Posts with the tag Israel

Your Tax Dollars at Work in the Middle East: Palestinians Forced from East Jerusalem Homes by Israeli Settlers Despite US Protests

Mark C. Eades — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:04:44 EST

On the night of Nov. 22, a group of Israeli settlers descended on the Jerusalem home of Palestinian resident Fatima al-Daoudi while the owner was away visiting relatives, changing the locks on the gates and putting a metal sheet over an open-air porch built in by the al-Daoudi family in 1948. Although an eviction order was obtained by the al-Daoudi family and the settlers removed, the order was only temporary and the settlers are expected to return, eventually to stay as the al-Daoudi family is forced to seek housing elsewhere. Residents of the same house since 1930, the al-Daoudi family now faces the prospect of joining the many other Palestinian residents of Jerusalem who, like those in the neighboring West Bank, have been turned into homeless refugees by expanding Israeli settlements (PNN).

Despite US and international protests, a similar fate recently befell the family of Mohammed al-Kurd and his wife Fawzieh, residents of their East Jerusalem home since 1956. Evicted in a pre-dawn raid by Israeli police, the al-Kurd family was forced to move into a tent on private land rented from a Palestinian neighbor while Israeli settlers moved into their home of more than fifty years. Israeli harassment against the family continued, however, including repeated demolition of the tent in which they had been forced to live despite its location on private Palestinian land. To make matters worse, Mr. al-Kurd suffered from complications related to diabetes, of which he finally passed away on Nov. 23. As Mrs. al-Kurd, her children, and her grandchildren mourn Mr. al-Kurd's death, the family's future remains in question (PNN, BBC, AFP, Haaretz, AIC).

As Haaretz reported prior to the al-Kurds' eviction from their home, the US filed an official protest with Israel for acts against Palestinians including the eviction of the al-Kurd family and harassment of Palestinian residents by Israeli settlers in the West Bank. The US complaint was obviously ignored. Such complaints from US officials including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have grown more frequent in recent months according to a separate Haaretz report, drawing the ire of some Israeli officials, who suggest the US is meddling in local affairs that are none of its business. Despite overriding US concern for Israeli interests and massive US aid to Israel, it would seem that the Israelis have little regard for US and international opinion on the human rights of Palestinians. Billions of your tax dollars go to Israel each year, yet even the most restrained US complaints against settlement expansion and abuse of Palestinians go ignored by those who are supposedly America's best friends and a beacon of democracy in the Middle East. Meanwhile, anger toward both Israel and America festers throughout the Arab world.

President-elect Obama has told us that "the time for change has come." Has the time come for this long, sad state of affairs to change?

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

‘Obsession’ Interviewee Calls Film ‘Vile Piece of Propaganda’

funkfresh01 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 18:05:13 EDT

Dr. Khaleel Mohammed: ‘Film demonizes an entire community. I have allowed myself to be used.'

(WASHINGTON, D.C., 9/27/08) â€" The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today said that a participant in an anti-Muslim film that is being distributed to 28 million homes in presidential election swing states CALLED the production a “vile piece of propaganda” in a statement sent to www.obsessionwithhate.com/

(WASHINGTON, D.C., 9/27/08) â€" The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today said that a participant in an anti-Muslim film that is being distributed to 28 million homes in presidential election swing states has issued a statement calling the production a “vile piece of propaganda.”

Obama / McCain: Who & Why

Jonathan Zucker — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:47:39 EDT

Rarely have we seen an American election mean so much to Israel. Both Obama and McCain are in fact and have always been supporters of Israel. All non-partisans have acknowledged that. This is NOT a choice of who is a bigger supporter of Israel but who will be a more EFFECTIVE supporter of Israel.

An International Viewpoint of Palin

Liz — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:50:25 EDT

LOL McCain's choice of Palin almost certainly lost him any Jewish support that he might have had in Florida. It is not so much her association with evangelicals as we all know of the Jesus for Jews groups. It is Palin's close association and support of Pat Buchanan that does that ticket in. Palin is no friend of the Jews--a point that all Jewish officials are sure to point out again and again and again.

On Haaretz we have: DEMOCRATIC REP: "PALIN PICK IS DIRECT AFFRONT TO ALL JEWISH AMERICANS"

Democratic Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida lashed out Saturday at John McCain's choice of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate, accusing her of supporting "Nazi sympathizer" Pat Buchanan, and branding the move an "affront to all Jewish Americans."

"John McCain's decision to select a vice presidential running mate that endorsed Pat Buchanan for president in 2000 is a direct affront to all Jewish Americans," said a statement by Wexler.

"Pat Buchanan is a Nazi sympathizer with a uniquely atrocious record on Israel, even going as far as to denounce bringing former Nazi soldiers to justice and praising Adolf Hitler for his 'great courage'".

Go there for the whole story

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1016785.html

Ethnic Cleansing in Iraq: Part Two

Frank Lynch — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:15:29 EDT

Some comments to "Ethnic Cleansing in Iraq" yesterday said things such as 'read up before you post!'

I was a national security consultant to the Department of Defense at a time when that meant I took my martinis "shaken not stirred." Under contract to the DoD, I co-authored a conflict prediction study forty years ago that set forth today's MidEast situation with perfect accuracy. Yesterday's commenters implied I don't understand the MidEast. In fact, I predicted it 40 years in advance, perfectly! Which made me the only Presidential candidate who actually has foreign affairs competence. My writings here are not from readings, but from hands on experience.

I met the Shah, and spent time with the CIA controllers who lived in the palace "furnishing advice" on his every act. The Shah was our puppet, owned lock, stock and barrel. British MI-6 created the Shah by kidnapping him when they killed his father for collaborating with Hitler, and MI-6 agents raised and educated the Shah. Our CIA took him over in the 1960s. Yes, he used torture. Duh! Iran is in Central Asia!

Everyone between Poland and China uses torture as casually as Columbia University undergrads deprive their opponents of the right to free speech and freedom of assembly.

Jimmy Carter ordered our CIA out of Iran and cut off all support and supplies. The Shah had the most modern Air Force in the world, all state of the art American technology because Iran was the armored firewall protecting Arabia and oil from takeover by the USSR, with whom they shared a long, and viciously battle torn border.

When Carter cut off replacement parts and withdrew the thousands of American contractors who maintained the advanced technology air force, armoured brigades, and communications systems, Iran's military was rendered immobile within weeks.

When Carter withdrew the hordes of American intelligence gatherers, the Shah lost much of his knowledge of the Russian sabateurs infiltrating Iran and who were organizing, supplying, paying salaries to, and training the so-called "popular uprising."

Every day there was military action of both Soviet organized phony internal "rebels" as well direct small scale invasions by USSR secret police groups operating in every poluation center inside Iran. As soon as Carter crippled Iran's military, death loomed large.

The Ayatollah Khomeni lived in exile in Paris financed by the USSR. Just as we had CIA sitting alongside the Shah every day, Soviet Russia had agents walking beside Khomeni all day long, every day. Iran was the biggest prize of the Cold War. Remeber, this was immediately after the Soviet/China alliance whupped us in Vietnam.

As soon as the Russian terror squads verified that Carter really had, with monumental stupidity, removed all support from the Iranian government so that the Soviet guerrillas could operate inside Iran with impunity, Soviet agents took control of the Tehran aerodrome, and chartered, using Russian bank accounts for payment, an Air France plance to fly Khomeni back into Iran while a US Air Force plane flew the Shah to safety.

Ever since then Russia and Iran have functioned as a single weapon against American interests.

Iran controls the "democratically elected" government of Iraq. Iraq's President and his top officers have large personal offices in Tehran! They shuttle back and forth getting their instructions from the Ayatollahs.

This is no different from the way the Chinese Communist Secret Service had a so called "Arkansas restauranteur" with an office and satellite dish accross the street from the White House. That "restauranteur" was never vetted for White House access by the Secret Service but had a special, one of a kind pass, that let him run in and out of the White House and barge in unannounced on Bill Clinton's meetings. He was Clinton's best friend and confident. When the "restauranteur" was supoened by Congress, he boarded a plane to Hong Kong and nobody including our CIA has been able to find him.

Intelligence agencies have enormous influence behind the scenes of all governments. How do you think French President Sarkozy got together with the Russian President on 90 minutes notice and negotiated a Treaty that let the Russinas do anything they want in Georiga and still be in compliance with the Treaty?

And Sarkozy loves Nobama.

WHY THE SUNNIS FEEL BETRAYED

We promised them a role in the Iraqi government if they fought on our side against Al Quada. Now the Iraqi government is not embracing them, but exterminating them. And the Iraqi government has its real offices in Tehran. The President of Iraq commutes to his Tehran office for instructions from his masters before making any decisions.

The Iranians hate the Sunnis as much as Pakistan hates India. Fallujah was the site of a massacre of Shiites by Sunnis many centuries ago. For Shiia, the annual pilgrimage to Fallujah ranks almost equal with the pigrimage to Mecca, for Shiia to reiiterate their hatred of Sunnis and reinforce their desire for vengeance. US public television regularly broadcasts coverage of this annual Shiia convention to pledge vengeance against the Sunnis. Nobama's withdrawal makes it possible.

Indeed, today's news reports that Shiite Extremist Muqtada al-Sadr is rousing his militia to protest our withdrawal as too slow.

We are following the Nobama timetable to leave Iraq, so the Iranian Shiites can exterminate their enemies for ten centuries, the Sunnis.

Nuclear Weapons - The Truth

Rob-33704 — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 09:24:39 EDT

The truth is - nuclear weapons have only two purposes:

1. Deterance.

2. Retaliation - if deterance fails.

The Soviet Union wanted the atomic bomb because the U.S. had them. China because the Soviet's had them. India because China had them. Pakistan because India had them.

Iran supposedly wants them because Israel has them but the real reason is probably because all the other big kids on the block have them. So, how can you be a regional super power without at least a few???

If Iran has some nukes mounted on a missle with sufficient range to deter the U.S. and/or Israel from bombing them with conventional munitions they have achieved what is for them a worth while goal.

If, on the other hand, they actually launch one of those weapons what do they risk??? The total destruction of their nation and culture. That is the real message that they need to understand.

Iran Warns Israel - so what

Rob-33704 — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 09:05:43 EDT

The following is a news report from 2005.

Iran warned its arch-enemy Israel of "unimaginable losses" if it attacks Syria and vowed that it was standing by the Syrian people.

We know that Israel did eventually strike the Syrian nuclear facility so the question then becomes what were the "unimaginable losses" to Israel??? Answer - there weren't any.

Excessive rhetoric has always been a middle eastern trait. Example - There is a message sent by one of the Hyksos rulers in northern Egypt to a pharoah complaining because the commotion from the pharoah's hippo hunt - taking place 500 miles away -was keeping the Hyksos ruler awake at night.

The Iranians can talk all they want - it's just a way of reminding everyone that they think they are still important.

Robert

Coalition For Economic Equality

From the Front Page of the Iran Daily Newpaper

Jan CO — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 06:28:45 EDT

Thu, Aug 07, 2008

New Weapon a Warning to Israel

An Iranian expert on strategic affairs termed Iran’s successful testing of a new naval weapon as an apparent response to brazen threats made by the Zionist regime.

Amir Mousavi told Alalam website on Tuesday “Iran is entitled to demonstrate competence of its forces against any possible aggression.“

On Monday the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) tested a new 300-km range naval weapon (missile) that can be used to block oil shipments from the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf, two strategic waterways in the south of Iran.

Referring to the potential of the new indigenous weapon including accurate targeting without satellite surveillance, Mousavi said the test was in line with “ways to safeguard national interests.“
IRGC Commander Brigadier Generel Mohammad Ali Jafari said this week his naval forces recently tested a weapon with a 300-km range that could be used to block the strategic Strait of Hormuz if an aggressive military action is taken against Iran by the western powers or their Israeli lackey.

“The design and production technology used in this weapon is completely indigenous to Iran and has never been used in any other country,“ Jafari said without giving details.
In July, Iran tested nine long-range missiles in a military drill in the Persian Gulf, including the upgraded, longer-range Shahab-3 which can hit targets as far as Israel and US military bases in the Middle East.

Deputy Israeli prime minister, Shaoul Mofaz in June said the Zionist military will resort to military force if Iran refuses to suspend its civilian nuclear program as “demanded by the international community.“

However, it was unclear who had granted the Zionist deputy premier or other officials in Tel Aviv the liberty to talk on behalf of the so-called international community that has remained silent for more than half a century over the lawlessness and war crimes committed by the occupying power.

___________________________________________

PGCC Against Military Adventurism

Kuwait’s foreign minister said the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council opposes any military action against Iran.
The six-nation PGCC supports Iran’s right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, the daily Al-Qabas quoted Mohammad Al-Sabah Al-Salem Al-Sabah as saying in a meeting with members of the emirate’s National Assembly, Presstv reported.

Israel, backed by the United States, has threatened Iran with military attack if Tehran does not suspend its nuclear activities. Iran has warned that it is prepared for any eventuality, and said that any military aggression against its territory will trigger a major conflict that could suck in the regional states aligned to the US and its dangerous anti-Iran policies.

Justice for the Palestinians

Rob-33704 — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:12:16 EDT

Being in favor of justice in "Palestine" doesn't have to mean being anti-Israel does it????

If I am for "Justice" then surely I can't be either anti-Israel or anti-Palestinian. I have to be both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian. Don't I??????

Middle East Policy

Rob-33704 — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 18:38:12 EDT

I think the statement (in Democrats For Justice in Palestine) that our middle east policy is one sided is incorrect - if by that you mean pro-Israel. I think the goal of our middle east policy is to ensure the flow of oil and we support Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and others who certainly aren't pro-Israel in support of that goal.

Bigger picture

Al Garman — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 15:14:21 EDT

This is a short and not very new film (7:11, 2004), but looks like new, maybe because the problems are still there and not solved, wish people could support each other even if there was no common enemy, (I know that we can, we are Democrats):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpjHSiQLPmA

PRESS PHOTOS: (BARACK OBAMA IN ISRAEL&JORDAN)

FreedomOfSpeech — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 04:54:32 EDT

U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) attends a ceremony in the Hall of Remembrance at Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem July 23, 2008. Obama began a visit to Jerusalem on Wednesday pledging staunch support for Israel and saying that if elected, he would work to reinvigorate the Middle East peace process.

REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun (JERUSALEM) US PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN 2008

(moreinextended)

Bush gives "amber light" to Israeli Attack on Iran

Liz — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:09:11 EDT

Case in point regarding mainstream media, the following headline is not one that we were likely to see in any mainstream American paper, but it did appear in the Sunday London Times. [I checked the Sunday NYT and could find no comparable article.] Bush has given Israel what writer Uzi Mahnaimi calls "an amber light" to strike Iran. Of course, in the traditional Bush administration newspeak, the "official" word is that the pentagon and our government will not have Israel's back if they do. . . and if you believe that . . . then I guess there is no need to discuss the value of impeachment, even at this late date in the maniac's reign of terror on our nation.

President George W Bush backs israeli plan for strike on Iran

As Tehran tests new missiles, America believes only a show of force can deter President Ahmadinejad

President George W Bush has told the Israeli government that he may be prepared to approve a future military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities if negotiations with Tehran break down, according to a senior Pentagon official.

Despite the opposition of his own generals and widespread scepticism that America is ready to risk the military, political and economic consequences of an airborne strike on Iran, the president has given an “amber light” to an Israeli plan to attack Iran’s main nuclear sites with long-range bombing sorties, the official told The Sunday Times.

“Amber means get on with your preparations, stand by for immediate attack and tell us when you’re ready,” the official said. But the Israelis have also been told that they can expect no help from American forces and will not be able to use US military bases in Iraq for logistical support.

Nor is it certain that Bush’s amber light would ever turn to green without irrefutable evidence of lethal Iranian hostility. Tehran’s test launches of medium-range ballistic missiles last week were seen in Washington as provocative and poorly judged, but both the Pentagon and the CIA concluded that they did not represent an immediate threat of attack against Israeli or US targets.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article4322508.ece

USA Iran: War Clouds Recede

Liz — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 07:12:33 EDT

I take this as a sign it's going to be a great Sunday. After all the dismal news from this past week it was a welcome relief when I came across this piece--even though it was written three days ago. This analysis was done by Jim Lobe. Jim Lobe's blog on U.S. foreign policy, and particularly the neo-conservative influence in the Bush administration, can be read at http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/. Here is a synopsis of "Despite Fireworks, War Clouds Recede."

"While Wednesday's test-firing by Iran of nine medium- and long-range missiles was strongly denounced by Israel and the United States, there appears to be a growing consensus here that the chances for war, at least between now and the U.S. elections in November, have actually receded in recent days. "

Irans Defense Spending Per Capita--so who is the real bully?

Liz — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 15:33:48 EDT

Iran’s total defense spending for 2006, the latest available, was nearly 55 percent less that Israel’s, despite having ten times the population of Israel.

Per capita, Israel's expenditure was calculated to be nearly 17 times higher at an average of $1,737 per person compared with only $110 for each Iranian.

U.S. military spending, and Israel's are far and away the highest in the world.

Israel has a population that is comparable to that of Massachusetts. U.S. military spending per capita is $1750; Israel's is $1380. Russia spends $432 per capita.

This article put the defense spending of Israel, Iran and the USA into its proper perspective.

http://theradicalmormon.wordpress.com/2008/02/14/the-defense-spending-discrepancy-between-the-usa-israel-and-iran-what-could-be-the-reason/

USA and Israeli saber rattling is driving the US Economy into the Dust

Liz — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 13:22:40 EDT

As if the Bush administration has not already done enough to bring our country and its people to our economic knees, they continue to do their damage. And as each day passes, I grow angrier and angrier at the members of the House of Representatives for not beginning the impeachment proceedings against George Bush and Dick Cheney.

In addition to the horrible implications of nuclear war (bought about by Pakistan, who do have nuclear bombs and who could possibly retaliate in defense of Iran); there is a more immediate effect of the Bush administration along with Congress’s support of continued badgering of Iran: the price of oil.

World oil prices have risen by nearly 50% since the beginning of 2008. Many believe that among the contributing factors, the uncertainty about Iran is another issue that keeps oil prices high. It is reported that oil market still believes that there is at least a 50% chance that either Israel or the USA will attack Iran before the end of Bush’s term. Some experts predict the price per barrel for oil could rise as high as $200 a barrel before fall.

One way to take that speculation away is to remove Bush and his administration from the equation by impeaching Bush and Cheney.

We learned from the article published in the New Yorker last week by Seymour Hersh that the Bush administration is sponsoring a $400 million covert action program against Iran to destabilize its government. We know that if Cheney had his way that Iran and likely half the Middle East would lay in smoldering ruins. We know now with a degree of some certainty that Cheney and Bush would like nothing better than to initiate a shoot-out at the Iranian OK Corral.

And members of our Congress continue to vote YEA on amendments like the Kyle-Lieberman Amendment and H.Con.Res. 362 that are nothing more than bully threats against Iran that increase instability in the Middle East and drive up the price of oil for Americans.

Isn’t it time to tell them NO. and to demand that they begin impeachment proceedings against this administration now while we still have a country and a world left?

http://www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer

Rove-Reversal: Jewish Dems Attack McCain's "Strength" On Iran

FreedomOfSpeech — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 09:47:25 EDT

Ooops ! There goes Mc Bushs only percieved "strength". LOL

SNIP:

Several of Congress' most prominent Jewish members are set to go after John McCain on an issue of perceived strength: his proclaimed "toughness" in dealing with Iran.

On Thursday, Sens. Frank Lautenberg and Ben Cardin, alongside more than half-a-dozen members of the House of Representatives and the National Jewish Democratic Council, will host a press conference highlighting a vote McCain made that helped corporations like Halliburton continue doing business with sanctioned countries like Iran.

The vote, McCain's critics argue, demonstrates a strand of political hypocrisy -- on the campaign trail, the Senator has repeatedly called for divestment from Iran -- and pokes holes in his attacks on Barack Obama.

"John McCain has been arguing that he is Mr. Tough Guy on Iran," said Ira Forman, Executive Director of the NJDC. "At the AIPAC conference he talked about how he would introduce stronger sanctions and boycott measures. He's also saying Obama is naïve and can't be trusted to deal with the Iranians. But when it came to deciding to be tough on Iran or supporting Halliburton, he stuck with Halliburton. It is easy to talk the talk but it is not so easy to walk the walk."

Gas Prices, Israel, the Possibility of war in Iran and the 2008 Election

spencer — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 14:05:03 EDT

Yesterday I had my first $5 a gallon sighting. It was at a shell in Garden Grove and was for Diesel #2. The Regular was something like $4.70. Just a few weeks ago Prices here were only starting to flirt with $4. What drove prices up nearly $0.80 a gallon? It was Israel.

Two major officials from Israel have said something to the effect of "war with Iran is inevitable". in Order for Israel to go to war with Iran the US would have to approve it. The US controls the Iraqi air space, and Israel needs to fly over Iraq to get to Iran. In effect if Israel goes to war with Iran so do we.

let's pray (and I'm not even monotheistic) that this does not happen within the next 7 months. George Bush would gladly Approve of it and try to add us to the equation. We could loose another 10,000 if we go to war with Iran. If Israel Tries to go to war with Iran between now and January, god help us all (once again I'm not even Monotheistic).

This is among the most Important issues facing the 2008 race. McCain would go to war with Iran !!! If Lieberman is his VP and they win, there is no doubt in my mind that we would be at war with Iran within the first 6 months of the new administration. McCain has already joked about it in a manor most disgusting and unspeakable. He has nearly said as much as "we will go to war with Iran".

Obama has said he will meet with Mamud Amack Nadinijad, and treat war as a last resort. He Opposed the first wrong war and will oppose the second. He voted against the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment. We can Trust him on this.

So to anyone considering voting for McCain, Do you want another 10,000 dead in a war that should have never been?

Obama, Another Crusader Or A Global Leader

Mark Stewart — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 19:15:52 EDT

America was insulated from ME (Middle East) conflict before Israel was pushed into Arab territory. Middle class America had seen continuous improvement in standard of living for centuries, excepting the Great Depression, and industry and commerce were alive and well.

During the Second World War America bailed the world out in the Pacific and in Europe. When the state of Israel was created, America was handed a choice. We chose to follow Europe into a millennia long conflict between the Muslim and Christian states. We have since defended European territorial interests loyally.

The ME saw it's heyday long ago. Deforestation and the usual accompanying bundle of conflict and failing economy ended the supremacy enjoyed in the north of Africa and along the eastern Mediterranean, the AAC or Arch of Ancient Civilization. Like the Atacama on the West Coast of SA, poor environmental management has resulted in permanent conditions of climate and topology that ensure continual poverty in low-key arid and semi-arid human habitations. Globally, these conditions signify failed human settlement. The ME is no exception. As it happened, the Muslim faith did well in geophysically impoverished nation states, and Christianity did well in newer, not yet depleted green states. Barrack Obama's backer, Al Gore is not on a child's fool errand. Change in climate and soil are seriously threatening much of the continental United States. That's an issue Obama will have to manage.

Relections on Two Reports from Pakistan

Liz — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 13:37:59 EDT

The following two reports are from “Daily Jang” a leading Newspaper in Pakistan:

Donors pledge 19.95 billion dollars for Afghanistan
Updated at: 2220 PST, Thursday, June 12, 2008

PARIS: World donors meeting in Paris on Thursday pledged a total of 19.95 billion dollars to rebuild Afghanistan, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner announced. [I wonder if they could spare a little for the USA to help repair our infrastructure.]

When I read the following one, I couldn’t help but wonder: What if members of a foreign army who are supposed to be our allies had killed 11 of our citizens and the Army officer in charge refused to even acknowledge the deaths (although public photos of the dead are available on the Internet) and the leader of that country had not offered a formal apology to the President of the USA along with apologies to the family? Hell, the way we operate that would be grounds for nuclear obliteration.