RE: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,164390,00.html

I have no problem with the Palestinians seeking an independant state peacfully...but Hamas has to go...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: TheTinker,

TheTinker!

Problem is, Hamas, et. al., such, is funded and supplied by Iran, and won't go anywhere until Iran is curtailed.

At issue is also the fact that the "Palestinian people" are essentially Sunni-Muslim Arabs who lived in an area historically called Palestine (something like the Oregon Territories of the old West).

The majority of "Palestine" is now Jordan and all Palestinians were granted citizenship in Jordan by King Abdullah. The majority of "Palestinians" live in Jordan today.

However, the "Palestinians" didn't want to become Jordanian; they wanted their own country.

Well, I want my own country too, but it's not in the works is it?

Palestinians are essentially the same as if the U.S. had decendents of settlers of the Old West demanding their own state today.

So, I submit the problem lies in the Palestinians' unwillingness to first accept a separate state in the 1940's and then citizenship in Jordan.

So, until Palestinians are willing to accept the West Bank (essentially abandoned by Jordan) and Gaza as their nation states; then I submit they will continue to suffer horribly as a people who have no homeland and are at war with the legitmate states around them.

quote:

Originally posted by TheTinker:
RE: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,164390,00.html

I have no problem with the Palestinians seeking an independant state peacfully...but Hamas has to go...

Because the Madrid agreement, Camp David accords, the Oslo accords, and Mr. Clinton's roadmap weren't carried through while Israel continued to 'punish' the "Palestinians", they elected Hamas.
Most "Palestinians", in and out of Gaza, support Hamas. It may well be the only entity left to negotiate any peace settlement.

quote:

Originally posted by popsiq:

quote:

Originally posted by TheTinker:
RE: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,164390,00.html

I have no problem with the Palestinians seeking an independant state peacfully...but Hamas has to go...

Because the Madrid agreement, Camp David accords, the Oslo accords, and Mr. Clinton's roadmap weren't carried through while Israel continued to 'punish' the "Palestinians", they elected Hamas.
Most "Palestinians", in and out of Gaza, support Hamas. It may well be the only entity left to negotiate any peace settlement.

A little simplistic assessment illustrating an anti-Israel bent don't ya think pop?

You failed to indicate that throughout the so called "peace initiatives" that Palestinians continued to bomb and kill Israelis so what did you expect Israel to do?

Essentially Palestinians have been at war with all the legitimate states that make up what once was the region called "Palestine."

Until they stop their terrorists activities; I don't see much hope they will ever acheive an independent state. Why should they?

Let's not forget the Isrealis are about the only winning ally we have. They kick azz. Maybe we could learn from them since their track record in the mid-east is far better than ours.
For those of you who cry for Palestine, remember that most of the oil-rich raghead world does nothing to help them. So pick up a towel and a RPG and become a lunatic.

quote:

Originally posted by gunsmoke6:
Let's not forget the Isrealis are about the only winning ally we have. They kick azz. Maybe we could learn from them since their track record in the mid-east is far better than ours.
For those of you who cry for Palestine, remember that most of the oil-rich raghead world does nothing to help them. So pick up a towel and a RPG and become a lunatic.

Lets not forget they ended there war in 7 days, I beleve if we were to leve them alone they would do it agin.

With every comment on foreign policy I hear from McCain, I wonder where the hell this idea that he's "strong" on foreign policy came from.

Because he's not.

He's either deluded or going senile from old age.

quote:

Originally posted by phillystake:

quote:

Originally posted by gunsmoke6:
Let's not forget the Isrealis are about the only winning ally we have. They kick azz. Maybe we could learn from them since their track record in the mid-east is far better than ours.
For those of you who cry for Palestine, remember that most of the oil-rich raghead world does nothing to help them. So pick up a towel and a RPG and become a lunatic.

Lets not forget they ended there war in 7 days, I beleve if we were to leve them alone they would do it agin.

There has certainly been a double standard applied to Israel.

Rarely do you hear the U.N. and other "peace" organizations condemn Palestine; but man they lay it on thick when it comes to Israel.

The same applies to the U.S. In my opinion the U.S. has only become weaker and less believeable because we give a crap about "world opinion."

Fortunately for Israel, they put the safety of their citizens and the welfare of their nation before "world opinion."

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky_Lieutenant:

quote:

Originally posted by phillystake:

quote:

Originally posted by gunsmoke6:
Let's not forget the Isrealis are about the only winning ally we have. They kick azz. Maybe we could learn from them since their track record in the mid-east is far better than ours.
For those of you who cry for Palestine, remember that most of the oil-rich raghead world does nothing to help them. So pick up a towel and a RPG and become a lunatic.

Lets not forget they ended there war in 7 days, I beleve if we were to leve them alone they would do it agin.

There has certainly been a double standard applied to Israel.

Rarely do you hear the U.N. and other "peace" organizations condemn Palestine; but man they lay it on thick when it comes to Israel.

The same applies to the U.S. In my opinion the U.S. has only become weaker and less believeable because we give a crap about "world opinion."

Fortunately for Israel, they put the safety of their citizens and the welfare of their nation before "world opinion."

One Engineer to another you know in our history of war there was a time when we did the samething when we put our people and our country above all.

quote:

Palestinians are essentially the same as if the U.S. had decendents of settlers of the Old West demanding their own state today.

I think that is called the Indian Nations that are esentually their own country.

In any event, you are either with us or with the terrorists. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Therefore, enemies of the terrorists are our friends.

quote:

Originally posted by phillystake:

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky_Lieutenant:

quote:

Originally posted by phillystake:

quote:

Originally posted by gunsmoke6:
Let's not forget the Isrealis are about the only winning ally we have. They kick azz. Maybe we could learn from them since their track record in the mid-east is far better than ours.
For those of you who cry for Palestine, remember that most of the oil-rich raghead world does nothing to help them. So pick up a towel and a RPG and become a lunatic.

Lets not forget they ended there war in 7 days, I beleve if we were to leve them alone they would do it agin.

There has certainly been a double standard applied to Israel.

Rarely do you hear the U.N. and other "peace" organizations condemn Palestine; but man they lay it on thick when it comes to Israel.

The same applies to the U.S. In my opinion the U.S. has only become weaker and less believeable because we give a crap about "world opinion."

Fortunately for Israel, they put the safety of their citizens and the welfare of their nation before "world opinion."

One Engineer to another you know in our history of war there was a time when we did the samething when we put our people and our country above all.

True enough; however, I don't recall us saying our goal was to destroy Britain was it?

I think if Britain had come to the table and said hey, you can have the colonies and we just want the frontier West of the Missippi; I think we would of taken it don't you?

Seriously, when does the World say, enough is enough to a people who have been offered their own lands on several occassions and billions of dollars in aide?

quote:

Originally posted by bill_kananen:

quote:

Palestinians are essentially the same as if the U.S. had decendents of settlers of the Old West demanding their own state today.

I think that is called the Indian Nations that are esentually their own country.

In any event, you are either with us or with the terrorists. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Therefore, enemies of the terrorists are our friends.

RIGHT! And the Indian Nations around the U.S. are beginning to flourish. How did they do that you may ask; with suicide bombs and screaming "death to the U.S.A?"

Maybe a little historically, but no, they worked within the confines of the law and acquired land LEGALLY.

Palestinians have had the same opportunities repeatedly but they are so blinded by their desire to destroy Israel that they are destroying themselves in the process.

Not only Israel Lt., but look at what nice guys they were to Jordan & Kuwait.

This is lengthy but well worth the read. Sincerely,
"A Dirty War"
On January 26, 2007, abu Dan, a student at the Islamic University of Gaza, had gone to a local cemetery with his father and five others to erect a headstone for his grandmother. When they arrived, however, they found themselves surrounded by 30 armed men from Hamas's rival, Fatah, the party of Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas. "They took us to a house in north Gaza," abu Dan says. "They covered our eyes and took us to a room on the sixth floor."

The video reveals a bare room with white walls and a black-and-white tiled floor, where abu Dan's father is forced to sit and listen to his son's shrieks of pain. Afterward, abu Dan says, he and two of the others were driven to a market square. "They told us they were going to kill us. They made us sit on the ground." He rolls up the legs of his trousers to display the circular scars that are evidence of what happened next: "They shot our knees and feet—five bullets each. I spent four months in a wheelchair." Abu Dan had no way of knowing it, but his tormentors had a secret ally: the administration of President George W. Bush.
A clue comes toward the end of the video, which was found in a Fatah security building by Hamas fighters last June. Still bound and blindfolded, the prisoners are made to echo a rhythmic chant yelled by one of their captors: "By blood,by soul, we sacrifice ourselves for Muhammad Dahlan! Long live Muhammad Dahlan!"

There is no one more hated among Hamas members than Muhammad Dahlan, long Fatah's resident strongman in Gaza. Dahlan, who most recently served as Abbas's national security adviser, has spent more than a decade battling Hamas. Dahlan insists that abu Dan was tortured without his knowledge, but the video is proof that his followers' methods can be brutal.

Bush has met Dahlan on at least three occasions. After talks at the White House in July 2003, Bush publicly praised Dahlan as "a good, solid leader." In private, say multiple Israeli and American officials, the U.S. president described him as "our guy."

The United States has been involved in the affairs of the Palestinian territories since the Six-Day War of 1967, when Israel captured Gaza from Egypt and the West Bank from Jordan. With the 1993 Oslo accords, the territories acquired limited autonomy, under a president, who has executive powers, and an elected parliament. Israel retains a large military presence in the West Bank, but it withdrew from Gaza in 2005.

In recent months, President Bush has repeatedly stated that the last great ambition of his presidency is to broker a deal that would create a viable Palestinian state and bring peace to the Holy Land. "People say, 'Do you think it's possible, during your presidency?'?" he told an audience in Jerusalem on January 9. "And the answer is: I'm very hopeful."

The next day, in the West Bank capital of Ramallah, Bush acknowledged that there was a rather large obstacle standing in the way of this goal: Hamas's complete control of Gaza, home to some 1.5 million Palestinians, where it seized power in a bloody coup d'état in June 2007. Almost every day, militants fire rockets from Gaza into neighboring Israeli towns, and President Abbas is powerless to stop them. His authority is limited to the West Bank.

It's "a tough situation," Bush admitted. "I don't know whether you can solve it in a year or not." What Bush
neglected to mention was his own role in creating this mess.

According to Dahlan, it was Bush who had pushed legislative elections in the Palestinian territories in January 2006, despite warnings that Fatah was not ready. After Hamas—whose 1988 charter committed it to the goal of driving Israel into the sea—won control of the parliament, Bush made another, deadlier miscalculation.

Vanity Fair has obtained confidential documents, since corroborated by sources in the U.S. and Palestine, which lay bare a covert initiative, approved by Bush and implemented by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams, to provoke a Palestinian civil war. The plan was for forces led by Dahlan, and armed with new weapons supplied at America's behest, to give Fatah the muscle it needed to remove the democratically elected Hamas-led government from power. (The State Department declined to comment.)

But the secret plan backfired, resulting in a further setback for American foreign policy under Bush. Instead
of driving its enemies out of power, the U.S.-backed Fatah fighters inadvertently provoked Hamas to seize total control of Gaza. Some sources call the scheme "Iran-contra 2.0," recalling that Abrams was convicted (and later pardoned) for withholding information from Congress during the original Iran-contra scandal under President Reagan. There are echoes of other past misadventures as well: the C.I.A.'s 1953 ouster of an elected prime minister in Iran, which set the stage for the 1979 Islamic revolution there; the aborted 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, which gave Fidel Castro an excuse to solidify his hold on Cuba; and the contemporary tragedy in Iraq.

Within the Bush administration, the Palestinian policy set off a furious debate. One of its critics is David Wurmser, the avowed neoconservative, who resigned as Vice President Dick Cheney's chief Middle East adviser in July 2007, a month after the Gaza coup.

Wurmser accuses the Bush administration of "engaging in a dirty war in an effort to provide a corrupt dictatorship [led by Abbas] with victory." He believes that Hamas had no intention of taking Gaza until Fatah forced its hand. "It looks to me that what happened wasn't so much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-empted before it could happen," Wurmser says.

The botched plan has rendered the dream of Middle East peace more remote than ever, but what really galls neocons such as Wurmser is the hypocrisy it exposed. "There is a stunning disconnect between the president's call for Middle East democracy and this policy," he .

Dahlan worked closely with the F.B.I. and the C.I.A., and he developed a warm relationship with Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet, a Clinton appointee who stayed on under Bush until July 2004. "He's simply a great and fair man," Dahlan says. "I'm still in touch with him from time to time."

"Everyone Was Against the Elections"

In a speech in the White House Rose Garden on June 24, 2002, President Bush announced that American policy in the Middle East was turning in a fundamentally new direction.

Arafat was still in power at the time, and many in the U.S. and Israel blamed him for wrecking Clinton's micro-managed peace efforts by launching the second intifada—a renewed revolt, begun in 2000, in which more than 1,000 Israelis and 4,500 Palestinians had died. Bush said he wanted to give Palestinians the chance to choose new leaders, ones who were not "compromised by terror." In place of Arafat's
all-powerful presidency, Bush said, "the Palestinian parliament should have the full authority of a legislative
body."

Arafat died in November 2004, and Abbas, his replacement as Fatah leader, was elected president in January 2005. Elections for the Palestinian parliament, known officially as the Legislative Council, were originally set for July 2005, but later postponed by Abbas until January 2006. Dahlan says he warned his friends in the Bush administration that Fatah still wasn't ready for elections in January. Decades of self-preservationist rule by Arafat had turned the party into a symbol of corruption and inefficiency—a perception Hamas found it easy to exploit. Splits within Fatah weakened its position further: in many places, a single Hamas candidate ran against several from Fatah.

"Everyone was against the elections," Dahlan says. Everyone except Bush. "Bush decided, 'I need an election. I want elections in the Palestinian Authority.' Everyone is following him in the American administration, and everyone is nagging Abbas, telling him, 'The president wants elections.' Fine. For what purpose?"

The elections went forward as scheduled. On January 25, Hamas won 56 percent of the seats in the Legislative Council. Few inside the U.S. administration had predicted the result, and there was no contingency plan to deal with it. "I've asked why nobody saw it coming," Condoleezza
Rice told reporters. "I don't know anyone who wasn't caught off guard by Hamas's strong showing."
\"Everyone blamed everyone else," says an official with the Department of Defense. "We sat there in the Pentagon and said, 'Who the **** recommended this?'?" In public, Rice tried to look on the bright side of the Hamas victory. "Unpredictability," she said, is "the nature of big historic change." Even as she spoke, however, the Bush administration was rapidly revising its attitude toward Palestinian democracy.
Some analysts argued that Hamas had a substantial moderate wing that could be strengthened if America coaxed it into the peace process. Notable Israelis—such as Ephraim Halevy, the former head of the Mossad intelligence agency—shared this view. But if America paused to consider giving Hamas the benefit of the doubt, the moment was "milliseconds long," says a senior State Department official. "The administration spoke with one voice: 'We have to squeeze these guys.' With Hamas’s election victory, the freedom
agenda was dead."

The first step, taken by the Middle East diplomatic "Quartet"—the U.S., the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations—was to demand that the new Hamas government renounce violence, recognize Israel's right to exist, and accept the terms of all previous agreements. When Hamas refused, the Quartet shut off the faucet of aid to the Palestinian Authority, depriving it of the means to pay salaries and meet its annual budget of roughly $2 billion.

Israel clamped down on Palestinians' freedom of movement, especially into and out of the Hamas-dominated Gaza Strip . Israel also detained 64 Hamas officials, including Legislative Council members and ministers, and even launched a military campaign into Gaza after one of its soldiers was kidnapped. Through it all, Hamas and its new government, led by Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, proved surprisingly resilient.

Washington reacted with dismay when Abbas began holding talks with Hamas in the hope of establishing a "unity government." On October 4, 2006, Rice traveled to Ramallah to see Abbas. They met at the Muqata, the new presidential headquarters that rose from the ruins of Arafat's compound, which Israel had destroyed in 2002.

America's leverage in Palestinian affairs was much stronger than it had been in Arafat's time. Abbas had never had a strong, independent base, and he desperately needed to restore the flow of foreign aid—and, with it, his power of patronage. He also knew that he could not stand up to Hamas without Washington’s help. At their joint press conference, Rice smiled as she expressed her nation's "great admiration" for Abbas's leadership. Behind closed doors, however, Rice's tone was sharper, say officials who witnessed their meeting. Isolating Hamas just wasn't working, she reportedly told Abbas, and America expected him to dissolve the Haniyeh government as soon as possible and hold fresh elections. Abbas, one official says, agreed to take action within two weeks. It happened to be Ramadan, the month when Muslims fast during daylight hours. With dusk approaching, Abbas asked Rice to join him for iftar—a snack to break the fast.
Afterward, according to the official, Rice underlined her position: "So we're agreed? You'll dissolve the government within two weeks?" "Maybe not two weeks. Give me a month. Let's wait until after the Eid," he said, referring to the three-day celebration that marks the end of Ramadan. (Abbas's spokesman said via e-mail: "According to our records, this is incorrect.") Rice got into her armored S.U.V., where, the official
claims, she told an American colleague, "That damned iftar has cost us another two weeks of Hamas government." "We Will Be There to Support You"

Weeks passed with no sign that Abbas was ready to do America's bidding. Finally, another official was sent to Ramallah. Jake Walles, the consul general in Jerusalem, is a career foreign-service officer with many years' experience in the Middle East. His purpose was to deliver a barely varnished ultimatum to the Palestinian president.

We know what Walles said because a copy was left behind, apparently by accident, of the "talking points" memo prepared for him by the State Department. The document has been authenticated by U.S. and Palestinian officials. "We need to understand your plans regarding a new [Palestinian Authority] government," Walles's script said. "You told Secretary Rice you would be prepared to move
ahead within two to four weeks of your meeting. We believe that the time has come for you to move forward quickly and decisively."

The memo left no doubt as to what kind of action the U.S. was seeking: "Hamas should be given a clear choice, with a clear deadline: ...they either accept a new government that meets the Quartet principles, or they reject it The consequences of Hamas' decision should also be clear: If Hamas does not agree within the prescribed time, you should make clear your intention to declare a state of emergency and form an emergency government explicitly committed to that platform."

Walles and Abbas both knew what to expect from Hamas if these instructions were followed: rebellion and bloodshed. For that reason, the memo states, the U.S. was already working to strengthen Fatah's security forces. "If you act along these lines, we will support you both materially and politically," the script said. "We will be there to support you."

Abbas was also encouraged to "strengthen [his] team" to include "credible figures of strong standing in the
international community." Among those the U.S. wanted brought in, says an official who knew of the policy, was Muhammad Dahlan. On paper, the forces at Fatah's disposal looked stronger than those of Hamas. There were some 70,000 men in the tangle of 14 Palestinian security services that Arafat had built up, at least half of those in Gaza. After the legislative elections, Hamas had expected to assume command of these forces, but Fatah maneuvered to keep them under its control. Hamas, which already had 6,000 or so irregulars in its militant al-Qassam Brigade, responded by forming the 6,000-troop Executive Force in Gaza, but that still left it with far fewer fighters than Fatah. In reality, however, Hamas had several advantages. To begin with, Fatah's security forces had never really recovered from Operation Defensive Shield, Israel's massive 2002 re-invasion of the West Bank in response to the second intifada. "Most of the security apparatus had been destroyed," says Youssef Issa, who led the Preventive Security Service under Abbas.
The irony of the blockade on foreign aid after Hamas's legislative victory, meanwhile, was that it prevented only Fatah from paying its soldiers. "We are the ones who were not getting paid," Issa says, "whereas they were not affected by the siege." Ayman Daraghmeh, a Hamas Legislative Council member in the West Bank, agrees. He puts the amount of Iranian aid to Hamas in 2007 alone at $120 million. "This is only a fraction of what it should give," he insists. In Gaza, another Hamas member tells me the number was closer to $200 million. The result was becoming apparent: Fatah could not control Gaza's streets—or even
protect its own personnel.

At about 1:30 p.m. on September 15, 2006, Samira Tayeh sent a text message to her husband, Jad Tayeh, the director of foreign relations for the Palestinian intelligence service and a member of Fatah. "He didn't reply," she says. "I tried to call his mobile [phone], but it was switched off. So I called his deputy Mahmoun, and he didn't know where he was. That's when I decided to go to the hospital."

Samira, a slim, elegant 40-year-old dressed from head to toe in black, tells me the story in a Ramallah café in December 2007. Arriving at the Al Shifa hospital, "I went through the morgue door. Not for any reason—I just didn't know the place. I saw there were all these intelligence guards there. There was one I knew. He saw me and he said, 'Put her in the car.' That's when I knew something had happened to Jad."

Tayeh had left his office in a car with four aides. Moments later, they found themselves being pursued by an S.U.V. full of armed, masked men. About 200 yards from the home of Prime Minister Haniyeh, the S.U.V. cornered the car. The masked men opened fire, killing Tayeh and all four of his colleagues.

Hamas said it had nothing to do with the murders, but Samira had reason to believe otherwise. At three a.m. on June 16, 2007, during the Gaza takeover, six Hamas gunmen forced their way into her home and fired bullets into every photo of Jad they could find. The next day, they returned and demanded the keys to the car in which he had died, claiming that it belonged to the Palestinian Authority.

Fearing for her life, she fled across the border and then into the West Bank, with only the clothes she was wearing and her passport, driver's license, and credit card.

quote:

Originally posted by 67NOV:
Not only Israel Lt., but look at what nice guys they were to Jordan & Kuwait.

Exactly. I think a lot of people like to look at this whole issue in a bubble and ignore just how violent Palestinians have been in the name of their own state.

I have a hard time figuring the "separate Palestinian state" out anyway.

What other than the fact that they lived in a particular region of the Ottoman empire make them uniquely Palestinian? There is no ethnic, language, tribal, or religious difference between them and other Sunni Muslim Arabs in the area is there?

quote:

Originally posted by Lucky_Lieutenant:
At issue is also the fact that the "Palestinian people" are essentially Sunni-Muslim Arabs who lived in an area historically called Palestine (something like the Oregon Territories of the old West).

The majority of "Palestine" is now Jordan and all Palestinians were granted citizenship in Jordan by King Abdullah. The majority of "Palestinians" live in Jordan today.

However, the "Palestinians" didn't want to become Jordanian; they wanted their own country.

Well, I want my own country too, but it's not in the works is it?

Palestinians are essentially the same as if the U.S. had decendents of settlers of the Old West demanding their own state today.

So, I submit the problem lies in the Palestinians' unwillingness to first accept a separate state in the 1940's and then citizenship in Jordan.

So, until Palestinians are willing to accept the West Bank (essentially abandoned by Jordan) and Gaza as their nation states; then I submit they will continue to suffer horribly as a people who have no homeland and are at war with the legitmate states around them.

The primary fault with your argument is that Israel doesn't want to give up the West Bank and Gaza. It wasn't "abandoned" by Jordan, Israel took it after Jordan invaded them. There is still a strong Zionist element in Israel; that's why there are still settlements being built in the West Bank. Israel isn't going to abandon them. Palestinians don't have a "state" if it's slam full of Israeli settlements and Israeli security for those settlements.

Don't fool yourself; Israel has no intention of abandoning the West Bank to the Palestinians. I understand Israel's point of view; if the West Bank was in Palestinian hands, Isreal suddenly become only about 25 km wide at it's most narrow point. That wouldn't give me a warm fuzzy, either.

At least McCain is willing to let people know who he is and what his military experience is. That is more than we can say for member # 5170553.

Just for me, I have a policy:

No name + No Profile = No Respect + No Reply

This message has been edited. Last edited by: OldArmyWOPA,

A listening ear, a caring heart, an open mind and an extend hand may be all I can offer, but they are yours without charge or judgment.

quote:

Originally posted by OldArmyWOPA:
At least McCain is willing to let people know who he is and what his military experience is. That is more that we can say for member # 5170553.

Just for me, I have a policy:

No name + No Profile = No Respect + No Reply

You also have no idea what you're talking about, or what I'm talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by aDAMWESTIII:
This is lengthy but well worth the read. Sincerely,
"A Dirty War"
...But the secret plan backfired, resulting in a further setback for American foreign policy under Bush. Instead
of driving its enemies out of power, the U.S.-backed Fatah fighters inadvertently provoked Hamas to seize total control of Gaza. Some sources call the scheme "Iran-contra 2.0," recalling that Abrams was convicted (and later pardoned) for withholding information from Congress during the original Iran-contra scandal under President Reagan. There are echoes of other past misadventures as well: the C.I.A.'s 1953 ouster of an elected prime minister in Iran, which set the stage for the 1979 Islamic revolution there; the aborted 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, which gave Fidel Castro an excuse to solidify his hold on Cuba; and the contemporary tragedy in Iraq.

Americans should be disgusted and outraged by this story, but I doubt it will raise an eyebrow. If it does, it will only be those complaining that the media published it and why don’t they tell about the good things we do in Palestine.
We’ve been so desensitized by the excesses of this government, this story won’t even amount to a speed bump.