allies; and
(3) how the United States is increasing its efforts against
Hizballah and other terrorist organizations supported by Syria.

(b) Form.--The report submitted under subsection (a) shall be in
unclassified form but may include a classified annex.

SEC. 7. <> DEFINITION OF APPROPRIATE
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.

In this Act, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means
the Committee on International Relations of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.

Approved December 12, 2003.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 1828:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 108-314 (Comm. on International Relations).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 149 (2003):
Oct. 15, considered and passed House.
Nov. 11, considered and passed Senate, amended.
Nov. 20, House concurred in Senate amendments.
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 39 (2003):
Dec. 12, Presidential statement.

*******************************************************************************************
There will be no sanctuary for those who attack Jewish people,
Jewish Institutions, or Jewish Interests anywhere in the world.
Never Again!

Erets Yisrael Le’Am Yisrael
LeShana HaBa'ah BeYerushalayim SHELANU

************************************************************************************************

* * * In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 ***,
any copyrighted work published here, is under fair use without
profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in
reviewing the included information for personal use, non-profit
research and educational purposes only.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

**************************************************************************************************

CIA and State Department Maladroitness Cause British Combat Deaths

Note: I wonder how many more people are going to die while the CIA splits hairs over their credibility so they can protect Iran from any kind of unpleasant repercussions. We appreciate the sacrifices being made by British Soldiers in Iraq in support of the War on Terror. Blogmaster

Iran supplied missile that hit UK helicopter

From The Sunday Times

June 24, 2007

Richard Miniter in Washington and Michael Smith

A ROYAL NAVY helicopter that crashed in flames in Basra last year, killing all five on board, was shot down by a sophisticated surface-to-air missile supplied to Iraqi militants by Iran, according to US officials.

America knew that the Mahdi Army, the radical Shi’ite militia, had obtained the shoulder-launched missile from the Iranians but failed to tell the British because of a row between the State Department and the CIA over the reliability of the source, US intelligence sources said.

The Lynx helicopter, from 847 Naval Air Squadron, based at Yeovilton, Somerset, was carrying a three-man crew plus Wing Commander John Coxen, the most senior officer to die in Iraq, and Flight Lieutenant Sarah-Jayne Mulvihill, the first British servicewoman killed in action since the second world war.

Witnesses told an inquest in Oxford last week that they saw a ball of yellow flame, typical of a particular type of missile, heading for the Lynx. Private Stuart Drummond said: “I thought it was a missile. The helicopter exploded. It was engulfed in flames and went down.”

The families of those killed were frequently asked to leave the inquest as secret details of the missile and the failure of the helicopter’s defensive systems were discussed. The report of a board of inquiry into the incident is heavily edited and was classified Top Secret Codeword, the highest UK classification.

This was because telephone intercepts, intelligence reports and pieces of the missile recovered from the scene confirmed that it came from Iran, the American sources said.

Three days before the attack, State Department officials interviewed an Iraqi linked to the Mahdi Army who told them Iran had supplied the militia with the Russian surface-to-air missile.

It was intended specifically for the Mahdi Army to shoot down a British helicopter, codenamed Operation Hawk-Taking.

The intelligence was not passed on to the British because the CIA dismissed the Iraqi detainee as “a well-known fabricator”, the sources alleged.

The allegations of Iranian involvement come amid increasing concern over Iran’s role in disrupting coalition operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Des Browne, the defence secretary, confirmed the scale of Iranian involvement in southern Iraq earlier this month. “Well over 80% of the violence is targeted against the British forces, much of it quite specifically influenced by the Iranians,” he said.

“We stand between them and their ambitions to share the spoils of what is potentially one of the richest cities in the world and to show the local population that they can force us out would be quite a coup for them. It’s in their interests to have their proxies drive us out of Iraq.”

British and US troops fought pitched battles with the Mahdi Army near the southern town of Amara last week as they broke up a network smuggling equipment from Iran to make armour-piercing shaped-charge bombs.

While it is widely known that Iran has been attempting to influence events in southern Iraq by backing attacks on British forces, suggestions that Iran is backing the Taliban in Afghanistan have, until recently, been given less credence by UK officials.

Browne went further than any British official on Iranian support for the Taliban. He said: “It is a changing pattern in that the Iranian influence is very important. We have evidence to suggest that they support the Taliban.”

Robert Gates, his US counterpart, made similar accusations, saying the extent of arms shipment across the Iranian border into Afghanistan suggested that the Iranian government was aware they were taking place.

Gates, a former CIA director, said he had seen recent intelligence analysis “that makes it pretty clear there’s a fairly substantial flow of weapons”.

Coalition forces have intercepted at least two large shipments of weapons coming into Afghanistan from Iran, one close to the border with Iran and the other near Kandahar.

It was left to the State Department to make the strongest allegations, with Nicholas Burns, the undersecretary of state, claiming there was “irrefutable evidence” that the Iranian government was involved in shipping weapons to the Taliban.

British officials, who had previously hesitated to suggest that Iran supported the Taliban, said they were seeing evidence of a shift in Tehran’s position.

That appeared to be confirmed by Admiral Ali Shamkhani, principal defence adviser to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader. Shamkhani told the US journal Defense News that Iran had “blocked US moves” in Iraq and Afghanistan.

While Iran’s “partner of choice” in Afghanistan is the United Front, the Taliban’s most implacable foe, Tehran is hedging its bets. It is also friendly with the government of President Hamid Karzai and invests heavily in Afghanistan, particularly in the west around Herat.

Its support for the Taliban is seen as similar to that of Pakistan’s, based on a recognition that in five or six years’ time America and its allies will be gone and the Taliban will not only still exist but could be in control of much of Afghanistan.

Officials said that Iran was also happy to be seen to be “tweaking the tail” of Britain and America.

- A British soldier died after a roadside bomb attack on his patrol in Basra yesterday.